CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Research Listening is one of the receptive skills as it involves students in capturing and understanding the input of English. Reading, the other receptive skill, involves students in understanding and interpreting the written word. Listening is probably more difficult than reading because students often recognize the written word more easily than they recognize the spoken word. Because of these issues, many students find listening difficult. Listening tasks can be very disheartening and demotivating, especially if students have had a previous negative experience. It is therefore important to give students plenty of opportunities to practice the skill of listening in a supportive environment that helps them to learn (Pollard, 2008:39). Furthermore, listening subject is also one of the most difficult skill to be learnt that make most of the students especially in Junior High School have low achievement in listening skill especially in listening minimal pairs as it happened to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. The second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan have low achievement in listening skill because of the following reasons: The students were bored in the process of learning listening because the teacher still used conventional method in teaching listening. The time of learning English in Junior High School was very limited The students assumed that English is a foreign language for them, so they did not have to be so serious to learn English. 1

In short, it is important for English teacher to use the best techniques and approach such as games which can provide students many opportunities to practice English language because most of student in every school levels especially in Junior High School, listening is difficult for them to learn. Actually, listening is about hearing the encompassing message from particular sound of speech. Student with the inefficiency of vocabulary range, weak pronunciation ability and also rarely engaged in speaking activity are estimated to be difficult in listening English especially in listening minimal pairs which sound similar but has different meaning for example the word “sheep” and „ship‟. In learning listening, one of the difficulties that English foreign language students face is minimal pairs. The term “minimal pairs” refers to two words within a language which have different meanings but vary in one sound segment only. Examples of this in English are the words “live” (verb) and “leave” (verb) (Fromkin, Blair & Collins, 2000:194). Based on the problems above, the researcher as one of English teachers at SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan and also a student of English Department who has been studying English for four years at Almuslim University would like to do a research as the final task to complete her study on the title “The Implementation of Minimal Pair Card Game to Improve Students‟ Listening Comprehension (A Classroom Action Research at The Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan)”.

1.2 Problem of the Research The problems of the research are made as follows:

2

1. Can Minimal Pair Card Game improve the students‟ ability in listening minimal pairs? 2. What are the advantages of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan?

1.3 Purpose of the Research Based on the problems above, the researcher draws the purposes of the research as described below: 1. To find out whether Minimal Pair Card Game can improve the students‟ ability in listening minimal pairs. 2. To find out the advantages of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan.

1.4 Significance of the Research This research is generally expected to be useful in many ways as described in the following: 1. Theoretically, the finding of the research can be used as the additional theoretical teaching resources at SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in teaching listening. 2. Practically, the result of this research can improve the students‟ listening ability in listening minimal pairs.

1.5 Scope of the Research In order to get more specific data in this research, it seems important for the researcher to limit the discussion of the research. Because the teaching listening is

3

very wide, the researcher limits this research on improving students‟ ability in listening minimal pairs.

1.6 Definition of Key Terms. The definitions of key terms that are explained in this thesis are as follows: 1. Listening is a process of receiving, interpreting and reacting to a message received from the speaker in listening to minimal pairs. 2. Minimal Pair Cards Game is the name of game in which the students are trained to listen the differences of minimal pairs and the students uses some minimal pairs‟ cards in playing the game. 3. Classroom Action Research is a research which is done to improve the quality of teaching and learning process.

4

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Definition of Listening Listening is an active process. It differs from hearing, which is passive. In listening, the listener has to pay attention and comprehend the verbal communication delivered by the speaker (Barker, 1987:14). Hornby (1995; 687) defines listening as hearing something that one is meant to hear. Valette (1989: 74) describes that listening has three components. First is called sound discrimination. Here the listener distinguishes all sounds in the language presented and discriminate between them. Second is called auditory memory. While pair drills are used to teach sound discrimination, connected phrases are used for increasing the auditory memory. Mimicry and memorization, reading aloud, dictation, are some techniques, which are beneficial in developing auditory memory. The last is achievement. The student‟s degree of achievement will depend on their ability to discriminate phonemes, to recognize stress and intonation pattern and to retain what they have heard. In fact, listening consumes more time than other facets of language speaking, writing, and reading in our daily life. The average person spends 68 % of his working time on listening. Nevertheless, researches on listening have extraordinarily been made.

2.2 Listening Achievement The teaching of listening achievement as a separate skill is a recent innovation in language teaching (Allen, 1977: 179). It is because listening

5

he states that when the nature of the skill is understood. active process in which the listener must discriminate between sounds. According to Valette (1989:74) students of foreign language won‟t be able to speak the target language accurately unless they perceive the ability to distinguish features of the new phonetics system. 1994: 13). The phenomenon of listening achievement is very complex. In learning a second language. understand vocabulary and grammatical 6 . In the daily conversation.achievement is simply considered as an adjunct of speaking. In addition.3 The Nature of Listening Comprehension Research has shown that listening is not a passive process. students must acquire the skill of listening. It is a skill that must be taught and doesn‟t happen automatically (Swarbrick. but listening precedes the speaking. They must be able to discriminate the sound of the target language. 2. Developing the ability in understanding the spoken foreign language. indeed. to discriminate among unfamiliar sounds. native speakers do not consciously make all the possible phonemic discrimination typical of their language. In addition Vandergrift in Mahdalena (2009: 9) states: Listening comprehension is anything but a passive activity. It is a complex. the process becomes exciting. however. They are so familiar with certain patterns and contexts that they can understand what is being said even they do not pay precise attention to every word. Postovsky in Mahdalena (2009: 9) points out that listening is not a passive skill and it requires full participation and the undivided attention of the learners. They must rely on their ears both to understand what is being said and to verify their own pronunciation. is long and continuous process.

The phenomenon of listening comprehension is very complex. Teaching listening comprehension. students must acquire the skill of listening. Developing the ability in understanding the spoken foreign language. indeed. and interpret it within the immediate as well as the large sociocultural content of the utterance. 1994: 13). but listening precedes the speaking. to discriminate among unfamiliar sounds. In learning a second language.structures. Coordinating all of this involves a great deal of mental activity on the part of the listener. They are so familiar with certain patterns and contexts that they can understand what is being said even they do not pay precise attention to every word. interpret stress and intonation. and deserves more analysis and support”. In the daily conversation. 1977: 179). retain what was gathered in all of the above. It is a skill that must be taught and doesn‟t happen automatically (Swarbrick. is long and continuous process. They must be able to discriminate the sound of the target language. 7 . It is because listening comprehension is simply considered as an adjunct of speaking. as a separate skill. native speakers do not consciously make all the possible phonemic discrimination typical of their language. Listening is hard work. They must rely on their ears both to understand what is being said and to verify their own pronunciation. is a recent innovation in language teaching (Allen. however. According to Valette (1989:74) students of foreign language won‟t be able to speak the target language accurately unless they perceive the ability to distinguish features of the new phonetics system.

Extensive listening will usually take place outside the classroom. Listening of both kinds is especially important since it provides the perfect opportunity to hear voices other than the teacher‟s. so extensive listening (where a teacher encourages students to choose for themselves what they listen to and to do so for pleasure arid general language improvement) can also have a dramatic effect on a student‟s language learning.4 Extensive and intensive listening Students can improve their listening skills and gain valuable language input through a combination of extensive and intensive listening material and procedures. and helps to improve their own pronunciation. The motivational power of such an activity increases dramatically when students make their own choices about what they are going to listen to. Students can also have their own copies of course book tapes. Many students will enjoy reading and listening at the same time using both the reader and tape.1 Extensive listening The researcher can claim that extensive reading helps students to acquire vocabulary and grammar and it make students better readers. Material for extensive listening can be found from a number of sources.2. or on personal stereos as they travel from one place to another. enables students to acquire good speaking habits as a result of the spoken English they absorb. car. in the students home. A lot of simplified readers are now published with an audio version on tape. These provide ideal listening material. 2.4. or tapes which accompany other books written especially at their level. They can also listen to tapes of authentic material provided that it is 8 .

The Advantages are that taped material allows students to hear a variety of different voices apart from just their own teacher‟s.4. and genre. The teacher needs to explain the benefits of listening extensively. and come to some kind of agreement about how much and what kind of listening they should do. or be kept in a box or some other container which can be taken into classrooms. or in some other location). The teacher can recommend certain tapes. they offer a wide 9 . when they want their students to practice listening skills. especially where real people are talking.2 Intensive listening Many teachers use taped materials. But even when tapes contain written dialogues or extracts from plays. and increasingly material on disk. The keenest students will want to listen to English tapes outside the classroom anyway. and will need little encouragement to do so. Many others.comprehensible. the teacher will need to make a collection of appropriate tapes clearly marked for level. topic. however. 2. This has a number of advantages and disadvantages. It gives them an opportunity to „meet‟ a range of different characters. In order for extensive listening to work effectively with a group of students or with groups of students. will profit from having the teacher give them reasons to make use of the resources available. and get other students to talk about the ones which they have enjoyed the most (Harmer. 2000:228). These can be kept like simplified readers in a permanent collection (such as in a self-access centre.

and machines to play them are relatively inexpensive. not by the listeners. Listening comprehension is claimed to be taken cat-c of but it actually seems to be neglected and overlooked by 10 . Despite the disadvantages. It is often difficult to ensure that all students in a room can hear equally well. writing and pronunciation. Nor can they see the speaking taking place. interact with the taped speakers in any way. the teacher needs to check tape (Harmer. Although this replicates the situation of radio. themselves. 2. The disadvantages are that in big classrooms with poor acoustics.variety of situations and voices. Finally. Mother problem with classroom tapes is that everyone has to listen at the same speed. speaking and writing are always incorporated. reading. It has been seen that listening comprehension is often left out of many theoretical books while other skills like reading. Taped material is extremely portable and readily available. Tapes are extremely cheap. a speed dictated by the tape. the audibility of taped and disk material often gives cause for concern. having a group of people sit around listening to a tape recorder or disk player is not an entirely natural occupation. and many teachers rely on tapes to provide a significant source of language input.5 The Importance of Listening Comprehension Teaching and learning of second or foreign language seems to concentrate on speaking. 2000: 229). the teacher still wants to use taped material at various stages in a sequence of lessons for the advantages mentioned above. In order to counteract some of the potential problems described above. For all these reasons most course books include tapes. This is because they cannot. it is less satisfactory when students have to take information from the tape. however.

This statement proves true as many teachers of English as a foreign language in Indonesia in general and in the province of Central Kalimantan in particular pay very little attention to the area of teaching listening comprehension for some reasons.both teachers and learners in second and foreign language in all educational levels in many countries including Indonesia. The teacher would like to see more emphasis given to listening comprehension as an entity in its own right. Most of the teachers of English can point out the history of extensive instructional focus on the expressive areas of language use or speaking and the comparative neglect of the receptive areas like listening. even though it is clear that the receptive skills are used more than twice as much as the expressive skills. 11 . It is always included as one of the main objectives in the curriculum that students need to acquire but in practice it usually receives little attention. It is the least stressed or focused on skill in the language classroom and receives the least pedagogical attention. Listening comprehension often plays only a trivial role in foreign language teaching and learning environments despite the fact that it often figures prominently in particular guidelines and statements of objectives. Pearson and Fielding in Mahdalena (2009: 19) remark on the general neglect in listening comprehension that teacher do not understand why there is so little attention paid to listening comprehension as a matter for a school curriculum when students spend so much time listening. the minimal attention paid to listening comprehension still persists. Although the preceding comment was made several years ago.

. Furthermore. Many courses which purport to teach‟ listening comprehension in fact consist of exercises which expose the students to a chunk of spoken material on a tape and then ask comprehension questions‟ to try to find out whether or not the student has understood the language of the text. .” 12 . seems to be that listening comprehension simply takes care of itself without any aid or teaching. Some teachers also believe that if students are efficiently taught and trained in reading and speaking skills. listening skills are very important but relatively few research projects are carried out in this area. . Brown in Mahdalena (2009: 19) also points out that it is assumed in teaching that students would easily acquire the ability to understand the spoken language if they hear their teachers speaking or listen to a tape.The students are not receiving any help in learning”. and that osmosis is all that needed. Furthermore. “Certainly some ELT methods have assumed that listening ability will develop automatically through exposure to the language and through practice of grammar.” Hedge in Mahdalena (2009: 20) also states a misconception of listening comprehension in the English language teaching curriculum. listening skills are viewed as developing automatically without any aid or teaching. and pronunciation. He further clarifies: “For many years it was suggested that students would learn to understand the spoken form of the language simply by being exposed to it. shared by other authorities. Scarcella (1998: 133) indicates that the reason that listening is often neglected in language instruction is that: “The concept. it is widely believed that listening skills are enabling skills that can happen on their own. vocabulary. they would acquire these skills and as a consequence their listening skills will be improved too. In addition. The only thing that students require is repeated listening or large doses of listening and they would acquire the skills on their own without any teacher help.In fact.

