IMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ACHIEVEMENT THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION METHOD TO THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 21 MEDAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54367/kairos.v2i3.736Abstract
This thesis discuss about Improving Students Speaking’ Achievement through the Application of Small Group Discussion Method to the Eighth Grade Students of SMP Negeri 21 Medan. The objective of the study was to find out how effective the use of Small Group Discussion Method (SGD) in teaching speaking especially in asking and giving opinion. The study of the research concentrates on the improving students’ speaking achievement by the application of small group discussion method. Specifically, it is concerned more about the students’ achievement in asking and giving opinion. The research has two cycles. Each cycle has three meetings. The subject of the research was students of Eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 21 Medan which consisted of twenty four students. The instruments of data collection were quantitative and qualitative data. While the quantitative data was conducted by pre-test, post-test I, and post-test II students’ speaking score in every cycle, the qualitative data conducted by the three instruments; observation sheet, questionnaire and diary notes. Based on the speaking tests, students’ score improved. In the pretest, the mean of the students was 48.82. The post-test I mean 68.66 and in the post-test II the mean of the students 77.91. Based on the observation sheet, questionnaire sheet and diary notes, it was found that learning activity ran well. Most students felt interested in the process of learning activity and involved in their group during the discussion time. The result of the research showed that Small Group Discussion Method was able to improve students’ achievement in asking and giving opinion.References
Algarabel & Desi. The Definition of Achievement and the Construction of Tests for its
Measurements: A Review of the Main Trends. Psicologica. 2001.
Brown, Douglas. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Activities. San Francisco
State University: Pearson Education Inc. 2007.
Burns, A. Doing action research in english language teaching: a guide for practioners. Sydney: Macquarie University. 2010
Cunningham. Student Achievement. National Conference of State Legislatures. 2012.
Finocchiaro, Brumfit. The Functional-National Approach: from Theory to Practice. New york: Oxford University Press; 1983.
Hewitt, Ralph. Leading Action Research in Schools. United States of America: University of
Central Florida. 2005.
Jolliffe. Cooperative Learning in the Classroom Putting it into Practice. Paul Chapman
Publishing. London EC1Y 1SP. 2007.
_____________. Cooperative Learning in the Classroom Putting it into Practice. Paul
Chapman Publishing. London EC1Y 1SP. 2007.
Kelly & Stafford. Managing Small Group Discussion.Workshop Series. 1993.
Mettetal, Gwynn. The what, why and how of classroom action research. “Journal of Teaching
and Learning.(JoSoTL)â€. 2001.
Rusmussen, Ray. Practical Discussion Techniques for Instructors. “AACE Journalâ€. 1984.
Sanjaya, Dedi. Improving Students Achievement on Writing Descriptive Paragraph Through The Application of Team Pair Solo. Medan: State University of Medan. 2011.
Slavin. Cooperative Learning Theory, Research And Practice. New York: the Hopkins University.
Tzu . The Comparison of the Difficulties between Cooperative Learning and Traditional Teaching Methods in College English. “Journal of Associate Department Applied Englishâ€. 2007.
Wallace. Action Research for Language Teachers. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. 1998
Wardiman A et al. English in Focus 2: for Grade VIII Junior High School: Ed 1. Jakarta: Pusat perbukaan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2008
Widiati & Cahyono. The Teaching of EFL Speaking in the Indonesia Context: the of State the Art, bahasa dan seni. 2006