ISSSSMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY THROUGH

i

ISSSSMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY THROUGH

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING (PBL) AT SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 4

TALLO

( Pre- Experimental Research at the First Year Students of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar)

A THESIS

Submitted to the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Makassar

Muhammadiyah University in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the

Degree of Education in English Departement

HERFIN MARLINA

10535598714

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR

TAHUN 2021

ii

iii

iv

v

vi

FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH MAKASSAR

SURAT PERNYATAAN

Nama : Herfin Marlina

NIM : 10535598714

Program : English Education Department

TITLE : Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Project-Based

Learning at SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo

Skripsi yang saya ajukan di depan tim penguji adalah hasil karya saya sendiri

bukan hasil ciplakan dan tidak dibuatkan oleh siapapun.

Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benar nya dan bersedia

menerima sanksi apabila pernyataan saya tidak benar.

Makassar, Januari2021

Yang membuat perjanjian

Herfin Marlina

vii

FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH MAKASSAR

SURAT PERJANJIAN

Nama :Herfin Marlina

NIM : 10535598714

Program : English Education Department

TITLE : Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Project-Based

Learning at SMK Muhammdiyah 4 Tallo

Dengan ini menyatakan perjanjian sebagai berikut:

1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai dengan selesai skripsi saya, saya akan

menyusun sendiri skripsi saya.

2. Dalam menyusun skripsi, saya akan selalu konsultasi dengan pembimbing.

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

4. Apabila saya melanggar perjanjian sayaseperti yang tertera padabutir 1, 2, dan 3

maka saya bersedia menerima sanksi sesuai dengan aturan yang berlaku.

Demikian perjanjian ini saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.

Makassar, Januari2021

Yang membuat perjanjian

Herfin Marlina

viii

MOTTO AND DEDICATION

ALLAH IS THE BEST PLANNER

This thesis dedicated to my belove parents, my lovely son and husband, and all

my family who always give me motivations, praying and love.

ix

ABSTRACT

HERFIN MARLINA. Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Project-Based

Learning at SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo (Pre-Experimental Research at the First Year

of Students of SMK Muhammadiyah 4Tallo) English Education Department, Faculty of

Teacher Training and Education, Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. Supervised by

Erwin Akib and Wildhan Burhanuddin.

The aim of this research was to obtain information about whether or not the use

Project-Based Learning was effective to improve students’ speaking ability in term of

pronunciation and fluency. The researcher used pre-experimental method. The data was

collected by using speaking test. In this case, a pre-test and post-test. The pre-test was

given to the students before giving treatment and post-test was given to the students after

giving treatment. The population of this research is the first year students of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar. Meanwhile, the sample of this research taken by using

purposive sampling in class TKJ which one class consisted of 16 students .

The research findings indicated that the improvement of the first year students of

SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar improved after the implementation of Project-

Based Learning . It was proven by the mean score of pre-test in term of pronunciation

was (45) and post-test was (78.75). And also by the mean score of pre-test in term of

fluency was (45.62) and post-test was (84.37). The result of t-test also shown that the use

of Project-Based Learning Method was effective to improve the students speaking skill

because t-test was higher than t-table, students’ speaking in term of pronunciation

(18.74>2.160) and in term of fluency (15.06>2.160). Based on the explanation above, it

can be concluded that in teaching speaking skill through Project-Based Learning was

successful to be implemented. In other word, Project-Based Learning can be a solution

for the teacher to improve the students’ speaking skill.

Keywords: Speaking Skill, Pronunciation, Fluency, Project-Based Learning.

x

ABSRTRAK

HERFIN MARLINA. Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berbicara Siswa Melalui

Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek di SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo (Penelitian Pra-

Eksperimental pada Siswa Tahun Pertama SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo) Jurusan

Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas

Muhammadiyah Makassar. Dibimbing oleh Erwin Akib dan Wildhan Burhanuddin.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendapatkan informasi tentang efektif

atau tidaknya penggunaan Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek untuk meningkatkan

kemampuan berbicara siswa dalam hal pengucapan dan kefasihan. Peneliti menggunakan

metode pra-eksperimental. Pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan tes berbicara. Dalam hal

ini, Pretest dan Posttest. Pre-test diberikan kepada siswa sebelum diberikan perlakuan dan

post-test diberikan kepada siswa setelah diberikan perlakuan. Populasi penelitian ini

adalah siswa tahun pertama SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar. Sedangkan sampel

penelitian ini diambil dengan menggunakan purposive sampling di kelas TKJ yang satu

kelasnya terdiri dari 16 siswa.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa peningkatan siswa tahun pertama SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar meningkat setelah penerapan Pembelajaran Berbasis

Proyek Hal ini dibuktikan dengan nilai rata-rata pre-test pengucapan adalah (45) dan

post-test adalah (78,75). Dan juga dengan nilai rata-rata pre-test dari segi kefasihan

adalah (45.62) dan post-test adalah (84.37). Hasil uji-t juga menunjukkan bahwa

penggunaan Metode Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek efektif untuk meningkatkan

keterampilan berbicara siswa karena uji-t lebih tinggi dari t-tabel, kemampuan berbicara

siswa dalam hal pengucapan (18,74> 2,160) dan istilah kefasihan (15.06> 2.160).

Berdasarkan uraian di atas dapat disimpulkan bahwa dalam pembelajaran keterampilan

berbicara melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek berhasil diterapkan. Dengan kata lain

Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek dapat menjadi solusi bagi guru untuk meningkatkan

kemampuan berbicara siswa.

Kata Kunci: Keterampilan Berbicara, Pengucapan, Kefasihan, Pembelajaran

Berbasis Proyek.

xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

AlhamdulillahiRobbiAlamin, the researcher expresses her gratitude to Allah

SWT the almighty God for His mercy, blessing and opportunity given to her o

that the researcher was able to finish writing this thesis.

Salawat and salam addressed to the prophet Muhammad SAW for his guidance

There was some handicaps and problems that the researcher encountered from

the beginning to the end of writing this thesis, owing to help and invaluable

suggestion from numerous people, the researcher could complete this thesis

Thus, the researcher would like to express her appreciation and sincere thanks to

all of them particularly

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

University of Makassar his advice during her studied at the University

2. Erwin Akib, S.Pd., M.Pd., Ph.D., the Dean of Teacher Training and

Education Faculty

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

Department of FKIP UNISMUH Makassar

4. The researcher most profound and sincere appreciation is due to her first

consultant Erwin Akib, S.Pd.,M.Pd., Ph.D. and to her second consultant

Wildhan Burhanuddin, S.Pd., M.Hum. who patiently guided and assisted the

rescarcher to finish this thesis by giving their suggestion, motivation, and

correction

xii

5. My heartful thank to all lecturer of the FKIP UNISMUH especially to the

lecturer of English Department and all staff of Muhammadiyah University of

Makassar for their guidance during the year of the researcher's study

6. The researcher's deep appreciation for as a headmaster of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar and the English teacher Miss. Fitriani S,

S.Pd., and all the students, especially for the class X TKJ in academic year

2020/2021 who have spared their time and activities for being subject of this

research

7. The researcher would like to express deepest and affectionate thank to her

parents, Irman Yusuf and Sukriah for their prayer, support, advice, love,

sacrifice and continual understanding through my life. And also to my

lovely son and husband Muhammad Abrisam Hylmi and Rezki. Love them

more with all my heart.

8. Thanks to my big family and friends whom always gives motivation to

finishing my study and many people who have help the researcher that I

can't mention one by one, thanks all.

Nothing is perfect but Allah SWT, the researcher realizes that this thesis is still

not perfect. Therefore, construction and suggestion will be highly appreciated

Makassar, Januari 2021

Herfin Marlina

xiii

LIST OF CONTENTS

COVER

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

CONSELLING SHEET I ............................................................................. iii

CONSELLING SHEET II ............................................................................ iv

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

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

MOTTO AND DEDICATION ...................................................................... vii

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

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................ x

TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................ xii

LIST OF TABLE .......................................................................................... xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................. xv

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

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

B. The problem of the research ................................................................ 4

C. Objectives of the Research .................................................................. 4

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

E. Scope of the Research ......................................................................... 4

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A. Previous Related Research Findings ................................................... 5

B. Some Pertinent Ideas ............................................................................ 7

C. Conceptual Framework ....................................................................... 16

D. Hypothesis ........................................................................................... 17

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHOD

A. Research Design .................................................................................. 18

B. Research Variables and Indicators ...................................................... 19

C. Population and Sample ........................................................................ 19

D. Instruments of the Research ................................................................ 19

E. Procedure of Collecting Data ............................................................... 20

F. Technique of Data Analysis ................................................................ 21

xiv

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

A. Findings ............................................................................................... 28

B. Discussions .......................................................................................... 32

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusion .......................................................................................... 35

B. Suggestions ......................................................................................... 36

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

CURRICULUM VITAE

xv

LIST OF TABLE

4.1 Frequency and rate precentage of speaking in pre-test ............................. 28

4.2 Frequency and rate precentage of speaking in pposttest ............................ 29

4.3 The mean score and standar deviation of the students .............................. 30

4.4 Table the improvement of the students’ speaking mastery ....................... 31

4.5 T-test of the students’ speaking mastery .................................................... 32

xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A ................................................................................................. 40

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................. 42

APPENDIX C ................................................................................................. 44

APPENDIX D ................................................................................................. 46

APPENDIX E ................................................................................................. 48

APPENDIX F .................................................................................................. 49

APPENDIX G ................................................................................................ 50

APPENDIX H ................................................................................................ 51

APPENDIX I ................................................................................................ 52

APPENDIX J ................................................................................................ 54

APPENDIX K ................................................................................................ 56

APPENDIX L ................................................................................................ 58

APPENDIX M ................................................................................................ 60

APPENDIX N ................................................................................................ 62

APPENDIX O ................................................................................................ 65

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION.

A. Background

As a foreign language in Indonesia, English was taught seriously by many

people to have a good prospect in the community of international world. Recently,

English becomes important. Since it is important, English is taught widely at

formal schools starting from elementary school up to universities; even at

informal school i.e. courses. The use of English as a second language in oral

communication was complex activities to be considered when teaching the

English language (Al-Sibai,2004). However, considered speaking as the most

important skill among four skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing)

because people who know a language are referred to as speakers of that language.

Speaking is one of the aspects in learning English which students should to be

master on it. Speaking allow the students to get information from people through

their conversation, and also the students should understand the information and

how to respond it or communicate their understanding about the information. It

means that the students must be able to speak so they can express what they want

to show to the other.

Speaking is the first step that student needs to be learn before they can read and

write (Linse, 2005). This is in line with The National Standards in Indonesia

(Depdiknas, 2006) state oral communication competence or speaking is initial

skills that lead the students to expand their communication competences (reading

and writing). A key to achieving good communication is being able to speak

2

clearly and articulate to ones success in life, because it plays a major role both in

individually and society.

In fact today, the students still tend to difficult in speaking, the students do not

know how to apply different transactional and interaction expression in different

situation and make the students seems lazy to speak. The teachers who are

involved in developing students speaking skill often feel frustrated because some

of the students make no effort to speak. When teacher want their students to

active, they prefer to be passive. It happen because the students are sometimes feel

afraid of their teacher when students make mistake and students do not have

enough confidence to talk because of feeling ashamed The another problems

caused by several factors such as reluctance, shyness, fear of committing oral

mistakes besides the students show poor speaking ability and they lack peers or

social circle with whom they can express or explore their speaking potentials.

Moreover, it can also be caused by lectures in teaching materials, teaching

techniques and the topics give in speaking activity. After doing interview with

teacher at SMK 4 MuhammadiyahTallo and have doing Magang 3 in there, the

writer find the problem has the similar case at the first grade students at SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo where the students face many problem in learning

English, the crucial problem is their participation in speaking.

Related to the problems above, implementing appropriate method for students

that provide many opportunities for students to speak English is needed. In this

case, Project-Based Learning (PBL) is one of the methods that recommended to

be used. Project-Based Learning (PBL) refers to a method that allowing the

3

students to design, plan, carry out an extended project that produces a publicly

exhibited output such as product, publication and presentation (Patton, 2012).

Project-Based Learning is innovative learning cantered on students and assign the

teachers as motivator and facilitators, where students are given the opportunity to

work autonomously construct learning. Through Project-Based Learning the

process begins with the inquiry raises questions guide (a guiding question) and

guiding students in a collaborative project that integrates a wide range of subject

in the curriculum.

Project-Based Learning is an in-depth investigation of a topic that is valuable

to the real world attention and effort students (Kemdikbud, 2014). Ten main

technique for implementing Project-Based Learning method, such as: creating a

good class atmosphere, getting the class interested, selecting the topic, creating a

general outline of the project, do basic research around the topic, report to the

class, process feedback, putting it all together, presenting the project, and asses

and evaluate the project.

Using Project-Based Learning can be a solution in order to improve students’

English knowledge especially in mastering speaking. The use of Project-Based

learning to improve students’ speaking will be taken up in detail on the next

chapter.

4

B. Problem Statement

Related to the background above, the researcher formulates the following

problem statement as:

Does Project-Based Learning (PBL) improve students’ speaking skill at SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo?

C. Objective of the study

Based on the problem statement above, the objective of this research is:

To find out whether or not Project-Based Learning (PBL) improve students’

speaking skill at SMk Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo

D. Significance of the study

The significance of the study can be considered into two, theoretically and

practically. Theoretically, this research can be a reference for the next researcher

in term of improving students’ speaking skill through Project-Based Learning

(PBL) in conducting a further related research. While practically, hopefully this

research can be useful for the teachers as a method to improve their students’

speaking skill.

E. Scope of the study

To avoid misinterpretation to the problems, the writer would like to limit the

scope of study. The writer wants to know whether Project-Based Learning (PBL)

can improve students’ speaking skill focus on pronunciation and fluency the first

grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo.

5

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Previous of Research Findings

This part present the previous findings by some researcher, many studies have

been performed by the other researcher related Project-Based Learning (PBL).

The previous research findings were discussed as follows:

The studies about Project-Based Learning are abounding. The first study

conducted by Permatasari (2013). The objective of the study is to find out how

Project-Based Learning could improve the speaking skill of second graders of

SMPN 1 Kawedanan, Magetan. The instruments uses are questionnaire, interview

guide, field notes or observation sheet and students’ worksheet. The findings

reveal that there was improvement on students speaking skill after applying

Project-Based Learning.

The second study conducted by Radjab (2013). The objective of the study is

to explain whether Project-Based Learning can improve the students’ English

speaking ability and to identify factors that influence changes in their language

skills during Project-Based Learning. The participants of this research were the

students of class III-B of third semester in teacher collages (STKIP) Tapanuli

Selatan. The result of this study indicate an increased level of positive English

language skill

6

The third study conducted by Rochmawati (2015). The objective of the study

is to focused on fostering student’s critical thinking through Project-Based

Learning with 25 students of the fourth semester of STAIN Ponorogo who took

TEFL 1 course. The instruments used are in the form of observation sheet and

interview guideline. The result of study indicates that the students showed

significantly positive attitude toward the implementation Project-Based Learning.

Based on the previous research findings above the writer indicate that Project-

Based Learning can be used to teach any English subject, especially in speaking

skill. After discussing the positive references in regard the use of Project-Based

Learning above, the writer expect to have some good result, but in same area of

English skills, namely speaking. Although studies on teaching speaking have been

done previously, ut it necessary to have more knowledge on teaching speaking

especially by using Project-Based Learning method. In addition, the participants

are different which may different result and also there is limited research on the

effect of Project-Based Learning as a method to teach speaking subject to improve

their pronunciation and fluency. The writer also concern to help senior high

school students at SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo to improve their speaking skill.

7

B. Some Pertinent Ideas

1. Concept of Speaking

a. Definition of Speaking

Speaking is the productive skill. This is an activity of producing words

or sentences orally. By that skill, people can deliver their ideas, thought and

opinion about the world in directly or indirectly way. In line with Brown and

Yale as cited Wulandari (2014) state that speaking expresses need-request,

information, service, etc.

Mackey (2007) defines speaking as oral expression that involves not

only the use of right pattern of fluency and rhythm but also the use of the

right words in order to convey the right meaning . Harmer (2007) argues

speaking is skill that becomes important part in human daily life because

speaking helps people to create the social relationship as human being. In

addition Chaney as cited by Wulandari (2014) state that speaking is the

process of building and sharing information, ideas or opinion through verbal

and non-verbal symbols in a variety of context.

Based on the definition above, it can be reviewed that speaking is the

most important skill of language that use to expressing our ideas, opinions or

feelings about something to the other by using words or sounds of articulation

in order to inform, to entertain, to persuade the other or the other listener.

8

b. Types of Speaking

1) Imitative

A very limited portion of classroom speaking time may legitimately be

speech generating “human tape recorder speech, where, for example, learner

practice an fluency contour or try to pinpoint a certain vowel sound. Imitation

of this kind is carried out the purposes of meaningful interaction, but for

focusing on some particular element of language form.

2) Intensive

Intensive speaking goes one step beyond imitative to include any

speaking performance that is design to practice some phonological or

grammatical aspect of language. Intensive speaking can be self-initiated or it

can even form part of some pair work activity, where learners “going over”

certain forms of language.

3) Responsive

A good deal of student speech in the classroom is responsive; short

replies a teacher or student. Initiated questions or comment, such as speech

can be meaningful and authentic

4) Transactional (dialogue)

Transactional language, carry out for the purpose of conveying or

exchanging specific information is an extended form of responsive language.

5) Interpersonal (dialogue)

The other form of conversation mention in the previous interpersonal

9

Dialog, carry out more for the purpose of maintaining social relationship than

for the transmission of fact and information. Learners would need to learn

how such features as the relationship between interlocutor, casual style, and

sarcasm are coded linguistically in this conversation.

6) Extensive

Students at intermediate to advance levels are called on to give extended

monologues in the form of oral reports summaries of perhaps short speeches

c. Teaching Speaking

In teaching four skills of English those are reading, listening, speaking

and reading become a compulsory for the entire English teacher to guide their

students to achieve those abilities by teaching these as interesting as possible.

Thus, speaking is also being taught like the other skills of English.

Teaching is a process of guiding learner in studying and getting new

knowledge, skills and attitude. Brown as cited by Wulandari (2014) state that

teaching cannot be separate from learning because teaching is guiding and

facilitating learning and enabling the learner to learn and setting the condition

for learning.

Nunan (2003) defines teaching speaking to teach English Foreign

Language (EFL) learners as follow:

1) Produce the English speech sound and pattern

2) Use word and sentences stress, fluency pattern and the rhythm

10

3) Select appropriate words and sentences according to proper social

setting, audience, situation and subject matter.

4) Use language as a means of expressing values and judgments’.

5) Use the language quickly and confidently with few unnatural pauses,

which are called fluency.

d. Problems in Teaching and Learning Speaking

Sometimes the learner find some obstacle when they want to speaks in

front of the class, it happen because they feel afraid of making mistakes they

are unwilling to be judged by the other participants. Ur as cited by Wulandari

(2014) argues some problem that might be possible problems in speaking

including:

1) Inhibition. The learners are often inhibited about trying new things in

foreign language classroom because they are afraid to make mistake or to

be criticized by the other and too shy to utter the word.

2) Nothing to say. Learner sometime get fault because they do not have

something to say. In the other word they cannot express themselves.

3) Low or uneven participants. Only one participant that dominate to talk in

the classroom while the other speaks a little or not at all.

4) Mother tongue use. The entire learner in the class use same mother

tongue which mean they speaks just use one language. So it makes them

feel unnatural when they are trying to talks or speak in the foreign

language

11

e. Assessment of Speaking

Assessing speaking is challenging because there are so many factors

that influence how well someone can speak a language. Brown as cited

Hidayati (2019) states that there are some aspects of assessing speaking such

as pronunciation, vocabulary, fluency, accent, and grammar which should be

mastered in order to be able to speak well. As a complex activity, speaking

has five main aspects as follows:

1) Pronunciation

Pronunciation is a basic quality of language learning especially in

speaking ability. It concerns the way what we say, articulate, assimilate,

intonate, and stress words. Having poor pronunciation skill can obscure

communication and prevent us from making meaningful utterances. Harmer

(2007) states that pronunciation teaching is not only making the students are

able to differentiate sounds and sound features, but also improving their

speaking ability immeasurably such as to concentrate on sounds and be aware

of using stress when producing sound.

2) Vocabulary

Vocabulary is a foundation of a language. To create meaningful

utterance or sentences, it needs to use appropriate vocabulary to express

something. In other words, the requirement for students who want to have a

good speaking ability is mastering vocabulary. McCarty (1990) states that the

biggest component of any language courses was vocabulary. In addition,

Harmer (2007) says that if the students have more vocabularies or at least

12

1000 words, they can communicate fluently. They do not take a long time in

expressing what they are going to say because they know the words that

describe their ideas.

3) Grammar

Grammar is very important in speaking accuracy. According to Nunan

(2003) grammar usually can be thought as a set of rules specifying the correct

pattern of words at sentence level. If our conversation is full of grammatical

mistakes, your ideas will not get across so easily. Studying grammar rules

will certainly help students speak more accurately. Those three parts are very

important elements to accomplish the accuracy in the effort of being able to

speak well.

4) Fluency

Fluency according to Spratt and friends (2005) is speaking at a normal

speed without hesitation, repetition and with smooth use of connected speech.

It deals with how comfortable students are when they speak, how easily the

words come out and whether there are great pauses and gaps in the student’s

speaking. It is a parameter of students’ speaking ability goal. It deals with the

quality of the way they speak fluently.

5) Accent

Language accent of one speaker and other is different. This is because

every person has their own way in saying words depending on the cultures the

speakers have. Roach (2009) states that there was no speaker who can be

taken to represent a particular accent or dialect in this world.

13

2. Project-Based Learning

a. Definition of Project-Based Learning (PBL)

Project-Based Learning is a student- centered pedagogy that

involves a dynamic classroom approach in which students gain

knowledge and skills by working for an extended period of time to

investigate and respond to an authentic, engaging and complex

question, problem or challenge. As a result, the students can develop

deep content knowledge as well as critical thinking, collaboration,

creativity and communication skills. There are several definition about

Project-Based Learning from the expert.

The first definition about Project-Based Learning comes from

Fitria (2015) state Project-Based Learning as an instructional method

centered on the learner. This approach organizes learning around

projects which are realized in the form of complex tasks. While making

the project, students can develop their problem-solving, decision-

making, and investigation skills. They also have the opportunity to

work autonomously over a given period of time to create realistic

products in a variety of presentation form.

The third definition come from Bahjat (2017) state Project-Based

Learning is an innovative approach to learning that teaches multitude

of strategies critical for success in the twenty-first century. Students

drive their learning through inquiry, as well as work collaboratively to

research and create projects that reflect their knowledge.

14

From the discussion of the understanding of Project-Based

Learning above, the writer conclude that Project-Based Learning is a

method that use project or activities as media, where the learner can

explore, assess and provide information to produce various forms of

learning outcomes. Project-Based Learning is particular strategy in

learning that changes or reverses the face of traditional classes, through

this method the learning process in class which is generally use

conventional learning becomes more innovative.

b. The Advantages of Project-Based Learning

According to Akbar (2015), there were some advantages when the

teacher uses Project-Based Learning in teaching speaking, as follows:

1) Project-Based Learning promotes self-motivation and self-

responsibility in learning.

2) Project-Based Learning caters more enjoyable and effective learning

3) Project-Based Learning engages contextual and meaningful learning

for students

4) Project-Based Learning fosters the students’ teamwork and

communication skill.

5) Project-Based Learning promotes social learning that can enhance

collaborative skill

6) Project-Based Learning could give an optimal opportunity to improve

students language skills

15

c. The Stages of Project-Based Learning

There are some stages of Project-Based Learning implementation

according to Akbar (2015). They are:

1) Speculation, in which teachers provide the choice of project topics

initially based on curriculum and discuss them with the students. In

this stage, teachers and students speculate possibilities that will lead to

the projects smoothly. However, for the beginner or lower level

students, teachers can choose the project by themselves but still

consider the students problem. This is because it can assume that the

students in beginner or lower level do not have the language or

confidence to develop project themes so that the teachers need to lead

them first before they can decide by themselves.

2) Designing the project activities, referring to organizing the structure of

a project activity that includes group formation, role assigning,

concerning methodology decision, information source, etc.

3) Conducting the project activities, in which the students work what

already planned and designed in the previous stage. At this stage, the

students gather information, discuss it with their group member,

consult problems encountered in their work with the teachers, and

exhibit their final products that might be in form of presentation,

performance, product, publication, etc. To wider community such as

other classes, teachers, foreigners, etc.

16

4) Evaluation Fragoulis states “evaluation is the assessment of activities

from the participants and discussion about whether the initial aims and

goals already achieved, implementation of the process, and final

products”

C. Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study is shown below:

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Students

speaking

achievement

Teaching

speaking

The material that

teaches speaking

Project-

Based

Learning

method

Pronunciation Fluency

Speaking

material

17

a. Input: refer to pre-test that is prepare to measure students’ speaking

ability

b. Process: refers to the treatment of speaking ability

c. Output: refers to the improvement of student’s speaking ability refers

to the pronunciation and fluency

D. Hypothesis

This research formulates the hypothesis as follows:

1. Null Hypothesis (H0): the use of Project-Based Learning method was

not improve students’ speaking ability at SMK Muhammadiyah 4

Tallo.

2. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The uses of Project-Based Learning

significantly improve students’ speaking ability.

18

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODE

A. Research Design

The method used in this research is pre experimental design that involves

one class. In the experimental class, the researcher applied “Project-Based

Learning in teaching speaking ability. The researcher used the pre-test and

posttest design in the experimental class. The aim was to find out the use of

Project-Based Learning in teaching speaking.

EXPERIMENTAL CLASS

O1 X O2

Explanation:

O1: Result of a pretest

X: Treatment that will be given in the class by using Project-Based Learning

method

O2: Result of post test

Based on the table above, in the experimental class a pre-test (O1) gave to

find out students’ knowledge before giving treatment. Furthermore, given

treatment (X) applied used Project-Based Learning and post-test (O2) apply

to determine student achievement. Score use to compare to see improvement.

19

B. Research Variable

There are two variable in this study. The first variable is dependent variable

and the second variable is independent variable. Dependent variable is

speaking, meanwhile Project-Based Learning is independent variable.

C. Population and Sample

The population of this research was the first grade students of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo. Meanwhile, the sample of this research was the first

grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo in class TKJ which consist of

16 students. The sampling technique that was used in this study is purposive

sampling. In purposive sampling the writer handpicks the cases to be included

in the sample on the basis of their judgment of their typical. In this way, they

build up a sample that is satisfactory to their specific needs.

D. Research Instrument

This test was used to find out an increase in students' speaking skill using

Project-Based-Learning Method. The test gave through pre-test and post-test.

A pre-test was conducted to find out the initial achievement of students'

speaking skill before using the Project-Based Learning method while a post-

test was conducted to find out the increase in students’ speaking skill after the

treatment was given.

20

E. Procedure of Collecting Data

The procedures of collecting data in this research are as follows:

1. Pre-test

Pre-test is to determine a student's baseline knowledge or preparedness for an

educational experience or course of study. Before giving the treatment, the

researcher gave the pre-test for the experimental class. The research

distributed the speaking test; it aims to find out the students’ speaking

mastery.

2. Treatment

Treatment is an explanatory variable manipulated by the researcher. The

treatment conducted five times after the pre-test given in the classroom. The

procedure of given the treatment is as follows:

a. The researcher gave short explanation about speaking material

b. The researcher introduced the Project-Based Learning method

c. The students are expected to pay attention to the teacher explanation

d. The researcher distributed speaking material

e. The researcher divided students into group

f. The researcher choose the topic that will be describe

g. The students will discussed the topic that will be choose

h. Each students from the groups wrote the words as the result of the group

discussion on the book and describe orally

21

3. Post-test

Post-test is a test given to students after completion of an instructional

program or segment and often used in conjunction with a pre-test to measure

their achievement and the effectiveness of the program. After giving the

treatment, the researcher gave the post-test for the experimental class by

distributing the same test. It aims to find out the result of the treatment.

F. Technique of Data Analysis

The data collect is analysis by using t-test, the steps are as follows:

a. Scoring the students’ correct answers of the pre-test and the post-test

Students’ Correct Answer

𝑺𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒆 =𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒘𝒆𝒓

𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒏𝒖𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓𝒐𝒇𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒎× 𝟏𝟎𝟎

Classifying the score of the students by using the following scale:

96-100 classified as very good

76-90 classified as good

61-75 classified as fairly

51-60 classified as poor

Score less than 50 classified as very poor

Sco

re

Aspects

Grammar Vocabulary Comprehension Fluency Pronunciation Task

1

Errors in grammar

are frequent, but

speaker can be

understood by a

native speaker

used to dealing

Speaking

vocabulary

inadequate

to express

anything but

the most

Within the scope

of his very

limited language

experience, can

understand

simple questions

(no specific

fluency

description

refer to

other four

language

Error in

pronunciation

are frequent

but can be

understood by

a native

Can ask

and

answer

question

on topic

very

22

with foreigner elementary

needs.

and statements if

delivered with

slowed speech,

repetition or

paraphrase.

areas for

implied

level of

fluency

speaker used

to dealing with

foreigners

attempting to

speak his

language

familiar

to him.

Able to

satisfy

routine

travel

need and

minimu

m

courtesy

requirem

ents

(should

be able

to order a

simple

meal,

ask, and

give

simple

direction,

make

purchase

s and tell

time)

2

Can usually

handle elementary

construction quite

accurately but

does not have

through or

confident control

of the grammar

Has

speaking

vocabulary

sufficient to

express

himself

simply with

some

circumlocuti

ons.

Can get the gist

of most

conversation of

non technical

subjects (i.e.,

topics that

require no

specialized

knowledge)

Can handle

with

confidence

but not with

facility most

social

situation,

including

introduction

and casual

conversatio

Accent is

intelligible

though often

quite faulty

Able to

satisfy

routine

social

demands

and work

requirem

ents,

needs

help in

handling

23

ns about

current

event, as

well as

work,

family and

autobiograp

hic al

information

any

complica

tion and

difficulti

es

3

Control of

grammar is good.

Able to speak the

language

sufficient

structural

accuracy to

participate

effectively in most

formal and

informal

conversation on

practical, social

and professional

topic

Able to

speak the

language

with

sufficient

vocabulary

to

participate

effectively

in most

formal and

informal

conversation

on practical,

social and

professional

topics.

Vocabulary

is broad

enough that

he rarely has

to grope for

a word

Comprehension

is quite complete

at a normal rate

of speech

Can discuss

particular

interest of

competence

with

reasonable

ease. Rarely

has to grope

for words

Errors never

interfere with

understanding

and rarely

disturb the

native speaker.

Accent may be

obviously

foreign

Can

participat

e

effectivel

y in most

formal

and

informal

conversat

ion on

practical,

social

and

professio

nal topics

4

Able to use the

language

accurately on all

levels normally

Can

understand

and

participate

Can understand

any conversation

within the range

Able to use

the language

fluently on

all levels

Errors in

pronunciation

are quite rare

Would

rarely be

taken for

a native

24

pertinent to

professional

needs. Errors in

grammar are quite

rare

in any

conversation

within the

range of his

experience

with a high

degree of

precision of

vocabulary

of his experience normally

pertinent to

professional

needs. Can

participate

in nay

conversatio

n within the

range of this

experience

with high

degree of

fluency

speaker

but can

respond

appropria

tely even

in

unfamilia

r

situations

can

handle

informal

interpreti

ng form

and into

language.

5

Equivalent to that

of and educated

native speaker

Speech on

all levels is

fully

accepted

native

speaker in

all its

features

including

breadth of

vocabulary

and idioms,

colloquialis

m and

pertinent

cultural

references

Equivalent to

that of an

educated native

speaker

Has

complete

fluency in

the language

such that his

speech is

fully

accepted bu

educated

native

speakers

Equivalent to

and fully

accepted by

educated

native

speakers

Speaking

proficien

cy

equivale

nt to that

of an

educated

native

speaker.

Brown (2007)

25

b. Calculating the mean score by applying the following formula:

𝑥 = ∑ 𝑑

𝑁

X = mean score

Σd = total of students’ score

N = the number of students’

c. Computing the frequency and the percentage of the student’s score

𝑷 =𝑭

𝑵× 𝟏𝟎𝟎

P = percentage

F = number of correct

N = Number of sample

d. find out the standard deviation of the students’ speaking ability

𝑆𝐷 =

√∑ 2 − (∑𝑋)2

𝑁𝑋

N − 1

Where:

SD = Standard Deviation

∑X = The sum of all score

∑X2 = The sum square of all score

N = Total number of students

26

f. To find the students improvement the formula as follows:

% = X2−X1

𝑋1 x 100

Where:

% = The student’s enhancement

X1 = The mean score of the pre-test

X2 = The mean score of post-test

g. To find out the significant difference between the scoreof pre-test and

post-test with the value of the t-test using the following formula:

h. 𝐷 = ∑D

𝑁

Where:

𝐷 = The mean score of different score

∑D = sum of total score difference

N =Number of students

t = 𝐷

√∑𝐷2− (∑𝐷)2

𝑁𝑁 (𝑁−1)

Where:

𝐷 = the mean of difference score

∑D = the sum of total difference score

∑D2 = squre of the sum of total score difference

N = the total number of score

27

i. The criteria for the hypothesis testing was as follows:

Comparison

Hypothesis

H0 H1

t-test<t-table Accepted Rejected

t-test>t-table Rejected Accepted

The tables explain that t-test value was smaller than t-table value, the null

hypothesis was accepted and the alternative hypothesis was rejected. Meanwhile,

the t-test was great that t-table value, the null hypothesis was rejected and the

alternative hypothesis was accepted.

28

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

A. FINDINGS

In this chapter the researcher present a description of the data result. The

data used in this research were quantitative data were taken from the pre-test

and posttest session. The pretest was given before giving treatment to the

students and the posttest given in the last meeting. The result of the students

score can be seen in the following data.

1. The students’ speaking in term of pronunciation and fluency

The researcher found that there was a improvements in learning process at

the first grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo. The frequency

and percentage of speaking in pretest can be seen in the following table:

Table 4.1 Frequency and rate percentage of students’ speaking in

pretest

No. Score Classification


F P F P

1. 91-100 Very good 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

2. 76-90 Good 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

3. 61-75 Fairly 1 6.25% 2 12.5%

4. 51-60 Poor 8 50% 6 37.5%

29

5. < 50 Very poor 7 43.75% 8 50%

Total 16 100% 16 100%

Table 4.1 showed the frequency and percentage rate of students’ speaking

in term of pronunciation, none student got very good and good (0.0%), 1

student got fairly (6.25%), 8 students got poor (50%) and 7 students got

very poor (43.75%). Meanwhile in term of fluency there was none students

got ver good and good (0.0%), 2 students got fairly (12.5%), 6students got

poor (37.5%) and 8 students got very poor (50%).

Table 4.2 frequency and percentage of students speaking in posttest

No. Score Classification


F P F P

1. 91-100 Very good 2 12.5% 4 25%

2. 76-90 Good 8 50% 12 75%

3. 61-75 Fairly 6 37.5% 0 0.0%

4. 51-60 Poor 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

5. < 50 Very poor 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total 16 100% 16 100%

Table 4.2 showed the frequency and percentage rate of students’ speaking in

term of pronunciation, 2 student got very good(12.5%) 8 students got good

30

(50%), 6 students got fairly (37.7%), 0 students got poor and very poor

(0.0%) . Meanwhile in term of fluency there was 4 students got very good

(25%),12students got good (75%) 0 students got fairly (0 %),none students

got poor and very poor (0.0%).

2. The Mean Score and Standard Deviation

Table 4.3 showed the distribution data of mean score and standard

deviation in pre-test and posttest.

Components

Pretest Posttest

Mean Score Standard

Deviation

Mean Score Standard

Deviation

Pronunciation 45 10.32 78.75 8.66

Fluency 45.62 14.12 84.37 6.8

The result of data analysis pretest and posttest of the students speaking in

the table 4.3 above, the mean score of pronunciation in pretest was 45

(categorized as very poor) and standard deviation was (10.32). The mean

score of pronunciation in posttest was 78.75 (categorized as good) with the

standard deviation was (8.66). Meanwhile, the mean score of fluency in

pretest was 45.62 (categorized as very poor) with the standard deviation was

(14.12) and the mean score of fluency in posttest was 84.37 (categorized as

good) with standard deviation was (6.8)

31

3. The Improvement of the students’ speaking in pretest and posttest

The table 4.4 showed the improvement of students’ speaking in pretest and

posttest

Table 4.4 the improvement of the students speaking in pretest and

posttest

Table 4.4 showed that pronunciation in pretest was 45 and posttest was

78.75 and the improvement was 75%. Fluency in pretest was 45.62 and

posttest was 84.37 and the improvement was 84.94%. The score of

posttest>pretest, it indicates that the students speaking has increased through

Project-Based Learning method.

4. Hypothesis Testing

To know the level significance of the pretest and posttest, the researcher

used t-test analysis on the level of significance (p)=0.05 with the degree of

freedom (df)=N-1 (16-1=15), where the N= number of subject (16 students),

then t-table value was 2.331. The t-test statistical analysis for independent

sample was applied. The following table showed the result of t-test

calculation:

Component Pretest Posttest Improvement(%)

Pronunciation 45 78.75 75%

Fluency 45.62 84.37 84.94%

32

Table 4.5 t-test of the students’ speaking

Components t-test value t-table value

Pronunciation 18.74 2.331

Fluency 15.06 2331

Table 4.5 showed that t-test value in term of pronunciation were greater that

t-table (18.74>2.331). The table also showed t-test value in term of fluency

were greater than t-table (15.06>2.331). It means that there were

significance difference between the students’ speaking in term

pronunciation and fluency before and after implemented Project-Based

Learning method. It could be concluded that the null hypothesis (H0) was

rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted. It means the use

of Project-Based Learning method was effective to improve students’

speaking ability.

B. DISCUSSION

The main purpose of this research was to find out whether using Project-

Based Learning method improve the students speaking ability focused to improve

students pronunciation and fluency at the first grade students of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo. To find out the purpose of the research the researcher

used test as instrument. The test gave through pretest and posttest. The

improvement after applied Project-Based Learning method was known from the

result of pretest and posttest and when the result of the posttest was higher the

33

result of the pretest it can be concluded that Project-Based Learning method was

effective to be used.

The result of the data was taken from 16 students of SMK

Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo in a class of pretest and posttest. The improvement of

students speaking ability in term of pronunciation and fluency has evolved. This is

supported by the result of students mean score in term of pronunciation in pretest

was 45 but after implementation of Project-Based Learning the mean score of

pronunciation in posttest was 78.75 and the improvement was 75%.

The improvement of students speaking ability in term of fluency also had

evolved. It is supported by the result of students mean score in term of fluency in

pretest was 46.82, but after the implementation of Project-Based Learning , the

mean score of fluency in posttest was 84.37 and the improvement was 84.94%. it

can be concluded that using Project-Based Learning as method to improve

students speaking ability focused on pronunciation and fluency was proved.

The result of this research was related with the previous theory that Project-

Based Learning can improve the students speaking ability. Akbar (2015)

conducted the research improving students speaking ability through Project-Based

Learning at MTSN Model Makassar. His research found that students after taught

speaking by using Project-Based Learning was more effective than using

conventional ways. So, it can conclude that Project-Based Learning has positive

effect to students of MTSN Model Makassar in speaking ability. Then, Fauziah

(2013) conducted a research at SMPN 1 Kawedanan Magetan. Her research reveal

34

that there was improvement on students speaking skill after applying Project-

Based Learning .

Based on the theory and previous related research finding, it can be

concluded that the research was done clearly supported with the previous finding,

that explain Project-Based Learning method can improve students’ speaking

ability. From the discussion above can be concluded that the students’ speaking

ability at the first grade students of SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar was

improve significantly after implementation Project-Based Learning as a treatment

in learning. It mean, Project-Based Learning enhanced the students speaking

ability.

35

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. CONCLUSION

Based on the result of the data analysis, research findings and discussion

in the previous chapter the researcher has come to the following conclusion:

1. The use Project-Based Learning improve the students’ speakinga ability

in term of pronunciation and fluency at the first year students of SMK

Muhammaadiyah 4 Tallo Makassar after implementation Project-Based

Learning method. It proven by the mean score of the post-test 78.75 is

higher than the mean score of pre-test 45. In Addition the t-test value is

greater then t-table value (18.74>2.331). Meanwhile in term of fluency

The result of posttest 84.37 is higher than the mean score of pre-test

45.62. In Addition the t-test value is greater then t-table value

(15.06>2.331).It was show that Null hypothesis was rejected and

alternative hypothesis was accepted.

36

B. SUGGESTION

Based on the conclusion above, the researcher puts some suggestion as

follows:

1. The English teacher should be more creative to choose technique or

strategy in teaching English, so that students can have enthusiasm, interest

and active in learning process.

2. The English teacher can use Project-Based Learning in teaching and

learning process especially in teaching speaking because it can enhance

the students’ speaking ability.

3. For next researchers are suggested that they develop these research

findings to investigate the speaking issues in any level of students.

37

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abubakar, M.S. (2015). Improving the second year students speaking ability

through Project-Based Learning (PBL) at mtsn model makassar.

English teaching learning and research journal,1(2), 216-228.

Al Doubi,S. (2017). Students’ perception of Project-Based Learning (PBL) to

improve learning language autonomy

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik,

Jakarta: Rieneka Cipta, p.118.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2013. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik, Cet.

XV: Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Brown, H. D. 2007. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching (5th Edition).

New York: Pearcon Education Inc.

Dewi, H. (2016). Project-Based Learning techniques to improve speaking

skills. English Education Journal, 7(3), 341-359.

Dywika Robbiantama, A. (2019). Improving Students’ English Speaking Skill

Through Cartoon Film Based On Discussion At Sma

Muhammadiyah 3 Jember In Academic Year 2018/2019 (Doctoral

dissertation, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jember).

Depdikbud. 2007. Petunjuk Proses Pelaksanaan Belajar Mengajar Dan Petunjuk

Pelaksanaan Sistem Pendidikan.Jakarta.

Fitria, S. (2013). Speaking activities in young learners classroom: the

implementation of project-based learning approach. Journal of

English and Education, 1(2), 90-102.

Gay, L.R, G.E. Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P.W. 2012. Educational Research

Competence For Analysis and Application. USA:Pearson.

Hidayati, W. (2019). An analysis of difficulty level in speaking English by eight

class students of smpunismuh Makassar.

Ichsan, M. H., Apriliaswati, R., & Rosnija, E. (2019). Improving students

speaking skill through project-based learning. Jurnal Pendidikan dan

Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 6(2).

38

Kemdikbud. (2014).Materi pelatihan guru implementasi kurikulum 2013 tahun

ajaran 2014/2015: Mata pelajaran IPA SMP/MTs. Jakarta:

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan

Maulany, D. B. (2013).The use of project-based learning in improving the

students speaking skill (a classroom action research at one of

primary schools in Bandung). Journal of English and

Education, 1(1), 30-42.

Nuraini, K. (2016). The barriers of teaching speaking English for EFL

learners. ELLITE: Journal of English Language, Literature, and

Teaching, 1(1).

Permatasari, S. F. (2013). Improving students’ speaking skill through Project-

Based Learning for second graders of SMPN Kawedanan. Skripsi

Jurusan Sastra Inggris-Fakultas Sastra UM.

Pratama, Y., & Awaliyah, Y. (2015). Teacher's Strategies in Teaching Speaking to

Young Learners. English Journal of Ibnu Khaldun university, 17(2).

Radjab, D. (2013). Improving students’ speaking skill through Project-Based

Learning technique at class III-B of third semester students. English

Language Teaching (ELT), 1(3).

Riswandi, D. (2018). The implementation of project-based learning to improve

students’ speaking skill. International Journal of Language Teaching

and Education, 2(1), 32-40.

Rochmahwati, P. (2015). Fostering students' critical thinking by project-based

learning. Journal on English as a Foreign Language (JEFL), 5(1), 37-

44.

Setiawan, A., & Bharati, D. A. L. (2018). Developing HOT project-based-

speaking assessment to stimulate the students’ critical thinking and

creativity. English Education Journal, 8(3), 301-307.

Sugiyono. 2010. Metode Peneitian Pendidikan: Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif,

dan R&D.Cet. X; Bandung: Alfabeta.

Widiseta, D. (2016). Improving students’ reading comprehension through Project-

Based Learning (PBL) for grade XI students at SMAN 1 Teladanan

Yogyakarta in the academic year of 2016/2017. English Language

Teaching Journal, 5(10).

39

Wulandari, R. (2014). Improving students’ speaking ability through

communicative language games at SMPN 1 Prambanan grade VIII A

in the academic year of 2013/2014 (Doctoral

dissertation). Indonesia: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Yaman, Ismail. 2014. Efl Students’ Attitudes Towards The Development Of

Speaking Skills Via Project-Based Learning: An Omnipresent

Learning Perspective

40

APPENDIX A

THE STUDENTS’ SCORE OF PRETEST

A. Students’ Score of Pretest in Term of Pronunciation

No Name Score Classification

1. Student 1 40 Very Poor

2. Student 2 60 Poor


4. Student 4 70 Fairly







11. Student 11 30 Very poor




41



Total 750

42

APPENDIX B

STUDENTS’ SCORE OF PRETEST

B. Students Score of Pretest in Term of Fluency















43




Total 730

44

APPENDIX C

SCORE OF POSTTEST

C. Score of Posttest in Term of Pronunciation



2. Student 2 80 Good


4. Student 4 95 Very Good










45




Total 1260

46

APPENDIX D

THE SCORE OF POSTTEST

D. The Score of Students Posttestin Term of Fluency
















47



Total 1350

48

APPENDIX E

RATING SCORE OF STUDENTS

E. Rating Score of Speaking in Term of Pronunciation in pretest and posttest

SAMPLE PRETEST POSTTEST GAIN D2

D(X2-

X1)2

X1 (X1)2 X2 (X2)

2 D(X2-

X1)

1. 40 1600 70 4900 30 3300

2. 40 1600 80 6400 20 2800

3. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

4. 60 3600 95 9025 25 4125

5. 50 2500 70 4900 20 2400

6. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

7. 40 1600 80 6400 40 4800

8. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

9. 50 2500 90 8100 40 5600

10. 40 1600 70 4900 30 3300

11. 30 900 70 4900 40 4000

12. 50 2500 95 9025 35 5425

13. 30 900 70 4900 40 4000

14. 40 1600 70 4900 30 3300

15. 30 900 80 6400 40 4800

16. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

TOTAL 730 36900 1260 95450 510 63450

49

APPENDIX F

RATING SCORE OF STUDENTS

F. Rating Score of Students in Term of Fluency in Pretest and Posttest

SAMPLE PRETEST POSTTEST GAIN D2

D(X2-

X1)2

X1 (X1)2 X2 (X2)

2 D(X2-

X1)

1. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

2. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

3. 40 1600 90 8100 50 6500

4. 70 4900 95 9025 25 4125

5. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

6. 50 3500 80 6400 30 2900

7. 40 1600 80 6400 40 4800

8. 40 1600 95 9025 55 7425

9. 50 2500 80 6400 30 3900

10. 40 1600 95 9025 55 7425

11. 40 1600 80 6400 40 4800

12. 70 4900 95 9025 25 4125

13. 30 900 80 6400 50 5500

14. 40 1600 80 6400 40 4800

15. 30 900 80 6400 40 5500

16. 40 1600 80 6400 40 4800

TOTAL 730 36300 1193 114600 610 78300

50

APPENDIX G

THE MEAN SCORE OF STUDENTS

G. The Mean Score of Students in Pretest and Posttest

1. The mean score of Pre-test and Post-test students speaking in pronunciation

a. Pre-test b. Post-test

X = X =

X =720

16 X =

1260

16

X =45 X =78.75

2. The mean score of Pre-test and Post-test students’ speaking in term fluency

a. Pre-test b. Post-test

X = X =

X =730

16 X =

1350

16

X =45.62 X =84.37

51

APPENDIX H

THE IMPROVEMENT OF STUDENTS

H. The Improvement of Students in Pretest and Posttest

1. Enhancement of the students’ speaking in pronunciation

% = x 100

% = 78.75−45.62

45.62x 100

% = 72.62%

2. Enhancement of the students’ speaking in fluency

% = x 100

% = 84.37−45.62

45.62x 100

% = 84.94 %

52

APPENDIX I

STANDAR DEVIATION OF STUDENTS

I. Standard Deviation of Students Pretest and Posttest in term of Pronunciation

1. Pretest

SD =

√∑ 2−(∑𝑋)2

𝑁𝑋

N−1

= √34000−

(720)2

16

16−1

= √34000−

518400

16

15

= √34000−32400

15

= √1600

15

= √106.06

= 10.32

53

2. Posttest

SD =

√∑ 2−(∑𝑋)2

𝑁𝑋

N−1

= √100350−

(1260)2

16

16−1

= √100350−

1587600

16

15

= √100350−99225

15

= √1125

15

= √75

= 8.66

54

APPENDIX J

STANDARD DEVIATION OF STUDENTS

J. Standard Deviation of Students in pretest and Posttest in Term of Fluency

1. Pretest

SD =

√∑ 2−(∑𝑋)2

𝑁𝑋

N−1

= √36300−

(730)2

16

16−1

= √36300−

532900

16

15

= √36300−33306

15

= √2994

15

= √199.6

= 14.12

55

2. Posttest

SD =

√∑ 2−(∑𝑋)2

𝑁𝑋

N−1

= √114600−

(1350)2

16

16−1

= √114600−

1822500

16

15

= √114600−113906

15

= √695

15

= √46.26

= 6.8

56

APPENDIX K

THE SIGNIFICANCE DIFFERENCE

K. t-Test pronunciation

Note:

∑D = 510

∑𝐷2 = 16950

N = 16

𝐷 = ∑D

𝑁 =

510

16 = 31.87

t = 𝐷

√∑𝐷2−(∑𝐷)2

𝑁𝑁 (𝑁−1)

= 31.87

√16950−(510)2

1616 (16−1)

= 31.87

√16950−

26010016

16 (15)

= 31.87

√16950− 16256

240

= 31.87

√694

240

57

= 31.87

√2.89

= 31.87

1.7

= 18.74

58

APPENDIX L

THE SIGNIFICANCE DIFFERENCE

L. t-Test Fluency

Note:

∑D = 610

∑𝐷2 = 24800

N = 16

𝐷 = ∑D

𝑁 =

610

16 = 38.12

t = 𝐷

√∑𝐷2−(∑𝐷)2

𝑁𝑁 (𝑁−1)

= 38.12

√24800−(610)2

1616 (16−1)

= 38.12

√24800−

37210016

16 (15)

= 38.12

√24800− 23256

240

= 38.12

√1544

240

59

= 38.12

√6.43

= 38.12

2.53

= 15.06

60

APPENDIX M

DISTRIBUTION OF T-TABLE

For level of significance (D) = 0.05

Degree of Freedom (df) = N-1 = 16-1=15

t-Table = 2.331

Df

Level of Significance for two-tailed test

0,5 0,2 0,1 0,05 0,02 0,01

Level of Significance for one-tailed test

0,25 0,1 0 0,025 0,01 0.005

1 1,000 3,078 6,314 12,706 31,821 63,657

2 0,816 1,886 2,920 4,303 6,965 9,926

3 0,765 1,638 2,353 3,183 4,541 5,841

4 0,741 1,533 2,132 2,776 3,747 4,604

5 0,727 1,476 2,015 2,571 3,365 4,032

6 0,718 1,440 1,943 2,447 2,143 3,707

7 0,711 1,451 1,895 2,365 2,998 3,499

8 0,706 1,397 1,860 2,306 2,896 3,355

9 0,703 1,383 1,833 2,262 2,821 3,250

10 0,700 1,372 1,812 2,226 2,764 3,169

11 0,697 1,363 1,769 2,201 2,718 3,106

12 0,695 1,356 1,782 2,179 2,681 3,055

13 0,694 1,350 1,771 2,160 2,650 3,120

61

14 0,692 1,345 1,761 2,143 2,624 2,977

15 0,691 1,341 1,753 2,331 2,604 2,947

16 0,690 1,337 1,746 2,120 2,583 2,921

17 0,689 1,333 1,740 2,110 2,567 2,898

18 0,688 1,330 1,734 2,101 2,552 2,878

19 0,688 1,328 1,729 2,093 2,539 2,861

20 0,687 1,325 1,725 2,086 2,528 2,845

21 0,686 1,323 1,721 2,080 2,518 2,831

22 0,686 1,321 1,717 2,074 2,505 2,819

23 0,685 1,319 1,714 2,690 2,500 2,807

24 0,685 1,318 1,711 2,640 2,492 2,797

25 0,684 1,316 1,708 2,060 2,485 2,787

26 0,684 1,315 1,706 2,056 2,479 2,779

27 0,684 1,314 1,703 2,052 2,473 2,771

28 0,683 1,313 1,701 2,048 2,467 2,763

29 0,683 1,311 1,699 2,045 2,462 2,756

30 0,683 1,310 1,697 2,042 2,457 2,750

40 0,681 1,303 1,684 2,021 2,423 2,704

60 0,679 1,296 1,671 2,000 2,390 2,660

120 0,677 1,289 1,658 2,890 2,358 2,617

∞ 0,674 1,282 1,645 1,960 2,326 2,576

62

APPENDIX N

DOCUMENTATION

63

64

65

APPENDIX O

LESSON PLAN

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN

(RPP)

Nama Satuan Pendidikan : SMK MUHAMMADIYAH 4 TALLO

Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas /Semester : X/1

Materi : Describing Things

Alokasi Waktu : 9 JP (3 Pertemuan)

A. Tujuan Pembelajaran

1. Siswa dapat menangkap makna teks deskripsi dengan tepat.

2. Siswa dapat menulis teks deskripsi dengan grammar yang baik dan benar.

3. Siswa dapat berbicara monologue mendeskripsikan lingkungan rumah

dengan

baik dan benar.

B. Kompetensi Dasar

3.4 Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan beberapa

teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis dengan memberi dan meminta informasi

pendek dansederhana terkait orang, benda dan tempat sesuai dengan

kontekspenggunaannya.

4.4 Menyusun teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, pendek dan sederhana, terkait

orang, benda dan tempat, dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur

teks, dan unsurkebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks.

C. Alat dan Bahan

1. Alat:

a) Komputer/Notebook/HP : mendukung pembelajaran

b) Internet : mendukung pembelajaran

c) Buku dan alat tulis : menulis rangkuman materi

2. Bahan:

a) Buku sumber : Headaway Beginner, P.56

b) Modul : English Modul Grade X

66

c) Jobsheet : Describing Things

D. Model/Metode Pembelajaran:

1. Pendekatan : Scientific

2. Metode : Project-Based Learning

E. Kegiatan Pembelajaran

Pertemuan I

Langkah-langkah Pembeljaran

Alokasi

Waktu

Kegiatan Pendahuluan

1. Guru dan siswa berdoa sebelum pembelajaran

2. Guru dan siswa mempersiapkan handphone/laptop, koneksi internet

untuk melaksanakan pembelajaran online

Kegiatan Inti

1. Guru memberikan stimulus tentang describe things

2. Siswa menggali informasi tentang fungsi description dengan googling

materi yang sedang dipelajari atau bisa menggunakan sumber lain

seperti buku paket atau e-book

3. Guru memberikan penjelasan materi Describing Things melalui

Youtubechannel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQx8DegETtQkmrKVy2BpxrA

4. Siswa mengerjakan latihan membuat Describing things kemudian di

rekam secara orally

5. Siswa membandingkan materi yang dipelajari terakhir dengan materi

yang di berikan sebelumnya oleh guru dalam WhatsApp group

6. Siswa menanyakan materi yang belum di pahami melalui media sosial

WhatsApp group ke guru.

5 menit

35 menit


67

Kegiatan Penutup

1. Siswa menerima respon terkait hasil review sebagai untuk di lakukan

remidi atau pengayaan.

2. Berdoa atas selesainya materi

5 menit

Pertemuan II





Kegiatan Inti


2. Siswa menggali informasi tentang fungsi description dengan

googling materi yang sedang dipelajari ata bias menggunakan

sumber lain seperti buku paket atau e-book


Youtube channel:



rekam secara orally



6. Siswa menanyakan materi yang belum di pahami melalui media

sosial WhatsApp group ke guru.

Kegiatan Penutup




5 menit

35 menit

5 menit


68

Pertemuan III





Kegiatan Inti


2. Siswa menggali informasi tentang fungsi description dengan

googling materi yang sedang dipelajari ata bias menggunakan sumber

lain seperti buku paket atau e-book


Youtubechannel:



rekam secara orally



6. Siswa menanyakan materi yang belum di pahami melalui media

sosial WhatsApp group ke guru.

Kegiatan Penutup




5 menit

35 menit

5 menit


69

Pertemuan IV





Kegiatan Inti


2. Siswa menggali informasi tentang fungsi description dengan googling

materi yang sedang dipelajari atau bisa menggunakan sumber lain

seperti buku paket atau e-book


Youtubechannel:



rekam secara orally





Kegiatan Penutup




5 menit

35 menit

5 menit

Pertemuan V




5 menit


70


Kegiatan Inti

1. Guru memberikan stimulus dengan menanyakan kembali tentang

describe things

2. Siswa menggali informasi lain tentang struktur kalimat (grammar),

kosa kata (vocabulary), cara pelafalan kata (pronunciation dan intonasi

pengucapan untuk dengan googling materi yang sedang dipelajari atau

bisa menggunakan sumber lain seperti buku paket atau e-book.

3. Siswa mengerjakan latihan membuat Describing things mengenai

deskripsi lingkungan dan kegiatan selama di rumah kemudian

mempraktikkan secara monologue dari teksnya dengan cara dibuat

video atau rekaman kemudian di kirim ke WhatsApp group atau guru

mata pelajaran.





Kegiatan Penutup




35 menit

5 menit

71

F. Lembar Penilaian

Lembar Penilaian Keterampilan Bericara

No. Criteria to be

Assessed

Low

performance

75

Fairly

Performance

80-85

Very Good

Performance

90

Score

1. Pronunciation Too many

mistakes

With 2 until

5 mistakes

Perfect

pronunciation

2. Fuency Speech is

low

Speech is

requently

hesitant

No hesitation

3. Grammar Too many

mistakes

With 2 until

5 mistakes

Add more

personal

information

Total Score

72

73

74

75

CURRICULUM VITAE

The researcher, Herfin Marlina was born on 9th of

September 1996 in Enrekang. She is the first child from

fifth siblings. Her father is Mr. Irman Yusuf and her

mother is Mrs. Sukriah, S.Pd. She has two sister and two

brothers. She started study at SD 41 Enrekang in 2002 to

2008. In 2008, she continued her junior High School at

SMP Negeri 1 Enrekang then graduated in 2011, in the

same year, she continued her Senior High School at

SMA Negeri 1 Enrekang and finished it in 2014. Finally she continued her study

as ordinary students specializing in English Education in Faculty of Teacher

Training and Education at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. At the end of

her study, she could finish her thesis with the title Improving Students’ Speaking

Ability Through Project-Based Learning (PBL) at SMK Muhammadiyah 4 Tallo.

76

Documents

ISSSSMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY THROUGH