THE EFFECT OF TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE (TPR) METHOD ON STUDENTS’

SPEAKING ACHIEVEMENT; A CASE OF NINETH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMPN 1

KABAWO
WA ODE SITTI WARDANI
A1D2 14 054
Abstract:
This study aims to find out whether there is any significant effect of Total Physical
Response (TPR) method on students’ speaking achievement or not. The research question
formulated “is there any significant effect of Total Physical Response (TPR) method on students’
speaking achievement.” This study applied quasi experimental design by using two classes,
namely: experimental class and control class that given post-test after teaching by the TPR
method and conventional method. The sample of this study is the nineth grade students of SMPN
1 Kabawo who are registered in academic year 2017/2018. This study conducts from February,
19th to March 9th, 2018. The instrument used for collecting data is oral test and the data is
analyzed by using descriptive statistic and inferential statistic that are counting in SPSS 16.0.
The findings show that the students speaking score in experimental score is higher than the
students speaking score in control class. It is because the students who taught by TPR method is
easy to speak up in front of the classroom because they have enough knowledge of vocabulary,
so it supports the students to speak orally based on their own idea and don’t focused on
memorize the context that they want to speak up. However, teaching by using a real object can
make the students don’t learn by imagine something that they will do than teaching speaking
without real object where the students just imagine what they will do without see the real object.
It is proved by the comparison of the mean score from control class and experimental class,
where the mean score in control class is 2.23 and the mean score in experimental class is 3.12.
Besides, the gain score from control class to experimental class are 0.88. Furthermore, the effect
size of the study is 0.6 and it indicates that there is any significant effect of teaching speaking by
using Total Physical Response (TPR) method on students’ speaking achievement at the nineth
grade students of SMPN 1 Kabawo.
KEYWORDS: Speaking, Teaching speaking, Total Physical Response (TPR) method

A. INTRODUCTION
Speaking is one of the skills that have to be mastered by students in learning English.
Speaking is an essential tool for communication. Chaney (1998) stated that speaking is the
process of construction and involvement sense through the usage of verbal and non-verbal
symbols, in a diversity of contexts. Brown and Yule (1983) said that speaking is the ability
which the students will be given scored most in the real life. It is because the students do the
activity in their daily life. So that, the teacher must prepare the students as much as possible to
make communication in English in their daily life that relate with their activity in real life.
Cameron (2001) stated that speaking is the active use of language to express meaning so
that the other can make sense of them. It can be said that speaking is an activity to express
meaning in oral so that the listener can get the point and understand the meaning of the speech.
Chaney (1998) in Kayi (2006) argues that speaking is the process of construction and distribution
meaning through the use of non-verbal symbols in a diversity of situations. Actually, speaking is
a crucial part in language learning. So that, the speaker needs to produce the target language in
the spoken form by using body language.
For many years, teaching speaking has been undervalued and English teacher continue
the teaching process that focus on repetition drill and memorize of dialogue. In this case, the
teacher must improve students communicative in speaking. Because of that, the students can
express their speaking that appropriate with the social contexts which appropriate in
communication. Brown (2004) stated that to produce productive performance in speaking, the
oral or written idea must be specific to produce output within an expected range or performance
such that scoring or rating procedures apply appropriately. It can be simply said that input factor
will give influences in the output so that students’ performance must be acceptable for every
speaking activities.
In learning speaking, the students sometimes find some problems to make a
communication well. Piccolo (2010) said that one speaking problem faced by the students
occurred because they worried about making mistake, getting critic or losing face in front of the
class. It is because the students come from the different background that has many kinds of
language in their village. The first language can make them feel difficult to say something in
English. So that, the students shy to make a communication because the students can’t pronounce
English well. This statement is supported by Kartini (2010) who said that anxiety about
constructing errors when speaking in front of class is the problem faced by the students. And
according to Tsiplakides (2009) students who display communication nervousness do not feel
comfortable communicating in the target language in front of others, due to their limited
knowledge of the language, especially in relation to speaking skill. Not only that, the students
sometimes lack in motivation to learn English because the students think that English isn’t
important for them and it is difficult for them to use English in their daily conversation. These
problems come because the teaching method, strategy, technique and media in learning English
especially speaking isn’t interesting for the students.
There are some activities that can be done by the teacher in the teaching of speaking.
Kayi (2006) argues that discussion and reporting are good activities to promote speaking.
According to Kayi (2006), “in discussion activity learners will arrive at a conclusion, share ideas
about an even, or find solutions in their discussion groups”. Before having discussion, teacher
will give instruction for learners so they will know what they are going to do in their discussion
groups. In reporting activity, learners will report the result of their discussion also their activities
when they complete their task in their group to the whole class. This activity provides learners to
talk with others in their group by sharing knowledge.

B. LITERATURE REVIEW
Definition of Speaking
Cameron (2001) stated that speaking is the active use of language to express meaning so
that the other can make sense of them. It can be said that speaking is an activity to express
meaning in oral so that the listener can get the point and understand the meaning of the speech.
Chaney (1998) in Kayi (2006) argues that speaking is the process of construction and distribution
meaning through the use of non-verbal symbols in a diversity of situations. Actually, speaking is
a crucial part in language learning. So that, the speaker needs to produce the target language in
the spoken form by using body language. It means that, the listener can easily to understand what
the speaker said. Moreover, Pratt, Pulverness, & Williams (2005) said that to produce the target
language in oral, the speaker must express the meaning to the other people.

Teaching of Speaking
For many years, teaching speaking has been undervalued and English teacher continue
the teaching process that focus on repetition drill and memorize of dialogue. In this case, the
teacher must improve students communicative in speaking. Because of that, the students can
express their speaking that appropriate with the social contexts which appropriate in
communication.
Brown (2004) stated that to produce productive performance in speaking, the oral or
written idea must be specific to produce output within an expected range or performance such
that scoring or rating procedures apply appropriately. It can be simply said that input factor will
give influences in the output so that students’ performance must be acceptable for every speaking
activities.
There are some activities that can be done by the teacher in the teaching of speaking.
Kayi (2006) argues that discussion and reporting are good activities to promote speaking.
According to Kayi (2006), “in discussion activity learners will arrive at a conclusion, share ideas
about an even, or find solutions in their discussion groups”. Before having discussion, teacher
will give instruction for learners so they will know what they are going to do in their discussion
groups. In reporting activity, learners will report the result of their discussion also their activities
when they complete their task in their group to the whole class. This activity provides learners to
talk with others in their group by sharing knowledge.
Principle of Teaching Speaking
In the communication model of language teaching, the teacher helps the students in real
life communication. The teachers help their students to develop the speaking ability. According
to Nunan (2003), there are some principles for teaching speaking namely:
a. Give students practice with both fluency and accuracy
The students must be given opportunities to improve their fluency as well as accuracy.
Accuracy means using the target language correctly and fluency is using language quickly and
confidently. The teacher should not emphasize on any one aspect of speaking. Students must be
getting practice on both accuracy and fluency.
b. Use group work or pair work
To improve students speaking ability, the students must be given enough opportunities to
speak in class. Therefore, teacher’s talk time will be less and students talk time will be more.
According to Nunan (2003), pair work or group work can be used to increase the amount of the
time that learners get to speak in target language during lesson. Supported by that statement, the
students can be sharing information with other students to improve the speaking ability.
Implementing activities in speaking teaching, teachers must understand the procedures to
accommodate the above activities in speaking. Procedures that can be done for these activities,
teachers explain and give instructions before telling students in discussion. Instructions will help
students do the work in their discussion group because they can know what they are going to do.
By understanding their task, students will be involved in task activities. They will be divided into
small groups or in pairs to do their work. Students will talk more about expressing and sharing
ideas with other friends during the discussion. In the reporting activities, students will report the
results of their discussion to the class.

Definition of Total Physical Response (TPR) Method

James Asher, a professor of psychology at San Jose state University, introduced the idea
of teaching language were using TPR (Total Physical Response) over forty years ago. His first
paper on TPR (Asher, 1965) explained how language can be taught using commands: the teacher
gives a command, models the movement, and the students perform the action. TPR is a language
learning method which is based on the coordination of speech and action. In TPR classroom,
students respond to commands that require physical movement.
According to James Ashers (1969), Total Physical Response (TPR) is a method of
teaching language using physical movement to react to verbal input in order to reduce student
inhibitions and lower their effective filter. Richard and Rodgers (1986) state that TPR is a
language teaching method built around the coordination of speech and action; it attempts to teach
language through physical (motor) activity. Garcia (2001) explains that the two very important
concepts in TPR are the notion of Total Physical Response involvement and the role played by
the right hemisphere of the brain in learning a second language by action.
The first concept deals with the idea of introducing second language by giving action
response which has been influenced by the way people acquire their first language. A baby will
not memorize a list of words or try to speak immediately. They just listen first to the other family
members and then act or do thing in response to their utterances. In the next period he would
speak if he was ready to. The second one relates to the brain hemisphere. Our brain is divided
into two parts, left and right hemispheres. Scientists had found that the left and the right
hemisphere were two independent neurogical entities having different functions both account for
different responsibilities (Garcia, 2001:1)
Garcia explains further that the TPR approach is a right brain method of learning a
language because the language is taught mainly through actions. In the other words, commands
play as the core of the course. From the explanation above, the writer concludes that TPR places
more emphasis on the link between word and action. The activity, where a command is given in
the imperative and the learners obey the command, is the main activity of TPR. Therefore, it will
be easier for the students to recall the words they have learned if they use their body in learning
speaking items. The powerful method of TPR is best applied to introduce new vocabulary and
new grammatical feature at any level. TPR can be varied in any different activities such as
storytelling, dialogue, games, or a pattern drill.

The Principle of Total Physical Response (TPR) Method

Before applying the TPR method for teaching English, a teacher should understand the
principles of TPR goodly, so the researcher will be able to use it properly in the teaching learning
process. Diana Larsen and Freeman (2000) describe some principles in teaching learning process
by using TPR. The principles of TPR as follow:
a. Meaning in the target language can be delivered by action.
It means that in TPR to point out the meaning in the target language, the students perform an
action.
b. Retention is enhanced when learners respond physically.
It means that when student respond the target language physically automatically the meaning
of the target language can be saved in memory.
c. Feelings of success and low anxiety facilitate learning.
It means that in TPR method the students focused on the speech and action so that it can
make them feel comfortable in learning process and it can make the learning material is easy to
understand.
d. Listening comprehension comes first. Students will speak when they are ready.
It means that in TPR method the students begin with listen what teacher said and they respond
it physically. After that, the students begin to speak because they have more knowledge that has
saved in memory.

Total Physical Response (TPR) Method in Speaking

According to Visia, Djasmi, and Sukirlan in their journal entitled “Peningkatan
Keterampilan Berbicara Bahasa Inggris Melalui Metode total Physical Response Pada Siswa
Kelas 3 Sd Negeri Di Kota Bandar Lampung” said that in TPR method, students are not force to
speak directly, otherwise teachers wait until students acquire sufficient language through
listening until they start speaking spontaneously. In particular, Asher said that the best learners
internalize the language when they respond with physical movement as a sign that they
understand and understand about the lessons given.
In order to, all class members to engage in speech-learning activities, keep in mind that
the nature of speech is related to other speaking activities such as listening, reading, and writing
and subject. Thus, speaking should pay attention to two-way and functional communication. The
task of the educator is to develop the teaching of speech so that the class activities are dynamic,
live and enthused by the child so that it really feels as a necessity to prepare themselves for the
community. In order to achieve this, in the course of speaking should be noted several factors,
such as speaker, listener, and subject.

C. METHOD
The method used in this study was descriptive quantitative method. The design of this
study was quasi experimental design. It design which apply in two classes that is given post-test
after treatment. And to know the prior knowledge of the students, researcher asks the English
students score in Raport Book.
There are two variables in this study, namely; independent and dependent variable.
a. Independent Variable
The independent variable of this study was the effect of Total Physical Response (TPR)
method. The independent variable was symbolized with X.
b. Dependent Variable
The dependent variable of the study was students’ speaking achievement. The dependent
variable was symbolized with Y.
The population in this study was all the nineth grade students of SMPN 1 Kabawo who
registered in academic year 2017/2018. The nineth grade students were grouped into nine classes
(IX-A, IX-B, IX-C, IX-D, IX-E, IX-F, IX-G, IX-H, IX-I). The total population is about 195
students. In taking the sample, the researcher applied purposive sampling technique. The sample
of this study was two classes, namely: class IX-A which consists of 22 students and IX-B which
consists of 22 students.
In this study, the researcher used test as the instrument. The test was oral test where the
students performed in front of the class and the researcher took the video of each students. The
speaking test would use in post-test.
The researcher collected the data by giving a test to the students. The test is an oral test
that the purpose was to assessed the students’ speaking achievement. In collecting the data, the
researcher also will used video to assess the students’ speaking performance. The test consists of
post-test only.

D. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Result of Pilot Study
The pilot study is conducted at Class IXC of SMPN 1 Kabawo on February 19th 2018. It
is conducted to know the effectiveness of time allocation of the instrument that the researcher
used and also to check inter rater agreement. From the result of pilot study, the researcher finds
that the time allocation for doing the instrument in the classroom is enough 3 minutes each
students. So that, in doing the instrument the researcher spent time in 66 minutes for all students
in the classroom.
In dealing with the scale of speaking test used in this study, the researcher try to make an
agreement and fix the same perception with the English teacher. Researcher tries to assess 10
students with the English teacher to see the correlation between the score. The result of pilot
study show that both raters have a high inter rater agreement in giving score to the students based
on the students’ score classification provided by Ur (1996).

Post-test
1.Experimental Class
The description below is the result from students’ score on post-test in experimental class.
The result of students’ post-test score was measured by using band score from Ur (1996) which
involves accuracy and fluency. The result of students’ speaking achievement on post-test in
experimental class can be seen in the following table:
 Table: Students’ Score on Post-test in Experimental Class

No. Students’ Score Frequency Percentage (%)

1. 2 3 13,6

2. 2,25 2 9,1

3. 2,5 1 4,5

4. 3 8 36,4

5. 3,25 1 4,5

6. 3,5 1 4,5

7. 3,75 2 9,1

8. 4 1 4,5

9. 4,25 2 9,1

10. 5 1 4,5

Total 22 100.

Mean 3.1250

Standard Deviation .80456

Minimum 2

Maximum 5

The table above shows the result of students’ score on post-test in experimental class. As
can be seen from the table above, the maximum score is 5 and the minimum score is 2. Both
scores show the significance improvement on students’ speaking achievement. Moreover, the
students’ score on post-test show that most of students get moderate criteria. The mean score of
the above data is 3.1250 which are classified as moderate category. After calculating the data,
Total Physical Response (TPR) method in teaching speaking can increase students’ speaking
achievement. The detail distribution of students’ post-test is described below:
 Table: Distribution of Students’ Score on Post-test in Experimental Class

No. Composition Interval Score Frequency Percentage

Category (%)

1. Very Good 5 1 4,5

2. Good 4 3 13,6

3. Moderate 3 12 54,6

4. Poor 2 6 27,3

5. Very Poor 1 0 0

TOTAL 22 100 %

The table above shows the distribution of students’ post-test in experimental class. From
the table above, the researcher finds that there is one student have the highest score which
classified as very good (5). It has clear from the table above that the highest percentage of
students’ score on post-test in experimental class got 0 % which classified as very poor criteria.
Meanwhile, 13.6 % students get score 4 which classified as good criteria, 54.6 % get score 4
which classified as moderate criteria and 27.3 % students get score 2 which classified as poor
criteria. This result indicates that there is a great effect of teaching speaking by using Total
Physical Response (TPR) method.

2. Control Class
The description below is the result of students’ score on post-test in control class. The
detail explanation is shown in the following table:
Table: Students’ Score on Post-test in Control Class

No. Students’ Score Frequency Percentage (%)

1. 1 3 13,7

2. 1,25 1 4,5

3. 1,5 2 9,1

4. 2 1 4,5

5. 2,25 6 27,3
 6. 2,5 1 4,5

7. 2,75 2 9,1

8. 3 5 22,8

9. 3,5 1 4,5

Total 22 100.

Mean 2.2386

Standard Deviation .74991

Minimum 1

Maximum 3,5

The table above shows the result of students’ post-test in control class. As can be seen
from the table, the maximum score is 3,5. Meanwhile, the minimum score of students’ post-test
is 1. By looking both scores, it can be concluded that students’ score of post-test in control class
are in very poor criteria and the minority students get moderate criteria. It means that the
students’ score in post-test in experimental class is higher than the students’ score on post-test in
control class. Furthermore, the mean score is 2.2386 which classified as poor category.
Therefore, it indicates that teaching speaking by using conventional method don’t increase
students’ speaking achievement in the class. The detail distribution of students’ post-test score is
presented below:

Table: Distribution of Students’ Post-test Score in Control Class

No. Composition Interval Score Frequency Percentage

Category (%)

1. Very Good 5 0 0

2. Good 4 0 0

3. Moderate 3 6 27,3

4. Poor 2 10 45,4

5. Very Poor 1 6 27,3

TOTAL 22 100%
 The table above shows the distribution of students’ score on post-test in control class.
Based on the table, there is no students get very good and good score. Meanwhile, there are 6
students is categorized as moderate criteria and 10 students get poor criteria. Therefore, there are
still six students is categorized as very poor criteria with score 1. In short, it can be concluded
that most students’ score on post-test in control class is poor criteria that can be seen in the table
that the score is (2- 2.75). It shows that teaching speaking by using conventional method can’t
show the significance effect to the students’ speaking achievement.

Test of Homogenity
The homogenity test is used to find out whether the sample variance is homogeneous or
not. In this case, the Lavene-Test is employed on the data of pre-test and post-test. The
relationship can be considered homogeneus if the significant value is higher than significance
level of 0.05.
Table: Test of Homogeneity of Variances Sample
Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Levene

Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

2.994 1 42 .091

From the table above, it indicates that the p value is higher than the significance level of 5
% or 0.05 in pre-test where p value (0.091) > (0.05). Therefore, it can be concluded that the
sample variance in this study is homogeneous. It means that we can continue to analyze the data.

Normality Test
The aim of normality test is to know whether or not the test was distributed normally.
The test is one of an important rule that requisite in parametric analysis. The reseacrher was
applied Shapiro-Wilk analysis in SPSS 16 to know whether the data have distributed normally.
To determine the data was distributed normally, the value sig (p ) on Shapiro-Wilk column must
be higher than 0.05. The result analysis was presented in the following table:

Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig.

.933 22 .144
 .917 22 .066

Based on the table above, we can see the result of normality test by using Shapiro-Wilk
analysis on post-test value in experimental and control class were 0.144 and 0.66. It means that
the data were normally or the data are getting from the sample that distribute normally and really
represent the population of the study. In line, with the finding the data were acceptable to analyze
through statistical parametric analysis in form Independent sample t-test.
Hypothesis Testing
The hypothesis testing used to investigate whether or not there was any significant effect
of using Total Physical Response (TPR) method on students’ speaking achievement at the nineth
grade students of SMPN 1 Kabawo by using t-test with significant 0.05 and degree of freedom
42. Before testing the hypothesis, the researcher used SPSS 16.0 to test the normality of the data.

Table: The Result of Independent Sample t-test

Group Statistics

Class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Data experiment 22 3.1250 .80456 .17153

Control 22 2.2386 .74991 .15988

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the

Mean Std. Error Difference

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

Data Equal variances assumed .043 .837 3.780 42 .000 .88636 .23449 .41314 1.35958

Equal variances not assumed 3.780 41.794 .000 .88636 .23449 .41307 1.35965

Based on the table above showed the score equal variance assumed with F 0.043, Sig
0.837, T 3.780, df 42, sig. (2-tailed) 0.000, mean df 0.88636, Std. Error Difference 0.23449,
lower 0.41314, and upper 1.35958. Furthermore, the score equal variances not assumed with t
3.780, df 41.794, sig. (2-tailed) 0.000, mean df 0.88636, Std. Error Difference 0.23449, lower
0.41307, and upper 1.35965. Because on analysis test of homogeneity variance was
homogeneous, so the researcher used line equal variances assumed to test the hypothesis and
effect size.
Table 4.9 The Result of Hypothesis Testing
Df ttest Symbol ttable Result

42 3.780 > 2.021 H0: rejected

H1: Accepted

From the table we can see that ttest is (3.780) and ttable is (2.021). It means that ttest is
higher than ttable. So, the hypothesis is accepted. It means that there is any significant effect on
students’ speaking achievement that taught by using Total Physical Response (TPR) method at
the nineth grade students of SMPN 1 Kabawo.

Effect Size
The effect size on this analysis is calculated in order to see its’ effect. The data is
calculated using formula below:

Effect Size= Mean of Post-test in Experimental Class- Mean of Post-test in Control Class
Standard Deviation

Group Statistics
Std. Std. Error
Class N Mean Deviation Mean
Data experiment 22 3.1250 .80456 .17153
Control 22 2.2386 .74991 .15988

Effect Size= 3.1250- 2.2386

1.55447
= 0.6
Based on the data analysis of the effect size above, the effect size is 0.6. It indicates that
the effect size is categorized into large criteria. It means that there is an effect of teaching
speaking by using Total Physical Response (TPR) method in experimental class.

E. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Based on the finding of the study, it can be seen that there is any significant effect in
teaching speaking by using Total Physical Response (TPR) method on students’ speaking
achievement. The students’ score who are taught by using Total Physical Response (TPR)
method get the high mean score in speaking achievement on terms of fluency and accuracy. It
can be seen that the mean score of post-test in experimental class is 3.1250 is higher than the
mean score of post-test in control class is 2.2386. This score is increased because of applying the
Total Physical Response (TPR) method in teaching speaking for the nineth grade students of
SMPN 1 Kabawo because the students can easy to speak by action and fluently, so that the
students can get the higher score than the control class which used conventional method.
Therefore, the result of hypothesis testing is H0 rejected and H1 is accepted.

REFERENCES
Anderson, Mark and Kathy Anderson. 2007. Text Type in English 2. Malaysia: MacMillan

Ambarsari. TEACHING SPEAKING TO YOUNG LEARNERS USING TOTAL PHYSICAL

RESPONSE METHOD (A Quasy-Experimental Study at the Fifth Grade of SDN Baros
Mandiri V Cimahi). Thesis. English Education Study Program Language and Arts
Department Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan (STKIP) Siliwangi. Bandung

Asher, J. (1965). The Strategy of total Physical Response: An application to learning Russian.
International Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 291-300.

Asher, J. James. The Total Physical Response Approach to Learning Language.

www.tprworld.com/organizing.htm. (Accessed on 11 December 2017)

AydoÄŸan, H. and A. A. Akbarov "The Four Basic Language Skills, Whole Language &
Intergrated Skill Approach in Mainstream University Classrooms in Turkey."
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5(9): 672.

ÖZbaŞAran, S. and S. Razi "REVIEWING METHODS TO TEACH LANGUAGE SKILLS

TO YOUNG LEARNERS IN AN EFL CLASS."
Brown, G. and G. Yule. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Brown, Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment (Principle and Classroom Practice).United State
of America. Longman

Cameron. Lynne. (2001). Teaching Language to Young Learners. New York:Cambridge

University Press.

Chaney, A,L., T.L Burke, Teaching Oral Communication in Grades k-8.

Derewianka, Beverly. 2004. Exploring How Texts Work. Sydney: Primary English Teaching
Association.

Gerrot, Linda., & Wignell Peter. (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar.Sydney:
Antepodean Educational Enterprises.
Hendrawan, R. "TEACHING SPEAKING ENGLISH USING TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE
METHOD."

Hinkel, E. (2006). "Current perspectives on teaching the four skills." Tesol Quarterly 40(1):109
131.

Holleny, L. "The effectiveness of Total Physical Response Storytelling for language learning
with special education students."

Kane, Thomas. S. (2000). The Oxford Essential Guide to Writing. [Online].Available

in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_linguistics.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching, Oxford University.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1990). Language Teaching Methods: Teacher's Handbook for the Video
Series, US Department of State.

Malone, S. Introduction to Oral English using the Total Physical Response (TPR) Method, SIL
Bench Maji MTB MLE Program.

Nugrahaningsih, N. (2007). The Use of Total Physical Response (TPR) Method in English
Preposition Teaching (to the fifth grade students of the academic year 2006/2007 sdn
tajuki getasan kab. Semarang), Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Nunan, D. 1992. Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Octaviany, Y. (2007). The Application of Total Physical Response in Teaching English

Vocabulary to the Fourth Graders of SD Negeri 04 Krajankulon Kaliwungu Kendal in the
Academic Year of 2006/2007, Universitas Negeri Semarang.
Omidvar, Reza. 2014. Technology in Teaching Speaking Skill. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research Review. University of Mysore
Penny, U. 1996. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice Theory. Great Britain:Cambridge
University Press
R, Rahman, Yassi, Abdul Hakim, and Arafah, Burhanudin. 2016. The Use of Role Play to
Improve Teaching Speaking. International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications. Vol 6 (3). University of Hasanuddin, Indonesia
Richards, J. C. and T. S. Rodgers Approaches and methods in language teaching, Cambridge
university press.
Savic, Vera. 2014. Total Physical Response (TPR) Activities In Teaching English To Young
Learners. Conference Paper. University of Kragujevac
Shin, J. K. (2009). "Teaching English to young learners." Retrieved June 7: 2012.
Silver, M., B. Adelman, et al. (2003). "Total Physical Response (TPR) A Curriculum for
Adults." St. Louis: English Language and Literacy Center.

Underhill, Nic. 1987. Testing Spoken Language: A Handbook of Oral Testing Technique.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Visia, S. PENINGKATAN KETERAMPILAN BERBICARA BAHASA INGGRIS MELALUI

METODE TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE PADA SISWA KELAS 3 SD NEGERI DI
KOTA BANDAR LAMPUNG, Universitas Lampung.

Widodo, H. P. (2005). "Teaching Children Using a Total Physical Response (TPR) Method:
Rethinking." Bahasa dan seni 33(2): 235-238.

Woolfolk, Anita. (2004). Educational Psychology. (9th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.