depending upon the groups studied. time spent in communicating divides into approximately 50 percent listening. Morley in Mahdalena (2009: 20) also mentions the proportion of the listening in daily life “Listening is the most frequently employed skill in daily language use. ask them to make predictions about the listening passage.6 Stages in Listening There are three stages in a listening activity: 1. it plays an important role in everyday life. listening comprehension needs more attention from both teachers and students. 2. prepare them for the theme of the listening passage. 2. but on the average. Post-listening Teachers should first check learner‟s comprehension & completion of listening task and then continue with tasks with require creative application of information from the listening passage. Pre-listening The teacher should assign a listening task before learners listen. Listening Learners listen to the listening material 3. and 10 percent writing”. and connect listening passage with their experience. 15 percent reading.In fact. 13 . Research results vary slightly. She may also provide learners with necessary language skills. It is actually an important skill and the most frequently used. 25 percent speaking. Teachers should use listening tasks that are appropriate for the listening passage.

Is an organizational moment or warm-up a preactivity? Why or why not? How is this approach similar to or different from the traditional approach? What parts of a lesson are usually more learner-centered? More teacher-centered? Why is it important to connect new information with learners‟ experience and lives? (http://exchanges. Write a lesson plan that has pre-listening activities. Information gallery of while and post-listening activities (Which activities are most interesting? Which activities are most creative? Which activities are most difficult?).gov/forum/vols/vol32/no4/).state. Think-pair-share: Was the demonstration difficult? What could I do to make it more effective? Teacher presentation of pre and post-listening stages. a listening passage. Groups present pre-and post-listening activities for a listening passage.and post-listening activities for a listening passage. Sometimes it forms the jumping-off point for the activities which follow.7 Listening lesson sequences Listening can occur at a number of points in a teaching sequence. and creative post-listening activities. Learners report answers from the information gallery. and then ask learners to complete one of the sample listening activities). Teacher demonstrates a listening activity without any pre-activity (teacher can read A Place to Live. Learners write a lesson plan that uses a listening passage (homework). Sometimes it may be the first stage of a „listening and acting out‟ sequence where students role-play the situation they have heard on the tape. h 2. Sometimes live listening may be a prelude to a 14 . Class discusses sources of listening passages.Learners will create creative pre. Small groups of learners prepare pre.and post-listening tasks for listening passage.

The examples of minimal pairs can be seen in the following list: 15 . have listening training as their central focus. however. Frequently students listen for gist on first hearing before moving on to different task skills at other times they may listen for specific information straight away. Sometimes this will be for content reasons because a topic comes up and sometimes it may be a way of refocusing students‟ attention.piece of writing which is the main focus of a lesson. Minimal pairs are often used to show that two sounds contrast in a language or pairs of words that have one phonological element that is different. 2000:232). Other lessons. Most listening sequences involve a mixture of language skills though one. 2. In general. or act out some role. However much the teacher has planned a lesson. Practicing minimal pairs can help students understand the differences in pronunciation between one word and another. Nowhere is this more acute than in the provision of live listening. It also helps students practice the finer elements of muted vowel sounds which are common to English vowel production. the teacher should aim to use listening material for as many purposes as possible both for practicing a variety of skills and as source material for other activities before students finally become tired with it (Harmer. is often the main focus of the sequence. it defined that minimal pair is a pair of words that differ in a single phoneme. the teacher needed to be flexible in what he or she does as a teacher.8 The Meaning of Minimal Pairs In (Wikipedia. where the teacher may. in particular. 2011:1). feel the need to tell a story. on the spur of the moment.

thick b. 2000:249). Therefore in proposal.think r. long . pink .worn t.thorn p. Examples of minimal pairs in English are the words “fat” and “hat”. rink .thong l.a. The term “minimal pairs” means two words in a language which have different meanings but vary in one sound segment only (Fromkin. wick thick s. Blair & Collin.9 Teaching Listening through Minimal Pair Card Game One of the difficulties faced by a learner in learning English listening is minimal pairs. chin .pick k.word 2.thigh v. third .thin j. This is because mistakes with minimal pairs do not only impair understanding but also can lead students to believe that they understand but in fact they are quite mistaken.tie q. high . thick .beef u.thorn w.song g. thigh . There are many of these in the English language.thick n. but it can also affect their confidence when they try to communicate in English. horn .think h. tick .bye o. leaf – thief c.lick f. thigh . the researcher would like to apply Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. Minimal pairs are a more serious problem than simple poor pronunciation or listening skills on the part of a student.thin e.sick d.third i. thief . thick . thick . pin .bird m. kick . These kinds of mistakes can hamper their conversation skills in the obvious way that they are difficult to understand. 16 . thong . third . thorn . nerd . corn .

When the students have played the game a few times. on the next request.”. Sorry. one student starts by asking one of the other students for a pair to a card they possess. The students then take turns asking each other for cards matching the ones they possess. For example. I don't have it. they should ask for card with. In each group. 2010:2). This will both teach them a useful phrase and encourage them to listen during the other students' turns (Friyer. the student does not have the card they simply say. “Excuse me. she/he gives it to the asking student. This game may be done in groups of two to six. “May I have …… rather than “Do you have ……… ?”. First. the researcher explains about how to teach listening through Minimal Pair Card Game. Then the student who is doing the asking takes a card from the pile in the center and his or her turn is complete. when they ask for the card. the teacher divided the students in groups.. though four members are probably best. as they know that the student whom they are asking has the card in question. “No. As the students understand.Here.(Name of the student they want to ask). do you have a fifteen?” If the student has it. the teacher should improve the effectiveness of the game. If. if a student hears a card being asked for which they have on their turn. Then the teacher gives each student minimal pair cards game. If they do so and they are correct. then the asking student places the newly made pair down and can ask the same student or any other student for another card they possess one of. the teacher gives the explanation about minimal pairs. 17 . they receive an extra turn after making a mistake if they are mistaken they lose a turn. …….

Any students not participating in the exchange must also listen as a card they possess might be mentioned. The difference is there is a certain amount of pressure as there is an actual need to be understood. only they must focus and listen to avoid giving the wrong card. For the students to ensure they receive the card they need for a pair. One might suggest that a simple “repeat after me” exercise with the teacher has the same function. 2010:2). they must pronounce correctly or potentially be misheard and not receive the card or receive the wrong card. The student being asked is in the same situation. giving them an opportunity on their turn to ask for it (Friyer.This simple game is effective because it forces students to focus both on their pronunciation and listening. 18 .

The researcher used qualitative approach because.CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3. The number of students in the class is 34 students.1 Research Design In this research. 19 . There are many parallel classes of the second year students. Furthermore. the researcher collected qualitative data and analyzed the data qualitatively. As it is explained by Subyantoro (2009:8) that classroom action research is a form of systematic and reflective research conducted by educators or teachers by giving certain action to improve and increase the quality of teaching practices in the classrooms in order that those practices become more professional. 3. in this research. The researcher only took the second year students in class VIII-2 as the subject of this research. the researcher designed this research in classroom action research because the objective of this research is to improve the second year students‟ listening comprehension of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. the researcher used qualitative approach which is designed in classroom action research.2 Setting and Subject of the Research This research takes place at SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. The researcher chose classroom action research as the design of this research because in this research. the researcher intended to improve her quality in teaching listening and improve her students‟ listening comprehension in listening minimal pairs. The students were taken as the subject of the research because they had some problems in listening minimal pairs.

OBSERVING  Observing the action through observation form.1 Classroom Action Research Procedure PRELIMINARY STUDY 1. FINDINGS Students have difficulty in distinguishing minimal pairs The students were bored in the process of learning listening because the teacher still used conventional method in teaching listening. IMPLEMENTING  Implementing minimal pair card game in teaching listening. pre-test. questionnaire and the result of post-test for each student. planning. The procedure was described in the following figure: Figure 3. 3. post-tests and questionnaire. so they did not have to be so serious to learn English. Successful Stop Conclusion and Report Unsuccessful Revise the plan and continue to the next cycle Figure 3. ANALYSIS AND REFLECTION  Analyzing the result of observation. observation and reflection. the researcher adapted the procedure of classroom action research that was promoted by Kemmis and Taggart (1998:22). 2.3 Research Procedure Subyantoro (2009:10) explains that action research is done through many repeated cycles in which each cycle consists of four steps.3. In this classroom action research.  Observing the teaching-learning process in pronunciation and giving pre-test to the second year students of SMP NEgeri 2 Peusangan.1. The students assumed that English is a foreign language for them. 1998:22) 20 .  Doing reflection on the result. PLANNING  Preparing the lesson plans instructional materials and research instruments such as observation form. action. The Classroom Action Research (Adapted from Kemmis and Taggart.

3. 3. In this case.3. post-tests and questionnaire.1 Preliminary Study Preliminary study was one of the steps in which the researcher collaborated with the teacher to find some problems that are faced by the teacher and students in the classroom. This step was done before the researcher did this research in the classroom.3 Implementing Implementing is one of steps in classroom action research to conduct the research in the classroom by using the proposed technique to improve students` listening skill. the teacher and researcher tried to find some problems in teaching and learning listening by observing the process of teaching-learning listening and giving pre-test to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in class VIII-2 to know the students‟ basic knowledge in listening minimal pairs. Here. 21 .2 Planning Planning is one of the steps in classroom action research in which the researcher prepared everything for the completion of doing actions in the class like designing a lesson plan. 3. the researcher used minimal pair card game as a technique to improve the students‟ listening comprehension in listening minimal pairs. preparing research instrument such as observation forms.3. specifying the criteria of success and verifying the research schedule.3.

3. The researcher and the teacher could make reflection after accomplishing each cycle of the research. the researcher uses research instruments such observation checklists. questionnaires and tests (pretest and posttest). 1.5 Analysis and Reflection Reflection is one of steps to know whether the result of research can reach the criteria of success or not. This list may have been prepared by the observer or the teacher or both (Sukayati.3. Observation checklists Observation checklist is a list of things that an observer is going to look at when observing a class. 3. 3. The purpose of reflection in this research was to know whether this research could improve students‟ listening comprehension in listening minimal pairs or not. the researcher reflected on the effects of the above steps as a basis evaluation for further planning. Here. Observation checklists give an observer a structure and framework for an observation to get specific information on aspects of 22 . Here. the classroom atmosphere and the advantageous of applying minimal pair cards game in teaching listening. the observer could observe about the students‟ motivation and performance.3.4 Technique of Data Collecting To collect the required data. 2008:29).4 Observing Observing is one of steps in classroom action research in which the researcher acted as the practitioner and the other English teacher observed the researcher in doing the actions in the classroom. subsequent action and so on through a succession of cycles.

questionnaires were administered to the students to complete the information that cannot be attained from observation checklist. intelligence. In this research. skill. 3. In this research. observation checklist is used to obtain data about how the teacher in implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan and gathers data about the students‟ activity during the teaching and learning process. owned by individual or group (Anwar. the researcher used minimal pairs test to measure the improvement of the students‟ ability in listening minimal pair card games. In this research. There were two kinds of tests used in this research. 23 . the researcher tells to the students that questionnaire would influence their score in English subject. Thus.the class. Pretest was used to identify the problems as the basic knowledge to do the research and post-test was used to measure the improvement of the students‟ achievement in listening minimal pairs after giving some actions. Test Test is sequence or list of questions to measure. 2006:225). Questionnaire is very useful to know the students` feeling and response during teaching and learning process. The tests consisted of 20 questions in which each question was scored 5 if it was answered correctly. 2009:30). ability. 2. Questionnaire Questionnaire is list of a research or survey questions asked to respondents. In distributing questionnaires to the students. pre-test and post-test. the students can fill the questionnaire freely and honestly. and designed to extract specific information (Arikunto.

5 Technique of Data Analysis Technique of data analysis is the continuation of the data collecting phase. Quantitative data is in form of students‟ score and it is analyzed descriptively by using descriptive statistics for example searching for students‟ means score. there are two kinds of data collected and analyzed in classroom action research namely qualitative and quantitative data.3. The formula of means score used in this research is described as follows: x   fx N On the contrary. Data analysis is an essential part of a study. Therefore. percentage of successful learning and displaying data in a good way. qualitative data is the data in the form of sentence which obtained from observation checklist and questionnaire like students‟ attitude and motivation during teaching-learning process. Usually. Qualitative data is analyzed qualitatively by taking conclusion from all the qualitative data collected. 24 . a researcher must understand the techniques of data analysis to get reliable and scientific results.

1. implementing. This research was done in two cycles to get more accurate data. In other words. 2011. Preliminary study was done to get information about how far the students` ability in listening minimal pairs before Minimal Pair Card Game was given.1 Application in Cycle 1 The implementation of Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening comprehension to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in cycle 1 was done from Mei 11th.1 Data Presentation The data were collected from the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. The Application of cycle 1 was done through the steps: planning. Each of steps is explained as follow: 25 . observing and reflecting. The researcher had to give pre-test through preliminary study before planning of action in the cycle 1. Application of each cycle involved planning. The researcher found the data through two cycles. three meetings were needed to do the actions in the first cycle in one week.CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4. implementing. 4. The research was done to know whether Minimal Pair Card Game could improve the students‟ ability in listening minimal pairs and to find out the advantages of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. observing and reflecting. 2011 – Mei 19th. The duration of each meeting was 2 x 45 minutes.

Reza Mustafa Kamal Azwar Bahrul Fatzal Doni Saputra M.1 Preliminary Study Preliminary study was held on Mei 12th. Duration of test was 45 minutes. Ridhwan Fauzannur Score 45 40 50 30 40 50 50 26 . In the pre-test. Here. the students were asked to listen to some sentences from listening CD and choose which of the target words has been used in the sentences. After discussing. The score were taken based on listening rubric score.1 The Result of Pre-test No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Name of Students M.4. the researcher met the headmaster of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan to ask permission to do the research in that school by giving a formal letter for research. 2011. the teacher agreed to give pre-test for the students. The students in class VIII-2 were chosen as the sample of the research.1. the researcher met the teacher who would be a partner or a collaborator in this research. In this step. Then. the researcher discussed about the class and teacher.1. 2011 at the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. The result of pre-test can be seen in the following table: Table 4. The pre-test was done on Mei 12th.

Nasir Aulia Dani Hasanuddin Kamaruzzaman Herizal Zulkifli Efendi Zakaria Maulana Faisal Amri Asrif Aditya Gunawan M.8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Anwar Amiruddin Muhammad Syahrullah Karimullah M. Iqbal Ibnu Hajar Mukhlis Mujiburrahmat Zufri 45 45 50 55 45 45 55 45 45 35 50 40 50 45 50 35 55 45 45 40 45 55 50 27 . Rizki Munirwan Mulyadi M.

29 Based on the data found in the pre-test calculated through the formula. In other words. 28 . Where: ̅ = Mean score = Total score of all students N Thus. ̅ = The number of samples = introduced by Winarsunu = = 45.29 and categorized in the level “fair”. the researcher used the formula ̅ = (2002:88).31 32 33 34 Ihsanuddin Rahmatullah Husaini Marzuki 35 55 40 35 Listening Mastery Scale Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 = 76 – 100 = 50 – 75 = 26 – 49 = 0 – 25 = Excellent = Good = Fair = Poor The pre-test was held to find the mean score of students` ability in listening minimal pairs before the students were treated to the action. the result showed that the ability of the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs was still low and had to be improved. To find out the mean score of students. the means score of the students` ability in listening minimal pairs was 45.

the researcher was helped by an English teacher in that school. In preparing the tests. 4. Then. Here. She is a smart and creative teacher. Mr. field notes.2 Planning In planning the action. Implementing of the plan was begun when the researcher and teacher were ready to do the research in the class. Azmi observed the process of implementing the actions that done by the researcher and students during this research. the researcher consulted about the schedule of the research in class with the teacher. Therefore before the researcher implemented the action in the class. the researcher collaborated with an English teacher Mr. the researcher discussed about the lesson plans and technique that would be used to improve the students` ability in listening minimal pairs.3 Implementing and Observing the Plan In classroom action research. While.4. the researcher acted as the teacher in implementing the action to show the teacher how to apply Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching minimal pairs. There were three 29 . there was no a significant problem for the researcher in passing this step. The researcher had to explain about the technique of Minimal Pair Card Game to the teacher before the teacher did action in the class.1. the researcher did modeling session to the teacher so that she could understand the way of teaching listening through Minimal Pair Card Game. Therefore.1. In the modeling session. the researcher taught. and post-test for the first and second cycle were also prepared. Azmi as the observer. questionnaire. some research instruments involved observation checklists.1.1.

know . the researcher told about the purpose of this research and tried to motivate the students in this research. researcher did greeting to the students.say 8. As the students understood about minimal pairs. sheep .meeting in each cycle in which each last meeting of the cycle was used to do posttest. eat . The process of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described in the three teaching phases below: I. The next step was the researcher did observation about teacher`s and students` activities in class.ate 6. 4. led .ship 3.wear 5. the researcher explained how to play minimal pair cards game to the students and divided the students in groups. One group consisted of four students.lid 7.had 2. the researcher gave the explanation about minimal pairs. see .3.1. 2011. were .knew 4. Then. my . In this meeting. Pre-Teaching Activity First. Hat. the researcher gave each student minimal pair cards game. The list of minimal pairs that were used in playing minimal pair cards game in the first meeting was as listed below: 1.1. Then.may 30 .1 First Meeting First meeting was conducted on Thursday May 12th.

one student starts by asking one of the other students for a pair to a card they had. Amir! Do you have “a fifteen”? If the student has it. will. Post-Teaching Activity In the post teaching activity. Sorry. they could say. After that. In each group.9.3. I don't have it. For example “Excuse me. the student did not have the card. pull – pool II. The process of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described in the three teaching phases below: 31 . In this game the winner was the students who could find their cards pair as soon as possible. he gives it to the asking student.1.1. “No. the researcher firstly taught the students how to read the minimal pairs that written in the minimal pair cards. then the asking student placed the newly made pair down. the researcher asked the students to take turn asking each other for cards matching the cards they had.2 Second Meeting The second meeting was conducted on Saturday Mei 14th. The asking students also could ask the same student or any other student for other cards they had. III.well 10. 2011. If on the next request.”. the researcher corrected the students‟ errors that made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading “Alfatihah” 4. Main-Teaching Activity In the main teaching activity.

the researcher asked the students to play the game.mood 7. III. The list of minimal pairs that were used the second meeting is written below: 1. in the pre-teaching activity.I. fill. by.bit 5. bet . for – fur 10. wait. After that the researcher wrote new list of minimal pairs on the board and then taught the students how to read the words. the researcher corrected the students‟ errors that made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading prayer together.how 3. Post-Teaching Activity In the post teaching activity. chip – cheep II. There were two students who were absent on that day. been. In this meeting. They were well-organized and very cooperative in playing the game.bay 2. Main-Teaching Activity As the students understood the way to read words of minimal pairs above. the researcher greeted the students and checked their attendance list.fell 4. bad – bat 9. 32 .wet 6. mode . Pre-Teaching Activity As usual. who.bin 8. the students looked very enthusiastic and active in playing the game.

1. Nasir Score 65 50 50 65 50 50 55 55 55 70 55 50 60 55 69 55 33 . Therefore. Rizki Munirwan Mulyadi M. no one was absent in this meeting. the post -test was held to evaluate whether the students` ability in listening minimal pairs could be improved or not. 1.3. 2011.3 Third Meeting Third meeting was conducted on Thursday Mei 19th. In this meeting. Ridhwan Fauzannur Anwar Amiruddin Muhammad Syahrullah Karimullah M.4.2 The Result of Post-test in Cycle 1 No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Name of Students M. The result of post-test can be seen as follows: Table 4. Reza Mustafa Kamal Azwar Bahrul Fatzal Doni Saputra M.

34 . 2008:12).17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Aulia Dani Hasanuddin Kamaruzzaman Herizal Zulkifli Efendi Zakaria Maulana Faisal Amri Asrif Aditya Gunawan M. Iqbal Ibnu Hajar Mukhlis Mujiburrahmat Zufri Ihsanuddin Rahmatullah Husaini Marzuki 45 50 55 65 50 70 50 65 50 65 70 45 55 75 50 50 65 60 Listening Mastery Scale 1 = 96 – 100 = Excellent 2 = 85 – 94 = Very Good 3 = 71 – 84 = Good 4 = 56 – 70 = Fair 5 = 51 – 55 = Low 6 = 25 – 50 = Very Low (Depdiknas.

In this case the researcher together with the teacher did reflection based on predetermined criteria of success.1.The post – test in the first cycle was done to find the mean score of students` ability in listening minimal pairs after the students were treated through minimal pair card game. 4. the average score of students` in listening minimal pairs was 57.1.4 Reflecting This was the last step done in cycle 1. = Mean score = Total score of all students N Thus. In addition.17 Based on the data found in the post-test calculated through the formula. it showed that the score of the teacher‟s performance in teaching listening through minimal pair card game was in level 2 (fair). Based on the result of observation checklists for the teacher. Furthermore the result of observation checklists for the students in learning listening through minimal pair card game was also in level 2(fair). It was done to determine whether the cycle 1 was success or not. The score 57. The Analysis process consisted of the evaluation of researcher‟s performance in teaching listening through minimal pair card game and the students‟ performance in learning listening through minimal pair card game.17 was categorized in the level “fair”. To find out the mean score of students` ability in listening. the researcher used the formula ̅ = Where: ̅ introduced by Winarsunu (2002:88). ̅ = The number of samples = = = 57. based on the result of questionnaires distributed to 35 .17.

The product of teaching and learning in the first cycle can be seen the following table: Table 4. Motivated Students  Observation Checklist  Questionnaires Non-test Yes 3. the students had not showed their improvement yet in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students‟ average score in the post-test done in the first cycle was only 57.17 (fair) Source Students Instrument Observation Checklist Non-test 2. Students Post-test Test Yes 36 .3 Product of Teaching and Learning Process in Cycle 1 based on Criteria of Success Technique of data collection No Yes Yes No 1.the students. although the students were still confused about the knowledge of minimal pairs in first meeting. it showed that almost all of students had good motivation in learning listening through minimal pair card game. Criteria of success Actively involved Data  Commenting  Responding  Questioning Almost all of students are active and have good motivation. Even though the students‟ posttest average score was not qualified to the criteria of success. however it was higher than the students‟ average score in the pre-test. Students` ability in listening minimal pairs had improved. After doing some actions in the first cycle. The mean score of posttest is 57. while the qualified average score demanded in this research was higher than 65.

4. the researcher revised it to the second cycle. It means the teacher missed some teaching procedures as described in the lesson plan. The class was not boring Class  Observation Checklist  Questionnaires Non-test No Yes From the result of the analysis. Teaching and learning process. 2011. the researcher concluded that the first cycle was considered failed because the findings of the first cycle had not met the criteria of success. Second.Thursday Mei 28th. And the last. 37 . The implementation of Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in cycle 2 was done from Friday Mei 20th. implementing. observing and reflecting. First. 2011 The Application of cycle 2 was also done through the steps: planning. 4. Not very welldone.1. the students‟ average score in the post-test in the first cycle was 57 and it was not qualified to the average score demanded in the criteria of success. From the explanation above. it was necessary for the researcher to revise it to the next cycle. only 60 % of the students were enthusiastic and actively involved during the learning and teaching process. Therefore.2 Application in Cycle 2 Since the first cycle was failed. the teacher‟s performance in teaching listening minimal pair card game was considered fair. the researcher found that the result of the first cycle have not reached all the criteria of success.

the researcher did the action and Mr. It means the teacher observed the actions that was done by the researcher. Implementing and observing the action were done all at once. In this activity. The list of minimal pairs that were used in playing minimal pair cards game in this meeting was as listed below: 38 . The three teaching phases are described below: I.1. Each group consisted of four students.2 Implementing and Observing the Plan In this step. In planning the action.2. the teacher divided the students in groups and gave each student minimal pair cards game. After that the teacher introduced the students the new list of minimal pairs that would be used in the meeting.2. After all the students had understood how to read the minimal pairs. then.4.1. Pre-Teaching Activity In this activity. 4.1. 4. questionnaires and tests. 2011. researcher also implemented the actions in three teaching phases. In this meeting. the researcher also designed lesson plan and specified the criteria of success.2. Implementing and observing the action in second cycle were divided in three meetings as in the first cycle. the researcher and the teacher prepared the research instruments like observation checklists. the researcher reviewed the previous lesson about minimal pairs.1 Planning Planning or planning the action was done on Friday Mei 20th. Azmi acted as observer. 2011.2.1 First Meetings The first meeting in the second cycle was conducted on Saturday Mei 21st.

1. mat math 5. The process of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described in the three teaching phases below: 39 . bag badge 4. teeth . After the all the students had played the minimal pair card game. math map 6. two tooth 9. then den II. III. this kiss 10. Post-Teaching Activity In the post teaching activity.2 Second Meeting The second meeting in the second cycle was conducted on Thursday Mei 26th. patch .2.1. the researcher asked the students to start playing minimal pair card game. the researcher asked each student to make some sentences based on the words of minimal pairs that they had already learnt from the game. 2011. tent tenth 8. back black 7. Main-Teaching Activity In the main teaching activity. In this meeting.tea 2. most of the students looked very happy because most of them had already understood the knowledge of minimal pairs.3.path 3. the researcher corrected the students‟ errors that made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading “Alfatihah” 4.

Ship – sheep 5. Chick – cheek 3. Copy – coffee 10. III. Main-Teaching Activity As the students understood the way to read words of minimal pairs above.I. Lip – leap 4. the researcher asked the students to play the game. the researcher corrected the students‟ errors that made by the students during playing the game and then the researcher closed the class by reading prayer together. the researcher wrote new list of minimal pairs on the board and then the researcher taught the students how to read the words. Pat – fat 9. Post-Teaching Activity In the post teaching activity. first. In this meeting. Pick – peek 6. the researcher greeted the students and checked their attendance list. Rest – west 8. They were well-organized and very cooperative in playing the game. 40 . There were one students who was absent on that day. Slip – sleep 2. After that. almost all students looked very eager and active in playing the game. Pan –fan II. The list of minimal pairs that were used the second meeting is written below: 1. Ring – wing 7. Pre-Teaching Activity As usual.

Ridhwan Fauzannur Anwar Amiruddin Muhammad Syahrullah Karimullah M. The result of post-test in the second cycle can be seen as follows: Table 4. 2011.4 The Result of Post-test in Cycle 2 No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Name of Students M. no one of the students was absent.3 Third Meeting Third meeting was conducted on Saturday Mei 28th. 1. Nasir Score 75 80 65 65 70 75 75 75 65 70 65 60 60 65 69 60 41 . In this meeting. Rizki Munirwan Mulyadi M.4.3.2. the researcher did post -test to evaluate whether the students` ability in listening minimal pairs had improved or not. In this meeting. Reza Mustafa Kamal Azwar Bahrul Fatzal Doni Saputra M.

2008:12). Iqbal Ibnu Hajar Mukhlis Mujiburrahmat Zufri Ihsanuddin Rahmatullah Husaini Marzuki 65 80 65 65 80 70 70 65 70 65 70 65 70 75 85 75 80 75 Listening Mastery Scale 1 = 96 – 100 = Excellent 2 = 85 – 94 = Very Good 3 = 71 – 84 = Good 4 = 56 – 70 = Fair 5 = 51 – 55 = Low 6 = 25 – 50 = Very Low (Depdiknas. 42 .17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Aulia Dani Hasanuddin Kamaruzzaman Herizal Zulkifli Efendi Zakaria Maulana Faisal Amri Asrif Aditya Gunawan M.

In addition. Based on the result of observation checklists for the teacher in cycle 2.1.11 Based on the calculation above.11 and it was categorized in the level “good”.The post-test in the second cycle was done to find the mean score of students` ability in listening minimal pairs after the students were treated through minimal pair card game. the researcher used the formula ̅ = introduced by Winarsunu (2002:88). The Analysis process consisted of the evaluation of teacher‟s performance in teaching listening through minimal pair card game and the students‟ performance in learning listening through minimal pair card game.2. = Mean score = Total score of all students N Thus. It was done to determine whether the cycle 2 was successful or not. the researcher together with the teacher did reflection based on predetermined criteria of success. it showed that the score of the teacher‟s performance in teaching listening through minimal pair card game was in level 3 (good). ̅ = The number of samples = = Where: ̅ = 70. based on the result of 43 .4 Reflecting This was the last step done in cycle 2. the researcher found that the students‟ average scre in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70. Furthermore the result of observation checklists for the students in learning listening through minimal pair card game in cycle 2 was also in level 3 (good). 4. In this case. To find out the students‟ average score.

4 Product of Teaching and Learning Process in Cycle 2 based on Criteria of Success Technique of data collection Non-test Yes Yes Yes No 1. Motivated Students  Observation Non-test Checklist  Questionnaires Yes 3. Criteria of success Actively involved Data  Commenting  Responding  Questioning Almost all of students are active and have motivation. Students Post-test Test Yes 44 .11. it showed that almost all of students had good motivation in learning listening through minimal pair card game and they had a good attitude to the researcher in the process of learning listening through minimal pair card game. Students` ability in listening minimal pairs had improved. while the qualified average score demanded in this research was higher than 65.questionnaires distributed to the students.11 Source Instrument Students Observation Checklist 2. the students had showed their improvement in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students‟ average score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70. The product of teaching and learning in the first cycle can be seen the following table: Table 4. The mean score of posttest is 71. After revising the first cycle to the second cycle.

the teacher‟s performance in teaching listening minimal pair card game was good. From the explanation above. The evident can be seen from the mean score of post – test in first cycle (57.11 and it was qualified to the average score demanded in the criteria of success. Well-done Class is not boring. Class  Observation Checklist  Questionnaires Non-test Yes Yes From the result of the analysis. Teaching and learning process. And the last. 75 % of the students were enthusiastic and actively involved during the learning and teaching process.17) which was bigger than the mean score of pre – test (45. Second. However. the students were motivated in the process of learning listening minimal pairs through minimal pairs card game by showing their good behavior or attitude.29).2 Discussion The result of the first cycle showed that the students were not very actively involved in teaching and learning process. Even though the 45 . It means the researcher followed almost all teaching procedures as described in the lesson plan. First. 4.4. the ability of the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs has successfully improved. Besides. the researcher concluded that the second cycle was considered successful because the findings of the second cycle had already met all the criteria of success. the students‟ average score in the post-test in the second cycle was 70. Therefore. it was not necessary for the researcher to revise it to the next cycle. the researcher found that the result of the second cycle had already met all criteria of success in this research.

it was proven that teaching listening through minimal pair card game could improve students` ability in listening minimal pairs. the researcher revised it to the second cycle. Thus. The students also felt more comfortable in the process of learning listening through minimal pair card game. The result of second cycle was different from the result of first cycle.students‟ means score in post-test was higher then the students‟ menas score in pretest but the students‟ means score in post-test was not qualified to the means score demanded in the criteria of success 65. Because of the first cycle was categorized failed. In the second cycle. In addition the students‟ means score in post-test done in the second cycle was higher than the students‟ means score in the post-test done in the first cycle. 46 . comments and questions. Therefore. students showed that they were more interested in learning listening through minimal pair card game. based on data found from the second cycle. The students‟ means score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70. Furthermore the teacher‟s performance in teaching listening through minimal pairs was better than the teacher‟s performance in the first cycle.11. It was evident from the students‟ responses. the researcher stated that the implementation of minimal pair cards game to improve the students‟ listening ability in listening minimal pairs in the first cycle text had not reached all the criteria of success.

2. After revising the first cycle to the second cycle. The students felt more enjoyable and comfortable in the process of learning listening through minimal pair card game. had showed their improvement in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students average score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70. while the qualified score demanded in criteria of success was higher than 65. 3.2 Suggestion Based on the conclusion above. Teacher should introduce other kind of games in teaching English to the students because games can create the class atmosphere become more comfortable and fun. 5. it is suggested to the: 1. the students. Minimal pair card game improved the second year students` ability of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs.CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION 5.1 Conclusion Based on research findings. 4. the researcher could conclude as follows: 1. 2. Teacher should use minimal pair card game as a technique in teaching listening especially listening minimal pairs to improve the students‟ listening skill. The students‟ response toward minimal pair card game was very good because this technique could help them in listening comprehension especially in comprehending minimal pairs. 47 .11.

Teacher should give motivation to the students by doing interaction with students so they will not be bored in teaching and learning process. 5. 48 . 4. Students should be active and always pay attention to the teacher`s explanation during learning process.3. Other researcher should keep on doing research on this topic at the school to improve English education especially in listening skill.

49 .

2010. Minimal Pair Card Game. New York: Harcout Brace. 2006.. Subyantoro. 2009:30. XI. Sydney: Harcourt Australia Pty Limited. L. The Internet TESL Journal. Semarang: Universitas Diponogoro.org/listening). Accessed 12th March. Suharsimi. 2010 Mahdalena. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Valette. Understanding in Second Language Learning. An Introduction to Language. London:Longman. Collins. Jakarta. Penyusunan Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Barker. Communication. Scarcella. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Swarbric. Brown. (2000). Fromkin. Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary. Vol. D.org/. 2008. The Practice of English Language Teaching. No. Teaching English: Oxford Cambridge University Press Sukayati.. 1998. 1994. London: Routledge.BIBLIOGRAPHY Arikunto. New Jersey.Erlangga Subyantoro (2009:8). 1987. Teaching Modern Language.C. 2010 http://iteslj. Accessed 12th March. Jeremy. Fryer. Anwar. 9. Language Learning: London: Heinle 50 . Ann. P. Lucy. 1998. . 1977. 2008.com. 2010.S. Prentice Hall Blair. R. September. 2009. Yogyakarta: Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidikan dan Kependidikan. Harmer. J.1995. Maureen: http://www. Jakarta: Penerbit Rineka Cipta. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. 2010. Pollard. 1998. Saricoban (http://iteslj.. Classroom Technique: Foreign Language and English as a Second Language. Improving listening through Movie. V. Hornby.achieveyourdreamcoaching. Unpublished Thesis: State University of Malang. Allen Edward David & Rebecca M.D. A. Manajemen Penelitian.

M.Valette. New York: Harcout Brace Javanovich. Modern Language Testing. Rebecca. Inc. 1989. 51 .

the implementation of minimal pair card game to improve students’ listening comprehension (a classroom action research at the second year students of Smp Negeri 2 Peusangan) THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINIMAL PAIR CARD GAME TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ LISTENING COMPREHENSION (A Classroom Action Research at the Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan) Thesis Submitted to the English Department of FKIP Almuslim University in the Fulfillment of Requirement for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan By NASRIAH NIM: 080202331 52 .

Bandung: Rineka Cipta. 1991. Englewood Diff: Prentice Hall. 1981.1974. New York: Harcout Brace Javanovich. Allen Edward David & Rebecca M. Paivio.FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF ALMUSLIM MATANGGLUMPANGDUA. 1977. Inc. Classroom Technique: Foreign Language and English as a Second Language. Finocchiaro.R. Mary. 1998. Inc. Arikunto. Ebel. English as a Second Language from Theory to Practice. Frisbie. BIREUEN 2011 Allan. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Psychology of Language. Suharsimi. 53 . Robert & David A. Prosedur Penelitian. Valette. Inc. Essentials of Educational Measurement.

Richards C. Effective Class Management. 1995. Rebecca. 1989. Little. Techniques in Testing. Jack. English as a Language Learning in South Africa. Van de Walt. Jack & Theodore S Rodgers. Kelly.New York: Regents Publishing Company.R. Marry. L. Qualitative Data Analysis. vol 6. Underwood. Krashen. Newbury House. L. Dianne & Freeman. Modern Language Testing. Penelitian Pengajaran Bahasa. English Language Teaching Approaches and Methods Techniques. 1976. Language Education Magazine Volume 6. Stephen..Kelly. Teachable Moments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.. Matthew & Michael Huberman. New York: Sage Publication Inc. Geeta. Language Awareness Magazine. 1976. Wood.1995. 1983. 1994. Saleh. New York. Evaluation of Students’ Acvhievement. Centuries of Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. GBPP Muatan Lokal Sekolah Dasar Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Intro to Linguistics.td. Jakarta: Depdikbud. 1987. Valette M. Hornby. Ramelan 1992. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. London: Merrill Publishing Company. Yogjakarta: Yayasan Penerbitan Fakultas Psikologi UGM. Great Britain: St Edmunbury Press. The Sociolinguistics of Learning and Using Non Native Language. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press. London.. Bruce W. Tinambunan. New York: Harcout Brace Jovanovich.S. 1980. Semarang: Kanwil Depdikbud Jawa Tengah. 1986. Semarang:IKIP Semarang Press. Language Awareness and the Autonomous of Language Learner.Inc. Miles B.. David. Larsen. 1989. Harold. 54 . London: Longman. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Inc. Gay. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. 1996. Hadi. Sutrisno. 1987. Educational Research Competence for Analysis and Application. Wendy & Lisbeth H. 1997. 43 44 Littlewood. 1989. T. Tuckman. 1990. London: Longman.William. Peter & Bob Jefrey. GBPP. 1996. Madsen S. 1984. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foreign and Second Language Learning. A. Massachusetts. W.. New York: Harcout Brace Javanovich. USA. 1994. Language Acquisition and Second Language Education.td. Pretice Hall International. 1988. 1978. Metodologi Research. Christa. Rowley: Newbury House. Richards C. Teaching English to Children. Mursid. Scott A. Conducting Educational Research. Calcutta: Sangam Book L. D. Nagaraj. Ytreberg. 2001. Oxford University Press. Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary. G.

55 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful