Microsoft Word 7c75-990f-6a74-ebd8
Download 39.77 Kb.
|
Darmawan 2020 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1477 042017
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- Student 1 71/100 Student 2
- Student 3 54/100 Student 4
- Student 5 58/100 Student 6
- Student 7 88/100 Student 8
- Student 9 90/100 Student 10
- Results of the Post-Test: Control group
- Results of the Post-Test: Experimental group
- Activities of Post-Test Control group
- Task 4 Student 1
- Pre- Test Post-Test
- Semi-structured interviews
Table 1. Results of Pre-Test: Both groups
Results of the Post-Test: Control group To begin with, comparing the results of the pre-test and the results of the post-test we can conclude that the reading skills of the control group have not improved. The results of the post-test indicate that there was a slight decrease in comparison to the results of the pre-test. It goes without saying that the lowest marks are in the first task, as most of the students did not answer this question correctly. This is,perhaps, due to the fact that the students do not comprehend the reading text because of the unknown words which exist. What is more, in the second task the students’ marks are low, as the majority of them do not fill in the correct gap with the correct sentence which is missing. It is obvious that they are not familiar with this type of communicative activity such as jumbled sentences. Moving on to the third and fourth activities which are writing activities, we can conclude that the students of the control group present weaknesses, as they cannot form full sentences and not all the sentences which they do form make sense. In addition to this, their vocabulary is very poor and limited. Table 2. Results of Pre-Test and Post-Test: Control Group
Results of the Post-Test: Experimental group After the completion of the adapted lessons, the same post-test was handed out to the five students of the experimental group. The results,as presented, in Table 3, indicate that the students had developed their reading abilities after theywere taughtthe adapted -communicative - material. As Table 4 shows, the students acquired the highest marks in the first, third and fourth activity. This means that they were able to comprehend an unfamiliar reading text and give valid and accurate answers and express their opinion meaningfully. However, we should mention that we anticipated higher grades from the experimental group which was exposed to authentic and communicative material. Table 3. Activities of Post-Test: Control Group
Table 4. Results of Pre-Test and Post-Test:
Semi-structured interviews The semi-structured interviews constitute the last part of this research. The semi-structured interviews were used as a means of triangulation of the research results. It is worth noting that the interviews aimed mainly at the evaluation of the development of the students’ speaking skills as well as the students’ expression of preferences regarding the English lessons they have taught. Thirty- five questions were replied by the students of both groups, eighteen of them were open-closed and the rest were closed questions. This variation of questions was chosen for the needs of this specific interview and because of the pre-intermediate level of students. Moreover,an attempt was made to make the process of the interview interesting and not tiring for the students. Even though the students were willing to participate during the interview process, they could not hide the anxiety and stress they felt. The interviews which were recorded by the teachers who were also the researchers, were also conducted face-to-face between the students and the teachers/researchers, so that they could see things like the facial expressions of the students, their gestures, their facial grimaces, the pauses in their answers and what these pauses denoted, etc. 3.4.1 The Control group After carrying out the semi-structured interviews, the teachers/researchers focused on the most noticeable facts. To be more specific, most of the students of the control group had difficulty in expressing their opinion in English, consequently, they answered in Greek. In addition to this, they did not understand all questions in the English language, as a result the questions were carried out in Greek again. What is more, some questions were repeated due to the fact some interviewees did not comprehend them. It goes without saying that the majority of the students hesitated to express their opinion or had difficulty in thinking of an appropriate answer. These difficulties could be justifiable as the answers were not prepared in advance by the students. Last but not least, the researchers pinpointed that the students made grammar and vocabulary errors, errors in syntax, both inGreek and in English and in used the wrong pronunciation in some words. To conclude, the students of the control group were not familiar with speaking activities and they were also not fluent speakers of the English language. 3.4.2 The Experimental group The students of the experimental group replied in the oral questions more fluently and confidently than the students of the control group. However, this does not mean that they did not make language errors during the interviews. It is worth mentioning that they made some grammar and intonation errors too, yet they answered to the point. As concerning some of the questions, a few of their replies were considered irrelevant. Some of the students felt more comfortable answering in English, even though the questions were asked both in English and in Greek. CONCLUSIONS An action research was chosen to carry out this study. More specifically, an A2 level class, of a Private Language Institute, was the experimental and control group, upon which this research was conducted. In other words, the A2 level class was divided into two groups, the control and the experimental group. First of all, a pre-test was given out to the students of both groups in order to measure their reading skills. The results showed that the students’ level was average, as half of the students acquired 60-80 points. Ten lessons were carried out to students of both groups. In the control group, the material of the course book which is taught in this Private Language Institute was applied. To the other group, also known as the experimental group, new adapted material was designed based on the principles of the CLA and the CEFR. After the completion of the ten lessons, a post-test was handed out to the students of both groups so as to measure the students’ improvement in reading as well as the students’ language development. The results of both groups were not the expected ones. As far as the control group was concerned, the post-test pointed out a slight drop concerning the grades they had acquired in the pre-test. The grades of their pre-test were higher than the grades of the post-test. We can conclude from the results of the students’ post-test that their reading skills did not improve. On the other hand, the post-tests of the experimental group indicated that the students improved their reading skills, as there was a slight improvement in the grades they acquired. The last part of this research included the carrying out of the semi-instructed interview in which the students of both groups participated. The semi-structured interview, showed two things, firstly that the students of the experimental group were more interested in, and excited with, the material which was applied to them, by the teachers who were also the researchers, in communicative language teaching. And, as was expected, the control group was neither excited with, nor interested in, the conventional coursebook material which was applied to them. This last group of students, the control group, also showed limitations and errors in language production, in contrast to the students of the experimental group who were more fluent and communicative. Speaking is one of four language skills that play an important role in the context of global communications. Although speaking skills have become one of the compulsory and prerequisite subjects and have even been distributed in four semesters in the curriculum at the undergraduate level of English Department at Tadulako University, speaking skills and the ability of students are not sufficient yet. Based on the interaction with the students, the researchers found that there are many students in the English Department are still reluctant and even some students are not able to communicate orally in English. Thus, the researcher assumes that one of the causes of low student speaking ability is that the strategy or approach used by the lecturer in the class has not been effective to encourage every student to be actively involved speaking activities. In fact, one of the responsibilities of lecturers of speaking course is to facilitate students to be able to develop speaking skills. Therefore, the students are expected not only to be able to communicate orally in the classroom but also to be able to communicate in their daily life as well as for global communication purposes.There is a great expectation deal with the inclusion of speaking course in the curriculum at the undergraduate level of English Department. One of them is that by having sufficient communicative skills, students are expected to compete and to be able to elevate competitiveness at the international level, ability on accessing international trade and the modern economy, scientific knowledge and expertise, as well as technological developments and innovation [1, 2]. Some researchers argue that the development of globalization is closely related to the strength and dominance of English [3, 4]. Therefore, to meet the demands of globalization and the modernization of life, it requires an understanding that we are a part of a global society (Hamied, 2012 p.63). Thus, it generates a common perception that the global community is a society that can compete and adapt to the global culture and values. With the rapid development of information and communication technology, science, and global competence [1], including the ability to master adequate English as a language of global communication [6, 5] Referring to the description of the gap between the objectives and practices that occur in speaking learning activities of the undergraduate students of English Department, then this research investigated how lecturers implemented a communicative approach in the teaching of Speaking. The ability of oral communication in English actively is a key requirement for students who take speaking courses. Therefore, in every meeting, a lecturer is required to apply the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach. It is expected that students’ oral communication ability will increase after taking Speaking course. However, there are many students whose speaking ability has not improved yet. Based on the above elaboration, the purpose of this study is: (1) to reveal the strategies that are used by lecturers in implementing the principles of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach in teaching speaking; and (2) to explore students’ opinions related to the strategies used by lecturers in speaking course. The research significances are the formation of an effective pedagogical thinking framework for the development of speaking skills that can be used as a basis for curriculum development, instructional design, the availability of learning support facilities, and as a basis for developing comprehensive communication competency assessment system. Practically, the results of this study are also expected to provide empirical facts about the problems of teaching speaking. These facts can be used as the basis for the curriculum of developers and policymakers to improve the speaking learning system involving the formulation of competencies, teaching materials, learning strategies, and assessment systems. Methodology Referring to the objectives of the research above, the type of this research is evaluative research aims at investigating of the application of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach in teaching speaking at the English Department in Tadulako University. The purpose of this evaluation research is to determine the merits, values, and usefulness of a learning program [7]. The evaluation model used in this research is CIPP (context, input, process, and product) [8]. In this study, researchers used only two components in CIPP, namely Input, and Process. INPUT evaluation includes lecturers and students. Aspects that were investigated by the lecturers are their ability to manage the classroom, their creativity in using media and teaching facilities in the speaking course. Two aspects that are investigated by the students, their motivation and interest in speaking course. In PROCESS evaluation, it was investigated the implementation of speaking teaching strategies to meet the obj ectives of the curriculum. The subj ects of this study were eight students of English Department at Tadulako University which have enrolled in Speaking course and four lecturers of Speaking courses. In collecting and analyzing the data, this research used mixed quantitative and qualitative methods. The assumptions of using qualitative and quantitative methods are to understand the research problem and have a better question when compared to using only one method of research. The mixed-method is a good research design to be used as the strength of qualitative and quantitative data [9]. The researchers can also do the triangulation model through these the implementation of method combination. In this research, researchers used two models of triangulation, they are a triangulation of data sources and method triangulation [10]. Triangulation of data sources is the use of different data sources in which one data source is cross-checked to other data sources. The method triangulation is data collection using several methods. In this research, the researchers used method combination and triangulation in revealing the problems that occur in the speaking course at the English Department at Tadulako University.
Download 39.77 Kb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||