THE EFFECT OF DRAMA AND THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ …

1

Terbit Online pada laman webjurnal:https://jurnal.stairahmaniyah.ac.id/index.php/alulum

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2021) ISSN Media Elektronik: xxxx-xxxx

THE EFFECT OF DRAMA AND THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’

SELF- ESTEEM IN IMPROVING THEIR SPEAKING ABILITY AT RAHMANIYAH

HIGH SCHOOL OF SEKAYU MUSI BANYUASIN

ABSTRACT: The teaching of English is the most important thing in this era. Getting

students to speak English in class can sometimes be extremely easy. In good class

atmosphere, students who get on with each other, and whose English is at an appropriate

level, will often participate freely and enthusiastically if teachers give them a suitable

topic and task. However, at other times it is not easy to get students going. But a

problem that occurs more often than any of these is the natural reluctance of some

students to speak and to take part.

Based on the limitation of the problems above, the main problems of the study

were stated in the following questions: 1. Is there a significant difference in speaking

ability between students who are taught by using drama method and those who are taught

with conventional method? 2. Is there a significant effect of self-esteem on students’

speaking ability? 3. Is there a significant interaction effect of methods used and self-

esteem on students’ speaking ability?

In the experimental class, the researcher applied drama method and nother

group was the control group which was taught with conventional method. The writer took

the students’ self-esteem questionnaire scores, pretest, and posttest. Both groups were

posttested. Posttest scores were compared to determine the effectiveness of the treatment.

It started from 10th November until 28th november 2020

Keywords: The Effect Of Drama, Students’ Self- Esteem, Speaking Ability

Diterima Redaksi: 21-06-2021 Selesai Revisi: 24-06-2021 Diterbitkan Online: 04-07-2021

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents (a)

background of the study, (b) problems,

(c) objective of study, and (d)

significance of the study.

A. Background of the Study

The teaching of English is the

most important thing in this era.

Getting students to speak English in

class can sometimes be extremely easy.

In good class atmosphere, students

who get on with each other, and whose

English is at an appropriate level, will

often participate freely and

enthusiastically if teachers give them a

suitable topic and task. However, at

other times it is not easy to get

students going. But a problem that

occurs more often than any of these is

the natural reluctance of some students

to speak and to take part.

Rebecca (1990:5) states that

gaining a new language necessarily

involves developing four language

skills in varying degrees and

combinations: listening, reading,

speaking and writing among language

teachers.

In Indonesia, the English

instruction is administered based on

https://jurnal.stairahmaniyah.ac.id/index.php/alulum

2

the curriculum for English subject, the

objective of studying English at

Senior High Schools (Sekolah

Menengah Atas) is the students should

master four basic skills of language,

namely: listening, speaking, reading

and writing.

Speaking is a process of

communication, so the learners must

be able to express their thought and

feeling when they are speaking.

Brown (2004:140) states the speaking

is a productive skill that can be

directly and empirically observed,

those observations are invariably

colored by the accuracy effectiveness

of a test takers’s listening skill, which

necessarily compromises the realibility

and validity of oral production test.

Speaking is one of four skills

in English learning, but in reality, it is

seldom practiced by the students.

Students of foreign language are easier

to speak in another language. But the

problems are situations and conditions,

which sometimes cannot support to

speak in a foreign language. Harmer

(2007: 345) states the students are

often reluctant to speak because they

are shy and are not predisposed to

express themselves in front of other

people, especially when they are being

asked to give personal information or

opinions. They are worried about

speaking badly and therefore losing

face in front of their classmates.

Furthermore, Harmer

(2007:347) points out some aspects

that makes students speak in

classroom. They include students’

interest, enthusiasm, active class

participants and development of warm

and friendly classroom atmosphere.

Therefore, teachers need to play a

number of different roles during

different speaking activities.

In the teaching and learning

activities, especially in developing the

student’s speaking ability with group

that respond well to drama activities,

putting on one scene, or a short drama,

can be both enjoyable and rewarding.

Many students love planning,

costumes, travelling, and so on. In

teaching speaking, a teacher’s needs

for his/her language lesson are the

knowledge of the best and most

effective methods to use and her skill

in handling it with perseverance and

courage to carry on the work with

humour and enjoyment. A teacher

herself should use her inisiative to

make the students satisfied. One of the

techniques is English learning through

drama.

According to Thompson and

Evans (2005:14), drama can be used

within the context of other subjects as

a method for exploration of facts or

relationships or to enhance

understanding. It can be a means of

focusing a child’s experience and

putting their learning into a realistic

context. Drama can broaden children’s

understanding of concepts, develop

their use and understanding of

language and provide memorable

creative experiences which can be

drawn on in future problem-solving

situations. There are a variety of

drama techniques that lend themselves

to creative thinking and can be used to

develop language skills.

Based on the writer’s

preliminary investigation and

experience in teaching the eleventh

grade students of Rahmaniyah Senior

High School of Sekayu Musi

Banyuasin, it indicates that they had

low interest, individual learning, little

experience, and were shy to speak

English in class. To handle the above

problem the writer finds that drama

strategy could be applied as one of the

effective and efficient techniques in

developing and motivating the

students to increase their abilities in

speaking.

As a facilitator, the teacher

should know about what students need.

As the teacher of English, she or he

must be more active to create and

3

motivate his or her students in learning

and make his or her lesson more

interesting. It would prevent the

students from boredom in learning. In

this case, teachers must solve the

problems by presenting a new way in

teaching. That is why the teacher

should find out an appropriate

technique in teaching and learning

processes.

Esteem is worth and value that

we apply to people, places and

situations. We have esteem for an

exemplary performance whether it is

in sports, acting, or simply doing the

right thing. Messenger (2013:5) states

self- esteem plays a role in almost

everything we do. People with high

self- esteem do better and find it easier

to make friends. They tend to have

better relationship with peers and

adults, feel happier find easier to deal

with mistakes, disappointment, and

failures, and are more likely to stick

with something until they succeed.

Through all those facts above,

the researcher is interested to do a

research with the title “The Effect of

Drama and the Eleventh Grade

Students Self-Esteem in Improving

Their Speaking Ability at

Rahmaniyah High School of Sekayu

Musi Banyuasin.”

B. Problems

The problem presented in this

study deals with the students’ low

ability in speaking and to be solved

through the strategy of drama, that is

assumed to help students overcome

their difficulties in learning speaking.

Many times the teaching of English

language does not fulfill its goals.

Even after years of English teaching,

the learners do not gain the confidence

of using English in and outside the

class. The learners could not use the

language in the reality. Their output in

the language learning is just limited

on doing an exercise based on the text

books and in understanding grammar,

but isolated with real communication.

The writer found there were

three problems in learning speaking.

The first problem is connecting with

teacher investigation based on the

reflection in teaching and learning

processes, the students’ achievement

in speaking is still under Criteria

Minimal Completeness it occurs

because in teaching learning processes

the students are stilll asked to speak in

front of class only, while drama is one

techinique for motivating the students

to speak in class. The second problem

is the teacher still use a convensional

technique in teaching and learning

processes. In the convensional method

the teacher commonly asks the

students to speak after the teacher

explains the technique of speaking.

The last problem is the students in

eleventh class has low motivation in

learning English.

The teachers of English need

to vary the technique in speaking, one

of them is drama. This technique

might increase the students’ speaking

ability in English learning. One of the

techniques that the writer finds

effective and efficient is drama in

speaking.

Drama might be an appropriate

teaching techinque for the eleventh

grade students of the science class

with this technique. It could be easier

for the eleventh grade students to

speak English based on the real

situation, condition and context in

their life. By using drama and

selfesteem technique, teaching and

learning processes will work

communicatively, students can speak

English, because they have

experienced practice in speaking

English in class by drama.

1. Limitation of the Problems

The limitation of the problem

in this study was limited on the

application of drama and eleventh

4

grade students self-esteem in

improving their speaking ability at

Rahmaniyah Senior High School of

Sekayu Musi Banyuasin. The drama is

about the legend, the title is “Timun

Mas (Golden Cucumber)”

2. Formulation of the Problems

Based on the limitation of the

problems above, the main problems of

the study were stated in the following

questions:

1) Is there a significant

difference in speaking ability between

students who are taught by using

drama method and those who are

taught with conventional method?


effect of self-esteem on students’

speaking ability?


interaction effect of methods used and

self-esteem on students’ speaking

ability?

C. Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this research are

to find out whether or not :

1) there is a significant

difference in speaking

ability of the students

who are taught by using

drama method and

those who are taught

using conventional

method;


effect of self-esteem on

students’ speaking

ability;


significant interaction

effect of methods used

and self-esteem on

students’ speaking

ability;

D. Significance of the Study

This research is intended to

offer an alternative technique

of drama and the students self

esteem in speaking. The

significance of study is as

follows:

1) For the Teachers of English

The significance of this study

for the teacher is expected to remaind

the teachers about the importance of

drama and students’ self esteem in

teaching and learning process, because

the teacher may improve the quality of

teaching and leraning activities. They

can support and motivate the students

to achieve the objectives of education.

And by writing this thesis, the writer

hoped that it will give contribution to

the teachers of English to solve the

problem in teaching speaking,

especially in eleventh grade students

Senior High School of Rahmaniyah

Sekayu.

2) For the Students The significance of this study

for the students are, by writing this

thesis the writer hopes, it can improve

the students’ ability in speaking. So,

they can practice their ability in their

life.

3) For the Researcher Herself

This study can be used to

improve the writer’s knowledge and

skills in speaking, and can enlarge the

writers experiences

4) For the School This study can be used as a

practical contribution in increasing

and develoving the quality of

education.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

The present discussion

elaborates the basic theories for this

study. It describes: (a) concept of

speaking, (b) speaking ability, (c)

teaching of speaking, (d) speaking

evaluation, (e) concept of self-esteem,

(f) concept of drama, (g) teaching

procedures of speaking ability, (h)

concept of ability, (i) related previous

studies, and (j) hypotheses.

5

A. Concept of Speaking

Speaking has an important

role in human beings’ life. Speaking is

used for communication among people

in a society in order to keep in

relationship going well. Richard

(1990:67) says through speaking,

someone can express his ideas,

emotion, attention, reactions, to other

person and situation and influence

other person. So through speaking

someone can communicate or express

what he wants from others and

responds to the speaker.

According to Harmer

(2007:345-362), students are often

reluctant to speak because they are shy

and are not predisposed to expressing

themselves in front of other people,

especially when they are being asked

to give personal information or

opinions. Frequently, too, they are

worried about speaking badly and

therefore losing face in front of their

classmates. In such situations there are

a number of things we can do to help:

preparation, the value of repetation,

big groups, small groups and

mandatory participation.

B. Speaking Ability

Speaking is a productive skill.

As such, its development is

undertaken after the receptive skill of

listening comprehension. For native

speakers, active speech combines both

a code and message. The one of

language skills is speaking. Speaking

is the productive skill where the

teacher must have a basic

methodological model for teaching

this skill. Harmer (2007:275-276)

states that a key factor in the success

of productive skill tasks is the way

teachers organize them and how they

respond to the students’ work.

C. Teaching of Speaking

Speaking is a process of

communication, because the language

learner must be able to express their

mind and feeling when they are

speaking. It is the expressing of

someone to show their feeling and

mind.

The listener and the speaker

are straight by face-to-face

communication in expressing their

ideas. In teaching speaking there are

various ways or techniques that may

be the teacher in effort to improve the

speaking achievement and make the

students have chance to converse with

other people in the world.

The controlled or guided

speaking activities means that the

teacher controls speaking activities.

According to Littlewood (1984:7), the

techniques for controlled practice can

be adapted so that the learner is helped

to related language forms to their

potential functional and or social

meaning.

D. Speaking Evaluation

There are some theories about

speaking competence. Hughes

(1990:111) states that the components

of speaking are accent, grammar,

vocabulary, fluency and

comprehension. This research is used

the criteria of (Hughes, 1990:111)

from these criteria, the researcher only

take for of them, there are

pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary,

and fluency .

E. Concept of Self Esteem

Self-esteem is argued,

safeguards people against the ill

effects stemming from many of life's

problems.

According to Goodman, et al

(2001:1)

Self Esteem premise assumes

that people with high self-esteem, in

contrast to those with low self-esteem,

will behave in more socially

6

acceptable and responsible ways, will

somehow be more resilient to life's

vicissitudes, will generally display

higher achievement in conventional

pursuits, and will ultimately possess

greater socio emotional well-being.

Self-esteem is a disposition

that a person has which represents his

judgment of his own worthiness.

Branden (1998:78) defines self-esteem

as “the experience of being competent

to cope with the basic challenge of life

and being worthy of happiness.

According to Branden (1998:90), self-

esteem is the sum a feeling of personal

worth. It exists as a consequence of

the implicit judgment that every

person has of their ability to face

life’s challenges.to understand and

solve problems, and their right to

achieve happiness, and given respect.

F. Concept of Drama

From the description above,

the using of drama can enhance and

improve the student speaking ability in

English. Caplan (2011:7) states

participation in drama activity

encourages students and teachers to do

the following things.

a. Integrate concepts,

skills, and ideas from various subject

areas, including social students,

mathematics, science, and literacy.

b. Gain an understanding

of real world events from the past and

the present, the individuals who

shaped these events, and the

individuals who may influence them in

the future.

c. Develop reading

comprehension skills by entering the

world of a text through role playing,

interacting with others, visualizing

events, concepts, and information, and

dramatizing the experiences of

fictional characters and real life

individuals.

d. Produce written works

in a variety of contexts for different

audiences that demonstrate increasing

technical skill, self confidence, and

effective discover and scrutinize

ethical aspects of social issues such as

equity, social justice, citizenship, civil

rights, bigotry, bullying, and other

forms of antisocial behavior and their

reversals from various points of view

e. Generate and use

spoken, written, visual, and

multimodal texts that demonstrate

increasing fluency in the way of vivid

description, sensory details, and

effective persuasive and self-reflective

writing.

f. Understand and

develop compassion for others’

representations of ideas, values,

beliefs, experiences, and life

conditions–from literary characters

and challenged individuals to

historical figures.

g. Acquire critical

thinking skills in terms of examining,

questioning, and perhaps challenging

social practices and the language,

actions, and beliefs that drive these

practices, and investigating and

evaluating texts concerning their

manner of representing certain people,

groups, and notions of reality.

h. Gain social skills

through group problem solving,

listening to differing views, respecting,

weighing, and perhaps acting on

another’s proposals, and expressing

empathy and compassion; and develop

appreciation for the art of drama and

theater.

From the description above,

the learning will be effective and

enjoy through drama activities. Using

drama and drama activities has clear

advantages for language learning. It

encourages students to speak, it gives

them the chance to communicate, even

with limited language, using non-

verbal communication, such as body

movements and facial expression.

Using drama to teach English results

in real communication, involving ideas,

7

emotions, feelings, appropriateness

and adaptability.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

This part discusses (a) method

of research, (b) place and time of

study, (c) research design, (d) research

variables, (e) operational definitions,

(f) population and sample, (g)

technique for collecting data, (h)

validity and reliability of instruments

and (i) technique for analyzing the

data.

A. Method of Research

The purpose of this research is

to find the quantitative descriptive

method was used in this study, the

data were obtained by questionaire

(self-esteem), drama method and

speaking (speaking score). Both of

two variables, firstly were described,

and then they would find the

correlation, at the last they was found

the determination of the independent

variable on the dependent variable by

simple regression technique.

According to Hatch and Lazaraton

(1991:467), regression than is a way of

predicting performance on the

dependent variable by on eor more

independents variable. The procedure

is, first, the researcher measured

students’ motivation by using

questionnaires, and second used test to

find out students’ speaking ability.

After that, the researcher used t-test,

then the regression and the last the

researcher also used two-way

ANOVA analysis based on the result

of questionnaires and test.

Simple regression was useful

when we needed to predict scores on a

test on the basis of another test. The

researcher will be used this method

because it is appropriate to describe

the influence of the independent

variable on the dependent variable.

Variables were the condition or

characteristic that the experimenter

manipulates controls or observes (Best,

1994:137).

B. Place and Time of Study

The location of research was in


Sekayu Musi Banyuasin in the

academic year of 2020-2021, located

at Jalan Laut Kelurahan Serasan Jaya

Sekayu. The study was conducted in

12 meetings including pretest and

posttest activities to see the

effectiveness of drama technique to

develop the students speaking ability.

In the experimental class, the

researcher applied drama method and

another group was the control group

which was taught with conventional

method. The writer took the students’

self-esteem questionnaire scores,

pretest, and posttest. Both groups were

posttested. Posttest scores were

compared to determine the

effectiveness of the treatment. It

started from 10th

November until 28th

november 2020

C. Research Design

This study that used is a causal

design to see the effect between the

independent variables to the dependent

variable. The variables in this study:

Where :

X1

Independent Variable (X1)

= Self-esteXem2 Dependent Variable (X2)

= Drama method

Dependent Variable (Y)

= Speaking Ability

This study to see the influence in partial of X1 to Y, X2 to Y and

then X1 and X2 together to variable Y.

D. Research Variables

A variable is defined as

any characteristic that can change or

differ from time to time, from place to

Y

8

place or from one individual or group

to another (Robertson, 1987:30).

According to Fraenkel, at al (1990:36),

a variable is deined as any

characteristic that is not always the

same that is any characteristic that

varies.

There were two kinds

of variables in this study, independent

and dependent variable. McMillan

(1992:22) states that independent

variable that comes first and

influences or predicts the result, while

the dependent variable that is affected

by or is predicted by the independent

variable.

E. Operational Definitions

Operational definition

is very important to thesis research

because it can make the reader

understand what is being studied.

There are four important terms to

define operationally in this study

which the writer discusses.,

1) Teaching is the work or

profession of a teacher to facilitate

pupils to learn a particular subject and

how to do something.

2) Speaking is the process

of communication, so the learners

must be able to express their thought

and feeling when they are speaking.

3) Drama is a technique

of communicative language teaching,

where the students have to use gesture,

expression, body language and voice.

4) Self-esteem is argued,

safeguards people against the ill

effects stemming from many of life’s

problems.

F. Population and Sample

1. Population

Population is the larger

group to which one hopes to apply the

result is called the population(Fraenkel,

et al. 1990:91). Population is a

generalization area that consists of

object or subject that has quality and

specific criteria which is decided by

the researcher to observe and then to

put the conclusion of it (Sugiono,

2009:80)

The population of this

study would be all the eleventh grade

students of Rahmaniyah Senior High

School of Sekayu in the academic year

of 2020-2021. The total number of the

population was 81 as presented in

table 1 below.

TABLE 1

The Population of The

Research

N O

CL

ASS

STUD

ENTS

1 XI

IIS 1 26

2 XI

IIS 2 25

3 XI

MIA 30

Tot al

81

(Source: Rahmaniyah Senior

High School of Sekayu in the

Academic Year of 2020-2021).

2. Sample

Sample in research study refers

to any group on which information is

obtained. It is selected in such a way

that it represents, the large group

(population) from which it is obtained

(Fraenkel, at al., 2012:91).

However, if the subject in the

population are more than 100, it is

better for the researcher to take all of

the population. The sample can be

taken around 10-15% or 20-25% or

more (Arikunto, 2006:134)

In this research, the sample

was taken from population of


Sekayu. In this study, the sample was

taken by using random sampling.

Firstly, the write has organized the

sampling process into stages where the

unit of analysis was systematically

grouped and gave a questionnaire.

9

Secondly, she selected a

sampling technique for each stage into

high self-esteem and low self-esteem.

Then, students from each category

were taken and then they were

grouped into experimental and control

groups since they were from same

level of their class. The kind of

random sampling in this research is

simple random sampling.

G. Technique For Collecting Data

In collecting the data in

this study, a set of questionnaire and

test were used to prove the hypothesis.

The data were collected from

pretest and posttest of experiment.

Besides, the data were also collected

from questionnaire. The questionnaire

was used to know the students’

responses toward existence of drama

and self esteem in improving speaking

ability.

1) Pretest and Posttest

According to Wiersma (1991:

108) the addition of a pretest given

prior to administering the

experimental treatments essentially

extend the posttest-only control group

design to the pretest-posttest control

group design. The subject are

randomly assigned to the two or more

groups and tested just prior to the

experiment on a supposedly relevant

antecedent variable, possibly a second

form of the test that measures the

dependent variable.

2) Questionnaire of Self-

Esteem

A questionnaire is the main

means of collecting quantitative

primary data. A questionnaire enables

quantitative data to be collected in a

standardized way so that the data are

internally consistent and coherent for

analysis (www.terry.Uga.Edu/~rg

rover).

In this study, the questionnaire

consisted of 25 items of self-esteem

scale for English students. The items

of the questinnaire were ready-made.

The items of the questinnaire were

adopted from SOAR Program 2003 (in

Sinta S 2013:52). The ranging of the

scale category assessment used:

Always, Often, Sometimes, Rarely, and

Never.

The data from the

questionnaire were analyzed to get the

scores used. The formula is as below :

In this study, the researcher

also used mean formula to know the

average of students’ score of the

questionnaire. The formula is as

follows:

M = ∑x

N

Explanation :

M : Average of Student’s

Score

∑x : Total Score

N : Number of

Students

TABLE 2

Percentage of Self- esteem Scale

Percetage of Score Category Assessment

81 – 100 Always

61 – 80 Often

41 – 60 Sometimes

http://www.terry.uga.edu/~rg

10

21 – 40 Ralely

0 – 20 Never

(Source : SOAR Program 2003, in Sinta S. 2013:52)

3) Test

To measure the speaking test in the experiment and control group,

the researcher used rubric of speaking test table. Then, the test was administered

to experiment and control group was conducted conventionally. There were

pretest before the treatment and posttest after treatment has been given.

For speaking test, the writer used speaking rubric for fluency activities.

Based on Harris (1995:84) that format will draw in Table 3 :

TABLE 3

The Aspect for Giving the Score in Speaking

No The Aspect Score

1 Pronunciation :

a. Has few traces of foreign accent. b. Always intelligible, though one in

conscious of a define accent.

c. Pronunciation problems necessitate

concentrated listening and occasionally lead to

misunderstanding.

d. Very hard to understand because of

pronunciation problems. Must frequently be asked to

repeat.

e. Pronunciation problems to severe as

to make speech virtually unintelligible.

5

4

3

2

1

2 Grammar :

a. Makes few (if any) noticeable errors

of grammar or word order.

b. Occasionally makes grammatical

and/or word order errors wich do not, however,

obsecure meaning.

c. Makes frequent errors of grammar

and word order wich occasionally obsecure meaning.

d. Grammar and word-order errors

makecomprehension difficult. Must often rephrase

sentences and/or restrict hi8mself to basic patterns.

e. Errors in grammar and word-order so

severe as to make speech virtually unintelliginle.

5

4

3

2

1

3 Vocabulary

a. Use of vocabulary and idioms is

virtually that of a native speaker.

b. Sometimes uses inappropriate terms

and/or must rephrase ideas because of lexical

inadequacies.

c. Frequently uses the wrong words:

conversation somewhat limited because of

5

4

3

2

11

inadequate vocabulary. d. Misuse of words and very limited

vocabulary make comprehension quite difficult.

e. Vocabulary limitations so extreme as

to make conversation virtually impossible.

1

4 Fluency: a. Speech as fluent and effortless as that

of a native speaker.

b. Speed of speech seems to be slightly

affected by language problems.

c. Speed and fluency are rather strongly

affected by language problems.

d. Usually hesitant; often forced into

silence by language limitations.

e. Speech is also halting and

fragmentary as to make conversation virtually

impossible.

5

4

3

2

1

(rubric for fluency activities. Based on Harris, 1995:84 in Fitria, 2012:38- 40)

H. Validity and Reliability of

Instruments

1) Validity of the Test

Fraenkel, et al (1990:127) state

that validity refers to the

appropriateness, meaningfulness and

usefulness of the specific inferences

researchermade based on the data they

collected. In this case, the researcher

used one of the types of validity that

was content validity. After the

instrument has been constructed, then

to make the test materials have

validity, it was only used a written test.

5 = Always

4 = Often

3 = Sometimes

2 = Rarely

1 = Never

To know the content validity of the

test, the researcher wrote test

specification. The questionnaire type

of self esteem.

The questionnaire type of self-

esteem scale for English Students

Self-esteem scale for English

students

Direction :

1. Read the statements

clearly, and then giving check list ( )

and the following exercise allows you

to evaluate your self esteem using this

scale :

2. Please answer the questions from your deep heart

Name :

Class :

Student Number :

No. Statements 1 2 3 4 5

Success

1. Do you

know your strength and

12

weakness in

speaking class so

you will know

how the way to

speak English fluently?

2.

Are you

still confused with

what is needed to

speak English well?

3.

Are you

proud of when

you get a good

scores in speaking class?

4.

Do you

proud when you

can speak English

Well?

5. Do you do

your best to speak English well?

6.

Do you

feel ambitions to

get an excellent

score in speaking class?

7.

Do you

feel happy when

you finish

speaking class

well ?

Planning

8.

Do you

prepare well when

you take a

speaking subject test ?

9. Are you

serious in joining speaking class?

10.

Do you make a mid

mapping in every

topic that you get

from your

teacher?

11. Are you

serious in speaking subject

13

to get better score

than your friend’s?

12.

Are you

active or less to

give answer and

question when

speaking class

process ?

13.

Do you learn speaking

subject without

score target?

14.

Do you

join in speaking

subject only to

fulfil the

requirement of

teacher?

15.

Do you

focus on speaking

class because of others?

16.

Do you

finish the assignment in

speaking class

because of

yourself?

17.

Do you

need your

teacher’s support

to do your best in

speaking class?

18.

Do you

join in speaking

class because of your friends ?

Creativity

19.

Do you

have a trick in

enriching your vocabulary?

20.

Do you

find bay yourself

the easiest way to

speak English

well?

21. Do you

bring your

dictionary in

14

every meeting for speaking class?

22.

Do you like to make

perfect your

vocabulary before

speak?

23.

Do you

find the way to

enjoy in speaking class ?

24.

Do you

like debate class

to increase your

speaking skill?

25.

When you

find the problem

in speaking class,

will you solve the

problem and find

the best solution on it?

2) Reliability of the Test

Reliability is concerned with

the consistency of score obtained from

assesment (McMillan, 1992:35).

Before doing the research, the test is

field tested for its reliability. To know

or to find out whether the test

instrument was reliable or not, the

researcher used inter-rater reliability to

know testing how similarly students

score items. The data from the try out

result was then analyzed by using

Cronbach’s Alpha found in SPSS 19

Version.

The Self-esteem questionnaire

had been tried out and distributed to

the eleventh grade students’ of

Rahmaniyah High School of Sekayu

Musi Banyuasin. The result of the try

out had been analyzed byusing

Cronbach Alphha in SPSS 19 to show

the reliability.

Based on the analysis of the

reliability and validity of the try out

test, it found that the Self-esteem

questionnaire chosen in this study was

reliable and valid.

TABLE 4

THE RESULT OF TRY OUT

NUMBER

OF

STUDEN TS

RATE

R 1

RATE

R 2

TOTAL

SCOR

E

1

70

70 14

0

70

2

75

70

14 5

72,5

15

3

65

70

13 5

67,5

4

70

65

13 5

67,5

5

75

80 15

5

77,5

6

80

75

15 5

77,5

7

60

65 12

5

62,5

8

70

70 14

0

70

9

85

80 16

5

82,5

10

70

60

13 0

65

11

65

65

13 0

65

12

70

65 13

5

67,5

13

75

75 15

0

75

14

60

65

12 5

62,5

15

75

70 14

5

72,5

16

65

65

13 0

65

17

70

75

14 5

72,5

18

80

75 15

5

77,5

19

60

60

12 0

60

20

70

75 14

5

72,5

21

80

75

15 5

77,5

22

75

70

14 5

72,5

23

75

65

14 0

70

24

70

65

13 5

67,5

The interpretation of Alpha Cronbach value in this study was made based

on following table.

TABLE 5

THE RESULT OF

RELIABILITY OF TEST ITEMS

16

Descriptive Statistics

M ean

Std.

Deviation

N

ATE

R1

7

1,25

6,63

5

24

ATE

R2

6

9,58

5,69

5 24

TABLE 6

Correlations

RATER1 RATER2

RATER1 Pearson Correlation 1 ,705**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000

Sum of Squares and

Cross-products 1012,500 612,500

Covariance 44,022 26,630

N 24 24

RATER2 Pearson Correlation ,705** 1


Sum of Squares and



N 24 24

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

score in the first and the second

experimental group were classified

Variable result between two

raters shown the correlation

coefficient value with the alpha value

α = 0.01 or 1 % was 0.705 (r obtained).

If the r obtained exceeded that r table

(0.515), it means that the test

instrument was reliable. It showed in

table above.

I. Technique for

Analyzing the Data

In analyzing the data, the

researcher firstly analyzed the

students’ pretest and posttest in the

experimental group (using drama

technique) and second experimental

group (using traditional method) by

using ANOVA. Then, the students

students’ score level into upper,

middle, and lower score level to know

the effect of teaching speaking ability.

Before analyzing the data, the

test of normality and homogenity of

the sample was done to measure the

data from the students pretest and

posttest.

In the experimental group was

taught by using drama technique and

control group by using traditional

method. To mesure the data used t-test

and then the researcher also used

regression to know the

interactioneffect to the teaching of

using drama technique and students’

self-esteem, two way ANOVA in

SPSS 19 was used, they were

presented below.

17

1) The t-test was used to

measure each of the students’ speaking

ability between two groups. In this

study, after normality and

homogeneity test are done, namely

independent sample t-test. A test is

used to examine more closely the

group differences. After speaking test

a) =

b)

c)

was administrated, the scores were

then tabulated and computed using

independent sample t-test.

According to Riduwan

(2009:179), to calculate the formula of

Independent t-test the, formula is as

follows :

Where:

t = t-tes

= Parameter Score

SD = Standar Deviation

N = The Number of the Students

X = The Individual Score

= The Mean Score

2) The two- way ANOVA was used to measure an interaction effect

between the drama technique and students’ self-esteem on speaking ability.

According to Riduwan (2009:203), to calculate ANOVA manually is as

below :

JKT = - )

JKA = - )

JKB = - )

JKAB = - - JKA – JKB )

JKD = JKT - JKA - JKB – JKAB

) Note :

JKT : Jumlah Kuadrat Total (Sum of Total Kuadrat)

JKA : Jumlah Kuadrat Menurut Faktor A (Sum of Kuadrat based

on Factor A

JKB : Jumlah Kuadrat Menurut Faktor B (Sum of Kuadrat based

on Factor B)

JKAB : Jumlah Kuadrat Menurut Faktor A dan B (Sum of Kuadrat

based on Factor A and B)

JKD : Jumlah Kuadrat Menurut Faktor D (Sum of Kuadrat based

on Factor D)

Looking for Degrees of Freedom (dbA; dbB; dbAB; dbD; dbT),

) with formulas:

dbA (line) = b – 1

SD=

18

dbB (column) = k – 1

dbAB (interaction) = (dbA) . (dbB)

dbD (residue) = N – (b.k)

dbT (Total) = N – 1

Calculating the Mean Squares between Groups (KRA; KRB;

) KRAB; KRD), with formulas:

KRA =

Calculate Fcount (FA; FB; FAB), with formulas: )

Calculate Ftable (FA; FB; FAB), with formulas: ) FA (table) = FA (α) (dbA : dbD)

FB (table) = FB (α) (dbB : dbD)

FAB (table) = FAB (α) (dbAB : dbD)

Make a table of summary Two Ways ANOVA

)

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND

INTERPRETATIONS

The purpose of this chapter is

to present: the findings and

interpretations of the study.

1.1. Findings

From this study, the writer

discusses the data description obtained

from pretest and posttest on speaking

achievement test in the experimental

and control groups. The scores of

students’ speaking ability in pretest

and posttest were rated or marked by

two raters. The collections of primary

data were presented and analyzed

referring to the objectives of the study.

The data presented in pretest and

posttest scores of experimental and

control group. Then, the data were

analyzed by using SPSS version, to

know the significance of the findings.

In other words, it was used to

investigate students’ self-esteem and

students’ scores of speaking

achievement.

4.1.1 The result of The Test

The pretest and posttest were

given to the students in experimental

and control group. The pretest was

given to the students in experimental

and control group before the

researcher conducted her experiment.

The posttest was given after the pretest

conducted by researcher.

4.1.1.1 Pretest and Posttest

Scores in Experimental Group

The first time the students gave

pretest, the post-test was conducted

after the treatment or teaching

speaking with drama method. The test

given to the students were exactly the

same as in the pre-test. The data were

also analyzed and calculated.

In experimental group,

it was found that the lowest score of

pretest was 62,5, the mean score was

67,750 and standard deviation was 3,

19

7504. The chart below showed the

percentage of the scores.

HISTOGRAM 1

Percentage of pretest score in experimental group

pre_exp

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

62.5

65.0

67.5

70.0

72.5

75.0

Mean = 67.75 Std. Dev. = 3.7504

pre_exp N = 24

From the histogram above, it could be seen there was four students who

got the lowest score, which was 62,5, there were seventeen students who got 65,0

to 72,5 and there were three students who got the highest score, which were 7,5. It

meant that the students’ scores of the pretest in experimental group have the

normality distribution.

Based on the calculation in the pretest scores of the students’ speaking

skill in the experimental group, four students (16,7 %) got the lowest score, it was

62,5; five students (20,8 %) got 65,0; six students (25,0 %) got 67,5; three

students (12,5 %) got 70,0; two students (8,3 %) got 71,0; one student (4.2%) got

70;three students (12.5%) got 70.5; three students (12.5 %) got 71,0; two students

(8.3 %) got 72,0; one student (4.2 %) got 72,5; one student (4,2%) got 72,5; one

student (4.2%) got 74,5 and one student (4,2%) got the highest score, it was 75,0.

The students pretest score of experimental group could be seen in Table below.

TABLE 7

THE FREQUENCY OF PRETEST SCORE IN EXPERIMENTAL

GROUP

Fre

quency

P ercent

V

alid

Percent

Cum

ulative

Percent

alid

2,5 4

1 6,7

1 6,7

16,7

5,0

5 2

0,8 2

0,8 37,5

Freq

uen

cy

20

Meanw

HISTOGRAM 2

Percentage of posttest score in experimental group

post_exp

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

70.0

72.5

75.0

77.5

80.0

82.5

85.0

Mean = 75.979

Std. Dev. =

4.0176

N = 24

post_exp

post_exp

From the histogram above, it could be seen there was three students who

got the lowest score, which was 70,0, there were nineteen students who got 72,5

to 82,5 and there were two students who got the highest score, which were 85,5. It

meant that the students’ scores of the posttest in experimental group have the

normality distribution.

Based on the calculation in the posttest scores of the students’ speaking

skill in the experimental group, three students (12,5%) got the lowest score, it was

70,0; five students (20,8%) got 72,5; three students (12,5%) got 75,0; two students

(8,3%) got 75,5; five students (20,8%) got 77,5; four students (16,7%) got 80,0;

Fre

qu

en

cy

7,5 6

2 5,0

2 5,0

62,5

0,0 3

1 2,5

1 2,5

75,0

1,0 2

8 ,3

8 ,3

83,3

2,0 1

4 ,2

4 ,2

87,5

2,5 1

4 ,2

4 ,2

91,7

4,5

1 4

,2 4

,2 95,8

5,0 1

4 ,2

4 ,2

100, 0

otal

24 1

00,0 1

00,0

21

one student (4,2%) got 82.5 and one student (4,2%) got the highest score, it was

85,0. The students posttest score of experimental group could be seen in Table

below.

TABLE 8

THE FREQUENCY OF POSTTEST SCORE IN EXPERIMENTAL

GROUP

Freq

uency

P

ercent

Val

id Percent

Cum

ulative Percent

alid 0,0 3 1

2,5

12,

5 12,5

2,5 5 2

0,8

20,

8 33,3

5,0 3 1

2,5

12,

5 45,8

5,5 2 8

,3 8,3 54,2

7,5 5 2

0,8

20,

8 75,0

0,0 4 1

6,7

16,

7 91,7

2,5 1 4

,2 4,2 95,8

5,0 1 4

,2 4,2

100,

0

otal 24 1

00,0

100

,0

TABLE 9

THE PRETEST AND POSTTEST SCORES IN THE

EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

Statistics

p

re_exp

p

ost_exp

N Valid 2 2 4 4

Missing 0 0

Mean 6 7 7,750 5,979

Std. Error of Mean , , 7655 8201

22

Median 6 7 7,500 5,500

Mode 6 7 7,5 2,5(a)

Std. Deviation 3 4 ,7504 ,0176

Variance 1 1 4,065 6,141

Range 1 1 2,5 5,0

Minimum 6 7 2,5 0,0

Maximum 7 8 5,0 5,0

Sum 1 1 626,0 823,5

a Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown

4.1.1.2 Pretest and Posttest Scores in Control Group

The first time the students gave pretest, the post-test was conducted after

the treatment or teaching speaking with drama method . The test given to the

students were exactly the same as in the pre-test. The data were also analyzed and

calculated.

In control group, it was found that the lowest score of pretest was

60,0, the mean score was 64,417 and standard deviation was 2,9068. The chart

below showed the percentage of the scores.

HISTOGRAM 3

Percentage of pretest score in control group

pre_cont

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

60.0

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

Mean = 64.417 Std. Dev. = 2.9068 N = 24

pre_cont

Fre

qu

en

cy

23

M

From the histogram above, it could be seen there was four students who

got the lowest score, which was 60,0, there were eightteen students who got 62,0

to 68,0 and there were two students who got the highest score, which were 70,0. It

meant that the students’ scores of the pretest in control group have the normality

distribution.

Based on the calculation in the pretest scores of the students’ speaking

skill in the control group, three students (12,5%) got the lowest score, it was 60,0;

one student (4,0%) got 61,0; one student (4,0%) got 62,0; five students (20,0%)

got 62,5; six students (24,0%) got 65,0; one student (4,0%) got 65,5; two students

(8,0%) got 66,5; one student (4,0%) got 67,0 ; two students (8,0%) got 67,5 and

two student (8,0%) got the highest score, it was 70,0. The students pretest score of

control group could be seen in Table below.

TABLE 10

THE FREQUENCY OF PRETEST SCORE IN CONTROL GROUP

Freq

uency

P ercent

V

alid

Percent

Cum

ulative

Percent

V 6 alid 0,0

3 1

2,0 1

2,5 12,5

6 1,0

1 4

,0 4, 2

16,7

6 2,0

1 4

,0 4, 2

20,8

6 2,5

5 2

0,0 2

0,8 41,7

6 5,0

6 2

4,0 2

5,0 66,7

6 5,5

1 4

,0 4, 2

70,8

6 6,5

2 8

,0 8, 3

79,2

6 7,0

1 4

,0 4, 2

83,3

6 7,5

2 8

,0 8, 3

91,7

7 0,0

2 8

,0 8, 3

100, 0

T otal

24 9

6,0 1

00,0

S issing ystem

1 4

,0

Total 25

1 00,0

Meanwhile, from the result of posttest, the lowest score was

70,0, the highest score was 77,5, the mean score 72,854 and the standard deviation

was 2,3796. The chart below showed the percentage of the posttest score.

HISTOGRAM 4

Percentage of posttest score in control group

24

post_cont

10

8

6

4

2

0

70.0

72.0

74.0

post_cont

76.0

78.0

Mean = 72.854

Std. Dev. =

2.3796

N = 24

From the histogram above, it could be seen there was six students who got

the lowest score, which was 70,0, there were fourteen students who got 72,0 to

76,0 and there were two students who got the highest score, which were 78,0. It

meant that the students’ scores of the posttest in control group have the normality

distribution.

Based on the calculation in the posttest scores of the students’ speaking

skill in the control group, six students (24,0%) got the lowest score, it was 70,0;

one student (4,0%) got 71,0; one student (4,0%) got 72,0; eight students (32,0%)

got 72,5;one students (4,0%) got 74,0; four students (16,0%) got 75,0; one student

(4,0%) got 76,5; and two student (8,0%) got the highest score, it was 77,5. The

students posttest score of control group could be seen in Table below.

TABLE 11

THE FREQUENCY OF POSTTEST SCORE IN CONTROL GROUP

Fre

quency

P ercent

V

alid

Percent

Cu mulative Percent

alid V

0,0 7

6 2

4,0 2

5,0 25,0

1,0 7

1 4

,0 4

,2 29,2

2,0 7

1 4

,0 4

,2 33,3

2,5 7

8 3

2,0 3

3,3 66,7

4,0

7 1

4 ,0

4 ,2

70,8

Fre

qu

en

cy

25

issing

5,0

6,5

7,5

otal

M ystem

Total

7

7

7

T

S

4 1

6,0 1

6,7 87,5

1 4

,0 4

,2 91,7

2 8

,0 8

,3 100,

0

24 9

6,0 1

00,0

1 4

,0

25 1

00,0

TABLE 12

THE PRETEST AND POSTTEST SCORES IN THE CONTROL

GROUP

Statistics

p

re_cont

post _cont

N Valid 2 4

24

Missing 1 1

Mean 6 72,8 4,417 54

Std. Error of Mean , ,485 5933 7

Median 6 72,5 5,000 00

Mode 6 5,0

72,5

Std. Deviation 2 2,37 ,9068 96

Variance 8 5,66 ,449 3

Range 1 0,0

7,5

Minimum 6 0,0

70,0

Maximum 7 0,0

77,5

Sum 1 174 546,0 8,5

4.1.2. The Analysis of Paired Sample T-Test

4.1.2.1. Analysis of Paired Sample T-test in Experimental Group

26

M

M

-

To find out whether or not there was significance in speaking ability

before and after the treatment of the experimental group, the writer compared the

result of the pre-test with those of pos-test in the experimental group by using

paired sample t-test.

The result of paired sample t-test was found that the mean difference

between pretest and posttest in experimental group was -8,2292, the standard

deviation was 5,3140 and the significant level was 0,000. Since significant level

was lower than alpha value 0,05, it indicates that the students in experimental

group gained speaking ability significantly. It can be seen in the table below.

TABLE 13

Paired Samples Statistics

ean

N Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error Mean

air 1 pr

e_exp

p

ost_exp

6 2 3,75 ,765

7,750 4 04 5

7 2 4,01 ,820

5,979 4 76 1

TABLE 14

Paired Samples Correlations

Cor

relation

S ig.

P pre_exp & ,065

,

air 1 post_exp 4 762

TABLE 15

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

f

ig.

(2-

taile

d)

ean

td.

Deviat

ion

td.

Error

Mean

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

L ower

U pper

p - - -

air re_exp 8,2292 ,3140 ,0847 10,4731 5,9853 7,586 3 000

27

P

M

1 post_ex p

4.1.2.2 Analysis of Paired Sample T-Test in Control Group

To find out whether or not there was significance in speaking ability

before and after the treatment of the control group, the writer compared the result

of the pre-test with those of pos-test in the control group by using paired sample t-

test.

The result of paired sample t-test was found that the mean difference

between pretest and posttest in control group was -8,4375, the standard deviation

was 3,9981 and the significant level was 0,000. Since significant level was lower

than alpha value 0,05, it indicates that the students in control group gained

speaking ability significantly. It can be seen in the table below.

TABLE 16

Paired Samples Statistics

M ean

Std.

Deviation

S td. Error

Mean

air 1 pr

e_cont

p

ost_cont

6 2,90 ,

4,417 4 68 5933

7 2,37 ,

2,854 4 96 4857

TABLE 17

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correl

ation

ig. pre_cont 2

-,135

air 1 & post_cont 4 528

TABLE 18

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

T

f

ig.

(2-

taile

d)

ean

td.

Devia

tion

td.

Error

Mea

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

28

n

L ower

U pper

p air 1 re_con

post_con

-

- - -

8,4375 ,9981 8161 10,1258 6,7492 10,339 3 000

4.1.3 The Result of Normality Test

4.1.3.1 The Result of Normality Test in Experimental Group

The result of pretest score in experimental group based on

Kolmogrov_Smirnov showed that significance level (2-tailed) was 0,640 > 0,05.

It indicated that the data obtained was considered normal data.

The result of posttest score in experimental group based on


It indicated that the data obtained was considered normal data. The data showed

in table below.

TABLE 19

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

p

re_exp

p

ost_exp

N 2 2 4 4

Mean 6 7

Normal 7,750 5,979

Parameters(a,b) Std. 3 4

Deviation ,7504 ,0176

Most Absolute , ,

Extreme 152 140

Differences Positive , , 152 140

Negative - - ,101 ,106

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z , , 743 686

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) , , 640 734

a Test distribution is Normal.

b Calculated from data.

4.1.3.2 The Result of Normality Test in Control Group

The result of pretest score in Control group based on


It indicated that the data obtained was considered normal data.

The result of posttest score in control group based on

Kolmogrov_Smirnov showed that significance level (2-tailed) was 0,173> 0,05. It

indicated that the data obtained was considered normal data. The data showed in

table below.

29

TABLE 20

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

p

re_cont

po

st_cont

N 2 4

24

Normal Mean 6 72

Parameters (a,b) 4,417 ,854

Std. 2 2,

Deviation ,9068 3796

Most Absolute

Extreme

Differences

,

163 ,2

26

Positive , ,2 162 26

Negative - - ,163 ,115

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z , 1, 798 106

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) , ,1 548 73

Group

a Test distribution is Normal.

b Calculated from data.

4.1.4 The Result of Homogeneity

4.1.4.1 The Result of Homogeneity of Variance Test in Experimental

The result of homogeinity of variance test in experimental group

showed that p-value was 0,000 and F calculation was 53,806 > 0,05. It meant that

the data was homogenous. The data showed in table below.

TABLE 21

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

ss_score

L

evene

Statistic

d f1

d f2

S ig.

, 1

4 ,

155 6 695

TABLE 22

ANOVA

ss_score

S

um of

Squares

D f

Mea

n Square

F

S ig.

Betwee 8 1 812, 5 ,

30

n Groups Within

Groups

Total

12,630 6

94,740

1 507,370

4

6

4 7

630 15,1

03

3,806 000

4.1.4.2 The Result of Homogeneity of Variance Test in Control Group

The result of homogeinity of variance test in experimental group

showed that p-value was 0,000 and F calculation was 53,806 > 0,05. It meant that

the data was homogenous. The data showed in table below.

TABLE 23

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

ss_score

L

evene

Statistic

d f1

d f2

S ig.

1 1

4 ,

,353 6 251

TABLE 24

ANOVA

ss_score

S

um of

Squares

d f

Mea

n Square

F

S ig.

Betwee 8 1

854, 1 ,0

n Groups 54,297 297 21,075 00

Within 3 4 7,05 Groups 24,573 6 6

Total 1 4

178,870 7

Ability

4.1.5 The Contribution of Drama Method to The Students’ Speaking

4.1.5.1 The Contribution of Drama Method to The Students’ Speaking

Ability in Experimental Group

The analysis of regression used to know how much drama contributed to

the students’ speaking ability in experimental group. The result of regression

analysis found that drama method contributed 1,07% to the students’ speaking

ability. It can be concluded that the drama method gave contribution to the

students’ speaking ability. It showed in table below.

31

1

M

R

TABLE 25

Variables Entered/Removed(b)

odel

Var

iables

Entered

Var

iables Removed

M ethod

ss_ speakingsc ore(a)

. E

nter

a All requested variables entered.

b Dependent Variable: ss_selfesteem

TABLE 26

Model Summary

odel

R Square

A

djusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 , , ,0 6,4 327(a) 107 66 265

a Predictors: (Constant), ss_speakingscore

TABLE 27

ANOVAb

Model

Sum of

Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

1 Regression 108,737 1 108,737 2,633 ,119a

Residual 908,596 22 41,300

Total 1017,333 23

a. Predictors: (Constant), ss_speakingscore

b. Dependent Variable: ss_selfesteem

4.1.5.2 The Contribution of Drama Method to The Students’ Speaking

Ability in Control Group

The analysis of regression used to know how much drama contributed to

the students’ speaking ability in control group. The result of regression analysis

found that drama method contributed 0,05% to the students’ speaking ability. It

can be concluded that the drama method gave contribution to the students’

speaking ability. It showed in table below.

TABLE 28

Variables Entered/Removed(b)

M odel

Variable

s Entered

V

ariables

Remove

M ethod

32

M

d

1 ss_spesc ore(a)

. E

nter

a All requested variables entered. b Dependent Variable: ss_selfesteem

TABLE 29

Model Summary

odel

R

R

Square

Ad

justed R Square

Std.

Error of the Estimate

1 , ,0 - 6,17 073(a) 05 ,040 36

a Predictors: (Constant), ss_spescore

TABLE 30

ANOVAb

Model

Sum of

Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

1 Regression 4,477 1 4,477 ,117 ,735a

Residual 838,482 22 38,113

Total 842,958 23

a. Predictors: (Constant), ss_spescore

b. Dependent Variable: ss_selfesteem

Rater

4.1.6. The Reliability of Inter

4.1.6.1.The Reliability of

The first rater would be the writer and

the other one was as the second rater.

Before using the rubric, both raters

Inter Rater of Pretest and Posttest

in Experimental Group

To minimize the subjectivity in

scoring students’ speaking, two raters

who had the experience in handling

teaching and testing speaking to get

involved in giving scores were needed.

had discussed the content of the rubric. The correlation coefficient (r) between

two raters was calculated by means of

Product Moment Correlation. The

correlation of two raters was shown in

Table below.

TABLE 31


M ean

Std.

Deviation

N

7 6,03 4

ater1 1,688 24 8 7 6,34 4

ater2 2,042 12 8

33

TABLE 32

Correlations

rater1 rater2

rater1 Pearson Correlation 1 ,676**


Sum of Squares and



N 48 48

rater2 Pearson Correlation ,676** 1


Sum of Squares and



N 48 48

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level







instrument was reliable.

4.1.6.2 The Reliability of

Inter Rater of Pretest and Posttest

in Control Group







instrument was reliable. It showed in

table below.

TABLE 33


M ean

Std.

Deviation

N

6 5,26 4

ater1 8,646 53 8 6 6,01 4

ater2 8,625 64 8

34

TABLE 34

Correlations

rater1 rater2

rater1 Pearson Correlation 1 ,575**


Sum of Squares and



N 48 48

rater2 Pearson Correlation ,575** 1


Sum of Squares and



N 48 48

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

4.1.7 The Reliability of Questionnaire

To know the result of reliable or not of questionnaire, the data were

analyzed by using computerized statistic system. Based on the following table

below showed that 0,747 > 0,367, it meant that the coefficient reliability was

gained higher than r table. So, the reliability was significant. The result can be

seen in table below.

TABLE 35

Case Processing Summary %

ases Vali

d

Excl

uded(a)

Tota l

1

4 00,0

, 0

1

4 00,0

a Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

TABLE 36

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Part 1 Value -,039a

Part 2

Total N of Items

Correlation Between Forms

Spearman-Brown Equal Length

Coefficient Unequal Length

Guttman Split-Half Coefficient

N of Items

Value

N of Items

13b

,007

12c

25

,597

,748

,748

,747

a. The value is negative due to a negative average covariance

among items. This violates reliability model assumptions. You

may want to check item codings.

b. The items are: item1, item2, item3, item4, item5, item6, item7,

item8, item9, item10, item11, item12, item13.

c. The items are: item14, item15, item16, item17, item18, item19,

item20, item21, item22, item23, item24, item25.

35

TABLE 37

Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if Item

Deleted

Scal e Variance

if Item

Deleted

Cor rected

Item-Total

Correlation

Squ ared

Multiple

Correlation

Cro

nbach's

Alpha if

Item

Deleted

i

tem1

i

tem2

i

tem3

i

tem4

i

tem5

i

tem6

i

tem7

i

tem8

i

tem9

i

tem10

i

tem11

i

tem12

i

tem13

i

tem14

i

tem15

i

tem16

i

tem17

i

tem18

i

tem19

i

tem20

i tem21

72,6 3

34,8 53

,09 8

. ,369

75,2 1

31,7 37

,36 7

. ,307

74,7 9

35,2 16

,00 2

. ,394

73,2 1

29,5 63

,52 4

. ,259

73,1 7

31,5 36

,32 7

. ,310

72,9 2

38,1 67

- ,213

. ,426

72,7 9

36,6 94

- ,066

. ,396

73,5 8

33,8 19

,10 5

. ,367

75,3 3

35,2 75

,06 3

. ,376

72,8 8

35,8 53

- ,030

. ,399

74,8 8

39,3 32

- ,271

. ,466

75,9 2

35,5 58

,24 3

. ,363

75,7 5

33,6 74

,22 5

. ,344

75,2 9

31,6 94

,38 2

. ,305

73,5 4

33,7 37

,08 4

. ,373

72,9 2

34,7 75

,03 3

. ,386

73,9 2

38,2 54

- ,221

. ,427

75,2 5

32,9 78

,28 5

. ,330

75,6 7

37,7 10

- ,170

. ,419

72,7 5

33,5 87

,52 9

. ,326

75,2 9

32,6 50

,26 7

. ,330

36

i 73,0 32,9 ,26 . ,332

tem22 4 11 8

i 72,9 33,8 ,13 . ,360

tem23 2 19 4

i 72,7 35,1 ,08 . ,371

tem24 1 72 4 i 72,6 37,7 -

. ,422 tem25 7 10 ,169

The writer used two-way ANOVA

those who were taught using

conventional method.

It was also gotten that self-

esteem was 0,201 > 0,05. It meant that

there was no a significant influence of

self-esteem on students’ speaking

ability. It can concluded that Ho was

received and Ha was rejected.

The result of analyzing the data,

interaction effect could be known

0,329 > 0,05, it meant that there was

no a significant interaction effect of

methods used and self-esteem on

students’ speaking ability. It can

concluded that Ho was received and

Ha was rejected.

TABLE 38

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Dependent Variable: Ss_scores

Source

Typ e III Sum of

Squares

D f

Mea

n Square

F

S ig.

Corrected 1270 2 45,3 3 ,

Model ,786(a) 8 85 ,645 002

Intercept 1922

15,624

1 192

215,624

1 5436,83

1

,

000

Speaking 314, 379

1 314, 379

2 5,248

, 000

selfesteem 366, 2 18,3 1 , 909 0 45 ,473 201

Speaking * selfesteem

108, 292

7 15,4

70 1

,242 ,

329

Error 236, 1 12,4

583 9 52

Corrected 1507 4 Total ,370 7

a R Squared = ,843 (Adjusted R Squared = ,612)

Study

4.2 Interpretation of the

The scores of the students’

conventional way. Each scores of

pretest and posttest in both increased.

It was assumed that the students’

speaking test were calculated. Based

on the findings of above, the

interpretations are presented. If seen

from the result of analysis the data, It

can be know that the students were

taught using drama method was better

than the students were taught using

ability in learning speaking before

being taught by using conventional

method was in enough level and after

being taught by using drama method

was in good level.

The result of teaching showed

that there was different achievement

37

on the experimental and control

groups, as we know that in control

group the writer didn’t give treatment.

Therefore, treatment was given to the

students in experimental group could

influence their ability in knowledge

about speaking.

Teachinng speaking through

drama method gave a significant

contribution to the students’ speaking

achievement. This study found that

teaching speaking through drama

method can improve students’

speaking achievement. Before this

method is used, the students are less

interested in speaking achievement

and difficult to understand how to

practice speaking skill well. After

using drama method for teaching

speaking, students are more interested

in speaking lessons and help students

in understanding easier.

Learning speaking, there

should be some factors stimulated

situation. Such as throungh drama

method, the students can learn well to

work as a team. The students can work

together to practice the drama how

should be well. If there is no a good

team work, the drama is impossible

run well based on the situation has.

The students also became

active in learning especially in

speaking skill, they can think and

prepare how to be a good actor or

actress in drama. In addition, the

students can develop their speaking by

themselves.

Although the improvement was

high, teaching speaking through drama

method still gave positive effects to

the students’ speaking achievement.

The small improvement can be caused

by some other things, for example: the

defferences of ability among the

students, the materials, and the

situation and condition in the class.

By doing through drama

method in the classroom, the teacher

not only can improve the students’

speaking achievement, but also can

improve the students’ relationship

between them by working

cooperatively. This method can be

used as the teaching method at school.

Moreover, the students can

develop self-esteem towards practice

the drama well. If it is shown from the

result of students’ response related to

attitude, this study claims that the

fairly correlation happened might be

due to the lack of speaking practice of

students or they did not read alot

althought they love speaking.

Based on the analyzing data on

the contribution of drama method to

the students’ speaking ability was

found that drama method gave

contribution 1,07%. It means that

drama method influence the students’

speaking ability.

The points above can be

concluded that drama method could

stimulated the students to be active

participants in English classes through

a series of its activities, increased

students’ achievement and self-esteem,

produced a live, interesting, and fun

English class and be activated at the

same. This drama also can be done

regularly to develop students’

speaking ability.

38

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND

SUGGESTIONS

In this part, the writer

describes: (1) conclusions and (2)

suggestions.

1. Conclusion

Based on the findings and

interpretations in previous chapter, the

writer presents some conclusions.

They are as follows.

1. It can be seen from the

result of the study that there was

significant difference between the

mean scores in the post-test of

experiment group and control group.

Therefore, it was believed that

teaching speaking by using drama

method to the eleventh grade students

could be considered as one of the

effective method to be used.

2. Teaching speaking

throught drama method seems to have

positive effects on the students’ self-

esteem and speaking achievement. In

addition, the writer can say that drama

method is effective in improving

speaking achievement and self-esteem

toward speaking of eleventh grade

students.

3. Self-esteem toward

speaking achievement is not the only

factors to support students’ progress in

speaking achievement. It must be also

supported by others factors like

facilities. The role teacher, the

facilities, etc.

4. Supported by the

significant result of pretest is lower

than posttest, it is very useful for

students to assist and motivate them to

speak English in the class. Therefore,

they can speak better than before.

5. By conducting this

research, the researcher has more

knowledge in the field. The researcher

knew how to apply the speaking

lesson by using this method and also

has experience how to manage the

class.

2. Suggestion

From the conclusions above,

the writer would like to offer some

suggestion in other to develop the

teaching and learning of English in

EFL classroom.

1. Suggestions for The

Teacher of English

The teacher should be creative

in providing speaking materials. The

teacher have to have good material

and method to suit students’ need and

interest. Find effective method to take

students’ interest in following lesson

and think that English is fun.

2. Suggestion for The

Students

They are expected to give more

attention to the teacher’s explanation

and discuss to the teachers if they have

a problem in learning speaking. The

students should improve their interest,

concentration, imagination and active

in learning English especially

speaking by using drama method.


Institution

The school should provide the

facilities in supporting English

teaching and learning processes and

send to the teacher of English for

following workshops, training and

seminar related to English taeching

and learning activities.


Students

The students were expected to

be active asking to the teacher when

teaching and learning process. Beside

that the student should study hard and

practice more exercise in learning

English and the student also should

improve their interest in learning

English, especially in learning English

speaking.

39

REFERENCES

Alisyahbana, S. Takdir. 1990. The Teaching of English in Indonesia and Teaching

and Learning English World Wide. London: Clevedon Multilingual

Matters LTD.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2007. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bhumi Aksara.

Broughton, Geoffrey; Brumfit, Christopher; Flavell, Roger; Hill, Peter and Pincas,

Anita. 1980. Teaching English as a Foreign Language: Second Edition.

New York: Routledge.

Brown, H. Douglas. 2003. Language Assesing Principle and Classroom Practice.

San Fransisco State University. Logman.Com.

Byrne D. 1986. Teaching Oral English. Longman Handbooks for English

Chauhan, Vani. 2004. Drama Techniques for Teaching English. The Internet

TESL. Journal, Vol.X, No. 10, October 2004

Costello, Patrick J.M. 2003. Action Research. London: Continuum.

Doughill, John (1987). Drama Activities for Language Learner. London: Mcmilan

Publisher.

Dowdy, Joanne Kilgour and Kaplan, Sarah (eds.). 2011. Teaching Drama in The

Classroom: A Toolbox for Teachers. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Fraenkel, Jack R and Wallen, Norman E. 1990. How To Design and Evaluate

Research in Education. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Publishing

Company

Goodman, Norman.etc. 2001. Extending Self Esteem Theory and Research:

Sociological and Psychological Currents. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching: Fourth

Edition. Pearson Longman.

http. Pasca. UNHAS. AC.Id/ Journal /Files/ 5085c8e068d.pdf. 13

November 21.30 WIB.

http. Pasca. UNHAS. AC.Id/ Journal /Files/ 5085c8e068d.pdf. 13

November 21.30 WIB.

http: //www.quo.edu/english/ comferences.

http: //www.terry.uga.edu/~rg rover

http: brainyquote.com

http://books.google.co.id. Posted on March, 22 ,2013

Krik, Samuel. 1986. Educating Exceptional Children. Houghton Mifflin Company.

L.Oxford, Rebecca. 1990. Language Learning Strategies. Heinle and Heinle

Publisher, The University of Alabama.

Littlewood, William. 1984. Foreign and Second Language Learning. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Lubis, Yusnaini. 1988. Developing Communicative Proficiency in the English is

a second Language (EFL) Class. DIKTI: Jakarta.

McCarty, Michael. 1996. Discourse Analysis for Language Teacher. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Owens, Timothy J; Stryker, Sheldon; Goodman, Norman (eds.). 2011. Extending

Self-Esteem Theory and Research: Sociological and Psychological

Currents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

http://www.quo.edu/english/

http://www.terry.uga.edu/~rg

http://books.google.co.id/

40

Rohrberger, 1971. Reading and Writing about Literature. New York: Random

House.

Setiadi Linawati, dkk. 2008. Seri Pendalaman Materi Bahasa Inggris SMA dan

MA. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Seyler, Dorothy etc. 1981. Introduction to Literature Reading Analyzing and

Writing. New York: Random House

Sugiyono. 2009. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kulalitatif & R&D. Bandung:

Alfabeta

Suhardjono. 2007. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bhumi Aksara.

Thompson, Gill and Evans, Huw. Thinking Through: Linking Language Skills,

Thinking Skills and Drama. London: David Fulton Publishers. 2005.

Wessel, Charlyne, 1987. Drama. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

www. Angel Messenger.net

http://www/

THE EFFECT OF DRAMA AND THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ …

Documents

Transcript of THE EFFECT OF DRAMA AND THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ …