Endang Mulyani - 11310149 PDF

THE USE OF REALIA TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’
SPEAKING SKILL
(An Experimental Study of the Second Grade Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the
Academic Year of 2014/2015)
GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan Islam (S.Pd.I)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
By:
ENDANG MULYANI
113 10 149
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
2015
ii
iii
iv
v
MOTTO
“Itis never too late to be what you might have been.”
~George Elliot~
“Happinessdoesn’t depend upon who you are or what you have; It depends Solely
upon what you think”
~Dale Carnegie~
“Nothing Impossible”
~Audrey Hepburn~
vi
DEDICATION
This work is sincerely dedicated for:
 My God, Allah SWT who always besides me, listens to me, takes care of
me, and gives me the best thing ever.
 My parents, my mother (Rumini) and my father (M. Sarimin) who always
pray, guide, motivate me to become better person.
 My beloved brother (Kusmin ) and my grandmother (Yatinem) who
always support me.
 My big family who fill my life with love and affection.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Bismillahirrahmanirrahim,
In the name of Allah, the most gracious and merciful, the kings of universe
and space. Thanks to Allah because the writer could complete this graduating
paper as one of requirement to finished study in English Department faculty of
States for Institute Islamic Studies.
This graduating paper would not have been completed without support,
guidance and help from individual and institution. Therefore, I would like to
express special thanks to:
1. Dr. Rahmat Hariyadi, M.Pd as the Rector of State Institute for Islamic
Studies ( IAIN) Salatiga.
2. Suwardi, M.Pd. as a Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of
IAIN Salatiga.
3. Noor Malihah, Ph.D. as Head of English Education Department of IAIN
Salatiga.
4. Maslihatul Umami, M.A as counselor who has educated, supported,
directed and given the writer advice, suggestion and recomendation for
this graduating paper from beginning until the end. Thanks for your
patience and care.
5. All lecturers in English Education Department of IAIN Salatiga. Thanks
for all guidance, knowledge, support, and etc.
viii
6. My beloved mother and father. Thanks for everythings (support and
praying) no one better than you.
7. My beloved brother (Kusmin ) and my grandmother (Yatinem). Thanks
for everything.
8. My big family who fill my life with love and affection.
9. Special thanks for those who help and accompany directly in working
with this graduating paper; Riery, Dewa, Kusmin, Danny, Upla and
Any who always help me and standing beside me.
10. All of my friends TBI ’10 especiallyE class, thanks for the cheerfull and
your togetherness.
11. All of staffs of IAIN Salatiga who help the writer in processing of
graduating paper administration.
12. Everybody who has helped me in finishing this graduating paper.
Thanks for all supports, advice, suggestion and other helps that you all
gives. The writer hopes that this graduating paper will be useful for
everyone.
Salatiga, August 8th 2015

The writer
Endang Mulyani
113 10 149
ix
ABSTRACT
Mulyani, Endang. 2015. “The Use of Realia Technique to Improve Students’

Speaking Skill(An Experimental study of Second Grade Students of SMP
N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year of 2014/2015)”. Graduating Paper.
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education
Faculty, StateInstitute of Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga. Counselor:
Mashlihatul Umami, M.A.
This research deals with the use of realia to improve students’ speaking of
the second grade students of SMPN 3 Salatiga in the academic year
2014/2015.The objectives of this research are to find out whether the use of realia
is effective toward students’ speaking skill in the second grade students of SMP N
3 Salatiga in academic year of 2014/2015 and to measure how far is the
significant improvement of speaking skill before and after teaching speaking
using realia. The population of the research is second grade students in SMP N 3
Salatiga. The objects of the research are two classes of the second grade students
of SMPN 3 Salatiga chosen by purposive sampling. The first class is VIII B as
experimental group and the second class is VIII A as control group. This research
applies true experimental research. The data collected from the score of pre-test
and post-test after the treatment. The data tested using t-test formula by
comparing the mean score of pre-test and post-test from both classes. The level of
significance is 5% and 1% with df=50. The result of this research show that t-
value 3.888 is higher than t-table 2.009 for 5% and 2.678 for 1% with degree of
freedom (df) of 50 (N1+N2)-2=26+26-2).It was meant that Ha (Alternative
Hypothesis) was accepted while Ho (Null Hypothesis) was rejected. Since t-test
score was higher than t-table (2.009 < 3.888> 2.678), it can be concluded that
there is significant improvement before and after teaching using realia. Thus, it
can be said that realia is effective to improve students’ speaking skill of the
second grade students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the academic year 2014/2015.
Keywords: Realia, Speaking Skill
x
TABLE OF CONTENT
TITLE PAGE…………………………………………………………………......i
DECLARATION…………………………………………………………………ii
ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR’S NOTE ………………………………………….iii
STATEMENT OF CERTIFICATION…………………………………………..iv
GRADUATING PAPER…………………………………………………………iv
MOTTO…………………………………………………………………………..vi
DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………...vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT………………………………………………………....iv
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………….x
TABLE OF CONTENT…………………………………………………………..xi
LIST OF TABLE………………………………………………………………...xv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study....................................................................................1
B. Problems of the research..............................................................................4
C. Objectives of the Research...........................................................................4
D. Limitation of the Study................................................................................5
E. Benefits of the Study....................................................................................5
F. Definition of Key terms...............................................................................6
G. Outline of the Graduating Paper..................................................................7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Review of Previous…………………………………………………..…..,.,9
B. Realia...........................................................................................................10
1. Definition of Realia..............................................................................10
2. Use of Realia........................................................................................11
3. Realia in Teaching Speaking................................................................12
C. Speaking Skill............................................................................................15
1. Definition of Speaking ........................................................................15
2. Elements of Speaking ..........................................................................16
xi
3. Speaking Ability ..................................................................................18
4. Principles for Designing Speaking Techniques ..................................20
5. Types of Classroom Speaking Performance........................................22
6. Classroom Speaking Activities............................................................24
7. Function of Speaking Skill...................................................................26
D. Teaching Speaking Skill ...........................................................................27
1. Teaching Speaking ..............................................................................27
2. Reason for Teaching Speaking ............................................................28
3. Principles for Teaching Speaking .......................................................29
4. Difficulties of Teaching Speaking.......................................................31
5. Roles of the Teacher during Speaking Activities.................................33
6. Assessments of Speaking.....................................................................34
E. Descriptive Text……………………………………………………….37
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHOD
A. Place and Time of the Research.................................................................41

1. Place of the Research...........................................................................41
2. Time of the Research...........................................................................46
B. Research Method........................................................................................47
1. Type of Research..................................................................................47
2. Population............................................................................................48
3. Sample..................................................................................................48
4. Data Sources.........................................................................................51
5. Hypothesis............................................................................................51
6. Technique of Collecting Data..............................................................52
7. Technique of Analyzing Data..............................................................54
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. Use of Realia to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill in the Second Grade

Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga....................................................................59
1. Experimental Group.............................................................................59
xii
a. Pre – test.........................................................................................59
b. Post –test........................................................................................67
2. Control Group......................................................................................75
a. Pre – test.........................................................................................75
b. Post –test........................................................................................82
B. Discussion..................................................................................................89
1. Use of Realia Technique to Improve Students’ Speaking
Skill............................................................................................................89
a. Experimental Group.............................................................................89
b. Control Group......................................................................................90
c. Mean ....................................................................................................91
d. Standard deviation (SDD)....................................................................92
e. Standard error of mean difference (SEMD).........................................95
f. Determining the standard error mean difference of M1( mean
experimental group ) and M2( mean control group )...........................94
g. Determining t-value (to).......................................................................95
h. Determining ttable in significance level 5% and 1% with df..............95
i. Comparison between tscore with ttable...............................................95
2. Significant Difference of Students’ Speaking Skill Before and after using
Realia in Second Grade Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga............................97
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion................................................................................................102
B. Suggestion................................................................................................103
References
Appendices
xiii
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Fluency........................................35
Table 2.2 Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Pronunciation..............................36
Table 2.3 Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Vocabulary..................................36
Table 2.4 Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Grammar.....................................37
Table 2.5 Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Comprehension...........................37
Table 3.1 Data of the Teachers of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year of
2014/2015...............................................................................................................44
Table 3.2 Data of the Staff of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year of
2014/2015...............................................................................................................46
Table 3.3 Data of the Infrasstructure of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year
of 2014/2015..........................................................................................................46
Table 3.4 List respondents in Experimental Group.............................................51
Table 3.5 List respondents in Control Group......................................................52
Table 3.6 Rubric of Evaluation of Scoring Students’ Speaking Ability.............56
Table 4.1 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-Test Experimental

Group....................................................................................................................61
Table 4.2 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre – test Experimental

Group....................................................................................................................62
Table 4.3 Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’ Speaking Skill
in Fluency.............................................................................................................64
in Pronunciation....................................................................................................65
in Vocabulary........................................................................................................66
xiv
in Grammar............................................................................................................67
in Comprehension..................................................................................................68
Table 4.8 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post –Test

Experimental Group..............................................................................................69
Table 4.9 The Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post – testExperimental

Group....................................................................................................................70
in Fluency..............................................................................................................72
in Pronunciation…………………………………………………………………73
in Vocabulary……………………………………………………………………74
in Grammar………………………………………………………………………75
in Comprehension………………………………………………………………..76
Table 4.15Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-testControl

Group…………………………………………………………………………….77
Table 4.16 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-testControl

Group…………………………………………………………………………….78
in Fluency………………………………………………………………………..80
xv
in Pronunciation………………………………………………………………….81
in Vocabulary…………………………………………………………………….82
in Grammar………………………………………………………………………83
in Comprehension………………………………………………………………..84
Table 4.22 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-test Control

Group…………………………………………………………………………….85
Table 4.23 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-testControl

Group…………………………………………………………………………….86
in Fluency………………………………………………………………………..88
Table 4.25 Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’Speaking Skill

in Pronunciation………………………………………………………………....89
in Vocabulary……………………………………………………………………90
in Grammar……………………………………………………………………..91
Table 4.28 Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’Speaking Skill

in Comprehension………………………………………………………………92
Table 4.29 Students’ Speaking Skill Score in Pre-test and Post-test Score……93
Table 4.30 Students’ Speaking Skill Score in Pre-test and Post-test Score……94
xvi
Table 4.31 Pre-Test and Post-Test Students’ Average Scoresof Experimental and
Control Group……………………………………………………………........100
Table 4.32 Result of Calculating Research……………………………………102
Table 4.33 Diagram of Figure Pre-test, Post-test and Gain Score of Experimental
and Control Group…………………………………………………………….103
xvii
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study
In Indonesia, English is adopted as the foreign language. It
involves into education curriculum that every school runs. It becomes a
local content in Elementary school, a compulsory subject in Junior and
Senior High school and a complementary subject of higher education
institution. This is because of the situation we are facing now;
globalization era, which is very competitive. In learning English language,
learner need to master four language skills. Those are listening, speaking,
reading and writing. Listening and writing regarded as a receptive skill
while speaking and writing skill are considered to be productive skills,
Harmer (1989:16). Ur (1990:120) states that of all four skills, speaking
seems intuitively the most important.
Compared within these two categorize skills, most people think
that productive skills are more difficult than receptive skills. It can be
understood that writing and speaking are more important than reading or
listening. In order to produce something such as written and utterance,
people need more creativity and consideration to do so. Meanwhile, Nessa
&Jadd (1983:19) on their book entitled “Sociolinguistic and Language
Acquisition Series: an Issue as a Second Language Research” states that
speaking is seen as the most important instrument of communication.

2
People use it almost constantly. Speech is the basic language activity by
which people relate themselves to one another. There is a great need in day
for speech skill that goes beyond the individual, because it is enable him to
live to as a man among men not only part of them.
Speaking means a lot in communication because through speaking,
people can communication directly and other can grasp and give response
in short time. Harmer (2001:269) states that ability to speak fluently
presuppose not only a knowledge of language features ,but also the ability
to process information an language “ on the spot “. Therefore, both
teachers and students should give more attention to be able to speak a
foreign language fluently. Moreover, in order to make students are able to
communicate using foreign language properly, students need to be trained
more using that language for communication.
Based on the writers’ experience when the writer practiced become
a teacher on Teaching Practice Program (PPL) on August to September
2013 in SMP N 3 Salatiga, there were many students still have difficulty to
speak English well; afraid of making mistakes in speak English both in
structuring and pronouncing the words; less of vocabulary, and became
receptive rather than productive. Although the English teacher always
combines listening, reading, writing, and speaking on each meeting. In the
last session, the teacher always asks the students to make a dialogue and
practice speaking with their partner, but only several students who
practiced their speaking, they were some of them just silent.

3
One of those speaking problem above is caused by unsuitable
method and technique. As said by Mackey (1996:138) “The method used
has often been said to the cause of success or failure in language teaching.
It is ultimately the method that determines the what and the how of
language instructions”. Meanwhile, Mulyanto (1974: 13) states that
technique depends on the teacher, the imagination, his /her creativity and
the condition of class. A certain problem can be solved with various
techniques. English’s teacher also should be able to play their roles as
facilitators and guidance for the students in their attempt to acquire the
spoken language. An effective technique provide to the students in order
not to be afraid of making mistakes or felt shy when they speak is by
creating the best and fun condition of learning. There are many activities
to make fun and enjoyable activity in teaching speaking in the classroom.
Using visual aids is one of the techniques that can be used by the teacher.
One of them is realia.
Harmer (2001:140) states that realia or real items are useful for
teaching and learning in the classroom. Objects that are intrinsically
interesting provide a good starting point for a variety of language work and
communication activities. Realia also make learning process more
enjoyable.
From the explanation above, it is hoped that realia can be used as one of
the way to teach English especially speaking skill in the second grade
students of SMP N 3 Salatiga. By implementing this technique, it is

4
expected that it can help the teacher to provide an enjoyable and
memorable learning activities. The use of realia in speaking skill, it is
hoped that it can be useful for students in order to improve their speaking
skill. Considering the advantages of realia in improving students’ speaking
skill, the writer is interested in conducting this research entitled “The Use
of Realia to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill”.(An Experimental Study of
the Second Grade Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year of
2014/2015).
B. Problems of Research
Based on the research background,the writer formulates some
problems of the research as follow:
1. How is the effective use of realia in improving students’ speaking
skill in the second students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in academic year of
2014/2015?
2. To what extent is the significant improvement before and after
teaching speaking using realia?
C. Objectives of the Research
According to the problemsof the research above, the objectives of
research are:
1. To find out whether the use of realia is effective toward students’
speaking skill in the second grade students of SMP N 3 Salaiga in
academic year of 2014/2015.

5
2. To measure how far is the significant improvement before and after
teaching speaking using realia.
D. Limitation of the Research
In this research, the writer limits her discussion on the use of realia
in improving students’ achievement in speaking skill for the second grade
students of SMP N 3 Salatiga. In this research, the material lesson that the
writer chooses is describe someone/ something (description).
E. Benefits of the Research
Since, this research focuses on the use of realia in improving students’
speaking skill, the results of this research are expected to give worthwhile
information and contribution for the students, teacher and academicians to
know more about realia as media to teaching speaking skill.
1. Theoretically;
a. Giving contribution to enrich the English language teaching media
especially the knowledge about realia which is hoped after reading
this research, the readers will have more understanding about realia
asmedia to teach English especially speaking skill.
b. It is hoped, it can be reference for further researchers to conduct
further researchers with the similar problem of speaking ability
improvement.
2. Practically ;
a. Writer
6
This research can be used as a starting point in improving the
writers’ teaching experience.
b. Students
This research can be hoped to improve the students’ speaking skill
and give support to the students to be active in learning process.
c. Teachers
The writer is expected this research to be used as one of alternative
mediafor English teachers to solve their students’ anxieties in
speaking English. It is hoped that teachers can develop language
teaching methods and improve the quality of teaching learning
process.
d. Institution
The result of this research can contribute to the institution to
develop and create English language curriculum appropriate the
students’ need.
F. Definition of Key terms
To avoid misunderstanding, the writer defines the key terms used
in this study. The key terms are as follow:
1. Realia
interesting provide a good starting point for a variety of language work

7
and communication activities. Realia also make learning process more
enjoyable.
2. Improve
Improve mean as the process of becoming / making to the better
(Oxford Dictionary, 2003:216)
3. Speaking
Chaney (1998:13) states that speaking is the process of building and
sharing meaning through the use verbal and nonverbal symbols, in a
variety of contexts.
G. Outline of the Graduating Paper
This research consists of five chapters. Chapter one is introduction.
It involves background of the research, problems of research, objective of
the research, limitation of the research, benefits of the research, definition
of key terms, and the last point is outline of the graduating paper.
Chapter two is review of related literature. This chapter discovers
the theory which is used by the writer. It contains realia (previous
research, definition of realia, use of realia), speaking (definition of
speaking, elements of speaking, speaking ability, principles for designing
speaking, type of classroom speaking activities, and function of speaking),
teaching speaking skill (teaching speaking, reason for teaching speaking,
principles for teaching speaking, the roles of teacher during speaking
activities and assessment of speaking), and descriptive text.

8
Chapter three is research method. This chapter describes of time,
location of the study and research method (type of research, population,
sample, hypothesis, technique of collecting data and technique of data
analysis).
Chapter four presents the data analysis which has been collected.
The writer presents the data and results of the pre-test and post-tests both
from experimental and control class.
Chapter five is conclusion and suggestion.

9
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter presents the definitions and theories which are related to the
variables of this research. The supporting theories are needed to help to conduct
this research.
A. Review of Previous Research
There are many people including teachers, linguists and
academicians have been conducting several researchers related to the
teaching speaking such as the way to improve students’ speaking skill,
various techniques and methods that is used to increase the students’
speaking skill and interest in learning speaking. In order to help the writer
conduct this research, the writer read some previous researches as
reference and literary review.
The first, Nugroho (2010), has conducted a research of the use of
realia in teaching speaking .On his research he used an experimental
research to find out the effectiveness of realia to improve students
speaking skill in procedure and descriptive text. The object of his research
is the students on first year of Senior High School PGRI 3 Jakarta. The
finding of the research is realia is effective to be used in teaching speaking
procedure and descriptive text.
Second, Susanti (2007) has conducted a research of using role play
in teaching speaking. In this research, she used a pre experimental study to
prove whether the scores of speaking taught by using role play better or
10
not and to know the process of role play activities. According to her
research, from the result of the analysis of the research, it is proven that
the students’ score of speaking taught by using role play is better. This
result has answered the research question that the use of role play in
teaching speaking is quite effective.
Third, Hartati (2010) has conducted a research of the effect of
using realia toward students’ reading ability in narrative text. Her
graduating paper used an experimental research; the researcher used two
group designs as design of research and random sampling technique to
choose the sample of the research. The data of the research are taken from
a reading test. According to her research, from the result of the analysis of
the research, it is proven that there is a significant difference between the
students who are thought by realia and the students who are thought
without realia to the eight grade students of SMPN 2 Randudongkal
Pemalang Regency in the academic year of 2010/2011.
Meanwhile, this research is conducted in order to know the use of
realia to improve students’ speaking skill in the second grade students of
SMP N 3 Salatiga. The objects of this research are two classes in the
second grade students of SMP N 3 Salatiga.
B. Realia
1. Definition of Realia
Hubbard (1983:115) states that realia is real life object that enable
the students to make connections to their own lives. Finnochiaro

11
assumed that students understand and retain the meaning of words
better have seen or have touched some object associated with it.
enjoyable.
Based on the explanation above, the writer concluded that realia is
one of media in teaching learning process; it is a real thing that can
see, hear or touch directly. It makes students more interesting and easy
to understand the lesson.
2. Use of Realia
Hubbard (1983: 114) states there are several uses of real object, as
follows:
a. Uses for presenting vocabulary.
b. Uses or presenting new structure
c. To help students get into character when acting out a dialogue
or doing role play.
d. As props for dialogue or role play
e. Aids for various games.

12
enjoyable.
3. Realia in Teaching Speaking
Sumardiyani &Sakhiyya (2007:47) states that success or failure of
teaching learning process depends on several factors; one of them is
media that is used by teacher. Media is a means of communication to
help transferring the message and give power to the material
presentation so it will be understood easier and staying longer in
memory retention.
Arsyad (2003:33-34) states that if the teacher uses a good media
and students give good respond, teaching learning process will run
well. Therefore, the teacher should choose appropriate media. There
are many kinds of media. Audio media: radio, tape recorder, telephone.
a. Visual media: picture, magazine, news paper, illustration, film
strip, poster, etc.
b. Audio visual media: television, movie, CD, slide and sound.
c. Diverse media: Realia, diorama, display, sample, simulation.
Mustain (2009:21) states that the functions of real things or realia are
a. The instruction can be more interesting.
Real things can attract the student’s interest. If they are interesting,
they will give much attention to what is being taught. They will be
curious to know about the lesson.

13
b. Learning becomes more interactive.
Many activities can create trough applying real thing in the
teaching learning processes. A teacher can bring models into
classroom.
c. The length of time required can be reduced.
Most media presentation requires as short time to transmit their
messages, so does the real things. During this brief period, much
information can be communicated to the students.
d. The quality of learning can be improved.
If there is good preparation of using real thing, it will be possible
for teacher to create a good learning process in which the student’s
participation is dominant. As a result, the student’s knowledge and
skills can be improved.
The added advantages with this media is that realia based lessons
need not to be bound to cities and places that the teacher has physically
been to but rather can based on materials from a variety of places
collected from a variety of people with various interests. Further, the
students interact directly with these materials rather than with someone
else’s interpretation and analysis of them and thus may find virtual
realia even more appropriate for their interest. Another benefit of realia
is that the materials are truly interactive and more flexible that they can
be easily adapted and up dated.

14
According to Wrigth (1989:24), there are 5 criteria that provide for
making of realia in activity, there are:
a. Easy to prepare
When teachers want to use a media their activities, they have to
decide whether it is difficult to prepare or not. Realia is a simple
media that can be brought in the classroom and easy in preparing.
b. Easy to organize
The teacher has to decide whether the organizing a more
complicated activity worthwhile. The teachers can use realia
because it is easy organizing.
c. Interesting
Before applying realia in the activity, the teacher has to justify the
student’s interest toward it. Bringing realia (authentic objects from
culture), or manipulating to the classroom helps teacher in
providing comprehensible input in a second language.
d. Meaningful and authentic
Students are going to gain more if the language use is vital to the
situation or if they use the language appropriately.
e. Sufficient amount of language
The activity should give rise to a sufficient amount of language in
order to justify its conclusion in the language lesson.

15
C. SPEAKING SKILL
1. Definition of Speaking
Chaney (1998:13) states that speaking is the process of building
and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbal
symbols, in a variety of contexts. Brown (1994) states that speaking is
an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing
and receiving and processing information. Speaking is a crucial part of
second language learning and teaching. Despite its importance, for
many years, teaching speaking has been undervalued and English
language teachers have continued to teach speaking just as a repetition
of drills or memorization of dialogues.
However, today's world requires that the goal of teaching speaking
should improve students' communicative skills, because, only in that
way students can express themselves and learn how to follow the
social and cultural rules appropriate in each communicative
circumstance, there for recent pedagogical research on teaching
students conversation has provided some parameters for developing
objectives and techniques.
2. Elements of Speaking
Brown (2004:140) states that speaking is the product of creative
construction of linguistic strings; the speaker makes choices of lexicon,
structure, and discourse .The ability to speak fluently depends on how
the speaker produces utterance to convey their meaning. Harmer

16
(2001:269) states that the ability to speak fluently presupposes not only
a knowledge of language features, but also the ability to process
information and language ‘on the spot ‘. In order to do so, there are
some elements that should be considered by speaker. Those elements
for spoken production are described by Harmer (2001:269-270) as
follows:
a. Connected Speech
The speakers’ ability to use spoken language as native used by
omitted, modified, added or modified the linking or auxiliary
verb used in order to make the speaking run smoothly. For
example as in saying I would have gone and used in connected
speech as in I’d’ve gone.
b. Expressive Devices
In is the changing of intonation and particular parts of utterance
using special gestures, expression or mimic to show how they
are feeling. Expressive device allow the speaker to use extra
expression of emotion and intensity which contributes to the
ability to convey meanings.
c. Lexis and Grammar
Lexis and grammar also element necessary in spoken
production, it is related to the use of suitable grammatical and
phrases in different function and different context. Therefore,
the teacher should supply a variety of phrases for different

17
functions such as agreeing or disagreeing, expressing surprise,
shock, or approval.
d. Negotiation Language
It is use to seek clarification and to show the structure of what
the speakers are saying. It is allow the listener to ask for
clarification to the speaker when they do not understand what
they say. Meanwhile, in part of a speakers’ productive activity
involves the knowledge of language skill such as those
discussed above, the success of spoken production also depend
on the rapid processing skill that taking necessitates, Harmer
(2001:271), they are:
a) Language Processing, it is related to the speaker ability
to process language in their own heads and put it into
coherent order so that it comes out in forms that are not
only comprehensible, but also convey 0the meaning that
are intended.
b) Interesting with order, in speaking absolutely involves
interaction with one or more participants. This means
that effective speaking also involves a good deal of
listening, an understanding of how the other participants
are feeling, and a knowledge of how linguistically to
take turns or allow others to do so. It is related to

18
communication and interaction among the speaker and
listener.
c) Information processing (on-the-spot), it is related to the
speaker ability to response others’ feeling by processing
the information the speaker tell at the moment. It can be
inferred that information processing is process of the
listener giving response toward what the speaker say.
3. Speaking Ability
According to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary definition of
ability is skill or power, however speaking ability is skill or power to
express ideas, opinions or message orally. Speaking ability is the
ability to communicate orally. It is not only to apply the grammatically
correct sentence, but also to know when and where to use these
sentences and to whom. The ability to communicate is related to the
rules of a language use and rule of grammar.
Speaking ability is an important aspect and beneficial skill in
learning language. It is a part of the goal or skill in learning English in
the curriculum besides writing, reading, and listening. Through
speaking people convey what they mean by arranging a set of words
which contain
a subject talked about and the situation.
In language teaching, we often talk about the four language skills
(reading, listening, speaking, and writing). Harmer (2001:250) states

19
that reading and listening are called receptive skills, because receptive
skills are the ways in which people extract meaning from the discourse
the see or hear.. When we are listening or reading something it means
that we receive something from what we listen or read. And other
skills are speaking and writing. When we are speaking and writing it
means that we are producing something. So that, speaking and writing
skills are called productive skills.
Broughton (1978: 76) states that, however good a student may be
at listening and understanding, it need not follow that he will speak
well. A discriminating ear does not always a fluent tongue. There has
to be training in the productive skill of speech as well. Nunan
(1995:39) states that to most aspect of learning a second or foreign
language, and success is measured in terms of the ability to carry out a
conversation in the language.
For most second or foreign language learners, speaking skill is
somewhat difficult. This probably because they think that the target
language is different with their native language. Sometimes, they feel
it affects the mastery of another language. Just like other abilities,
speaking is complex. Teaching students speak a second language is not
easy. It needs a hard work and along process. At least there are five
components in speaking:
a. Pronunciation
b. Grammar
20
c. Vocabulary
d. Fluency
e. Comprehension
All of those components will produce speech that can be
understood in communication, good pronunciation, grammatically
knowledge, vocabularies mastery, comprehension in meaning and
fluency are needed in building a speech. However it must be
remembered that language and speech are meant for communication. It
is not enough for students to learn words, phrases and grammatical
only. They have to produce speech in their daily communication.
Learning language is about practicing and generating speech. Students
need to express their meaning by doing much practice in speaking.
Harris (1969: 83)
4. Principles for Designing Speaking Techniques ,Brown (2001:275-
276)
a. Use techniques that cover the spectrum of the learners.
b. Provide intrinsically motivating techniques.
c. Encourage the use of authentic language in meaningful context.
d. Provide appropriate feedback and correction.
e. Give students opportunities to initiate oral communication.
f. Encourage the development of speaking strategies.
Some students think that speaking ability is difficult; however they
don’t like to follow the speaking lesson. It is might caused by kind of

21
activities that did not make them interest. Some teachers did not give
an activity that makes them enjoy following the speaking lesson.
Actually there are many activities to promote the speaking ability that
can be used by teacher to make their students speak up. Good speaking
activities can and should highly motivating. If all the students are
participating fully and if the teacher has set up the activity properly
and can then give sympathetic and useful feedback, they will get
tremendous satisfaction from it. Here some activities that can motivate
students.
a. Discussion
After content based lesson, a discussion can be held for
various reason. The students may aim to arrive at a conclusion,
share idea about an event, or find solution in their discussion
groups. Before discussion, it is essential that the purpose of the
discussion activity is set by the teacher. In this way, the discussion
points are relevant to this purpose, so that students do not spend
their time chatting with each other about the irrelevant things.
For example, students can become involved in agree or
disagree discussion. In this type of discussions, the teacher can
form groups of student, preferably 4 or 5 in each group, and
provide controversial sentences like “people learn best when they
read vs. people learn best when they travel” then each group work
on their topic for a given time period and presents their opinions to
22
the class. It is essential that speaking should be equally divided
among the group members. At the end, the class decides on the
winning group who defended the idea in the best way.
This activity fosters critical thinking and quick decision
making, and students learn how to express and justify themselves
in polite ways while disagreeing with the others. For efficient
discussion, it is always better not to form large group, because
quiet students may avoid contributing in large groups.
The group members can be either assigned by the teacher or
the students may determine it by themselves, but groups should be
rearranged in every discussion activity so that students can work
with various people and learn to be open to different ideas. Lastly,
in class or group discussions, whatever aim is, the students should
always be encouraged to ask questions and paraphrase ideas,
express support, check for clarification, and so on.
5. Types of Classroom Speaking Performance
Brown (2004:141 -142), states that there are five categorizes of
speaking performance assessment tasks, described as follows:
a. Imitative
It is described as the ability to simply parrot back (imitative) a
work or phrase or possibly a sentence.
b. Intensive
23
It is production of short stretches of oral language designed to
demonstrate competence in a narrow band grammatical, phrasal,
lexical, or phonological relationship. The example of intensive
assessment tasks include directed response tasks, reading aloud,
sentence and dialogue completion, limited picture –cued tasks
including simple sequences, and translation up to the simple
sentence level.
c. Responsive
Responsive assessment tasks include interaction and test
comprehension but at the somewhat limited level of every short
conversations, standard, greeting and small talk, simple request and
comments, and the like.
d. Interactive
It is similar with the previous category which is representative,
however it is different in the length and complexity of the
interaction, which someone includes multiple exchanges and/ or
multiple participants.
e. Extensive
Extensive oral production tasks include speeches, oral
presentations, and storytelling, during which the opportunity for
oral interaction from listeners is either highly limited (perhaps for
nonverbal response) or ruled out together.

24
6. Classroom Speaking Activities
Considering the important function of speaking and its difficulties
to be mastered, many teachers, researchers, educators and linguistics
have develop many methods and techniques that can be used to teach
and increase students’ speaking ability. In this case, the teacher role is
very important to provide an appropriate activity to motivate the
students to explore their speaking ability. The speaking activity should
be interactive and interesting, so that the students will be more
motivated to speak fluently and confidently.
Basically, there are two types of speaking activity stated by
Hutchin (1987: 67) the first psychomotor activity: that is the
observable speech organ or limbs being accordance with signal from
the brain. The other one is language processing activity: that is
organization of information in meaningful network of knowledge, this
activity is not observable. Moreover, according to Harmer (2001:271-
275), there are many of the classroom activities which are currently
used in teaching and learning speaking. Those activities that mostly
used are:
a. Acting from Script
It is speaking activity where the students are asked to act
out scene from play and /or their course books or act out
dialogues they have written themselves and this activity

25
frequently involved them in coming out to the front of the class
or sometimes filming the result.
b. Communication Games
Games is one of speaking activities which can help to
create dynamic, motivating classes by providing relaxed
atmosphere, participate in activities that require them to use
what they have been drill on (Fauziati, 2005:130). Furthermore,
she explains that games are not only suitable for children but
also for adults, since there is always a child hidden in every one
of us. Harmer (2001: 272), states that games which are
designed to provoke communication between students
frequently depend on an information gap so that one student
has to talk to a partner in order to solve puzzle, draw picture,
put things in the right order find similarities and differences.
c. Discussion
Group discussion may be composed of three to five
students. The main aim of group discussion is to improve
fluency, and grammar is probably best allowed to function as a
naturally communicative context (Fauziati, 2005:134).
d. Prepared Talks
It is a popular kind of speaking activity where the students
make a presentation on a certain topic chosen by teacher or
their own choice. Prepared talks represent a defined and useful

26
speaker genre, and if properly organized, can be extremely
interesting for the speaker and listener (Harmer, 2001:274).
e. Questionnaires
In this activity the students can design questionnaire on any
topic appropriate. As they do so the teacher can act as a
resource, helping them in the designing process. The result
obtained from questionnaire can be from the basic for written
work, discussions, or prepared talks (Harmer, 2001:274).
f. Stimulation and Role Play
Students ‘simulate ‘a real –life encounter as if they were
doing so in the real world. Stimulation and role play can be
used to encourage general oral fluency, or to train students for
specific situation (Harmer, 2001:274). Furthermore, role –play
is creating a dramatic situation in the classroom, or in a part,
simply acting out dialogues, but also in the part relabeling
object and people in the room prepare for imaginative role
playing ( Fauziati, 2005:127).
7. Function of Speaking Skill
Brown and Yule (1983: 4) also describe a useful distinction
between two basic language functions. These are the transactional
function, which is primarily concerned with the transfer of
information, and the interactional function, in which the primary
purpose of speech is the maintenance of social relationship.

27
Another basic distinction when considering the development of
speaking ability is between monologue and dialogue. They ability to
give an uninterrupted oral presentation is very clear from interacting
one people and another speakers for transactional and intersectional
purpose, while, all native speakers can and do use language
interaction, not all native speaker have the ability to be extempore on a
given subject to group of listeners. Furthermore, Brown and Yule
(1983: 4) states that most language teaching is concerned with
developing skills in short intersectional exchanges in which the learner
is only required to make one or two utterance at a time.
Based on the above statement, Bygate (2012) in Fauziati (2005 : 5)
distinguishes that “between motor-perceptive skill, which are
concerned with correctly using the sound and structures of language,
and interactional skill, which involves motor perceptive skill for the
purpose of communication” motor perceptive skill are developed in the
language classroom through activities such as model dialogues,
patterns practice, oral drills and so on, until relatively recently, it was
assumed that the mastery of motor perceptive skill was that needed all
one, in order to communicated successfully.
D. Teaching Speaking Skill
1. Teaching Speaking
Speaking is a crucial part of second language learning and teaching
despite its importance, for many years, teaching speaking has been
28
undervalued and English language teachers have continued to teach
speaking just as a repetition of drills or memorization of dialogues.
However, today's world requires that the goal of teaching speaking
should improve students' communicative skills, because, only in that
way, students can express themselves and learn how to follow the
social and cultural rules appropriate in each communicative
circumstance (Brown, 1994; Burns & Joyce, 1997).
2. Reason for Teaching Speaking
Harmer (2007:123) states that there are three main reasons for
getting students to speak in the classroom:
a. Speaking activities provide rehearsal opportunities changes to
practice real life speaking in the safety of the classroom.
b. Speaking tasks in which students try to use any or all of language
they know provide feedback for both teacher and students.
Everyone can see how well they are doing: both how successful
they are and what language problem they are experiencing.
c. In speaking, students have opportunities to activate the various
elements of language they have stored in their brains, the more
automatic their use of these elements become. As a result, students
gradually became automatically language users. This means that
they will be able to use words and phrases fluently without very
much conscious thought.

29
Seen how speaking activities provide opportunities for rehearsal
give both teacher and students feedback and motivate students because
of their engaging qualities. Above all, they help students to be able to
produce language automatically. It can be concluded that the reason
for teaching speaking are to encourage the students to produce
language automatically and motivate the students to able to speak their
idea to other.
3. Principles for Teaching Speaking
There are five principles for teaching speaking, Nunan (2003: 54):
a. Be aware of the difference between second language and foreign
language learning contexts.
Speaking is learned in two broad contexts: foreign language
and second language situations. The challenges you face as teacher
are determined partly by the target language context.
b. Give students practice with both fluency and accuracy.
Accuracy is the extent to which students’ speech matches
what people actually say when they use the target language.
Fluency is the extent to which speakers use language quickly and
confidently, with few hesitation or unnatural pauses, false start,
word searches, etc.
In language lesson especially at the beginning and intermediate
levels learners must be given opportunities to develop both their
fluency and their accuracy. They can’t develop fluency if the

30
teacher is constantly interrupting them to correct their oral errors.
Teachers must provide students with fluency –building practice
and realize that making mistakes is natural part of learning a new
language.
c. Provide opportunities for students to talk by using group or pair
work, and limiting teacher talk.
Research has repeatedly demonstrated that teachers do
approximately 50 to 80 percent of the talking in classroom. It is
important for us as language teachers to be aware of how much we
are talking in class so we don’t take up all the time the students
could be talking. Pair work and group work activities can be used
to increase the amount of time that the learners get to speak in the
target language during lessons. One further interesting point is that
when the teacher is removed from the conversation, the learners
take on diverse speaking roles that are normally filled by the
teacher (such as posing questions or offering clarification.
d. Plan speaking tasks that involve negotiation for meaning.
Research suggests that learners make progress by
communicating in the target language because interaction
necessary involves trying to understand and make you understood.
This process is called negotiating for meaning. It involves
checking to see if you’ve understood what someone has said,
clarifying your understand and confirming that someone has

31
understand your meaning. By asking for clarification, repetition, or
explanation during conversations, learners get the people they are
speaking with to address them with language at a level they
can learn from and understand.
e. Design classroom activities that involve guidance and practice in
both transactional and international speaking
When we talk with someone outside the classroom, we
usually do so for international or transactional purposes.
International speech is communicating with someone for social
purpose. It includes both establishing and maintaining social
relationship. Transactional speech involves communicating to get
something done, including the exchange of goods and /services.
4. Difficulties of Teaching Speaking
Ur (1996: 120-121) describes some problems in speaking activities
in her book entitled A Course in Language Teaching as follows:
a. Inhibition. Unlike reading, writing and listening activities,
speaking requires some degree of real time exposure to an
audience.
b. Nothing to say. Even if they not inhibited, you often hear learners
complain that they cannot think of anything to say, they have no
motive to express themselves beyond the guilty feeling that they
should be speaking.
32
c. Low or uneven participation. Only one participant can talk at the
time if he/she is to be heard, and in a large group this means that
each one will have only very little talking time.
d. Mother-tongue use. In classes where all
On the other hand, she classified some characteristics of a
successful speaking activity, as follows:
a. Learners a talk a lot. As much as possible of the period of time
allotted the activity is in fact occupied by learners talk.
b. Participation is even. Classroom discussion is not dominated by
a minority of talkative participants: all get a chance to speak
and contributions are fairly evenly distributed.
c. Motivation high. Learners are eager to speak: because they are
interested in the topic and have something new to say about it,
or because they want to contribute to achieving a task
objective.
d. Language is of an acceptable level. Learners express
themselves in utterances that are relevant, easily
comprehensible to each other, and of acceptable level of
language accuracy.
Those characteristics of both difficulties and successful speaking
are very contradictive; it needs a comprehensive cooperation between
teacher and students themselves in order that they can help each other
to express their idea and act it out, because when they feel comfortable
33
in class activities they would have the same opportunity to practice
their language a lot. As time goes by, their ability in speaking will
improve by the process they engage.
The difficulties of speaking can be reduced by using the suitable
method for the students. So, it will be challenging task for the teacher
to create a comfortable atmosphere and help the students’ ability
through many kinds of techniques which is suitable for their level, with
comfortable atmosphere in speaking the students would able to express
their ideas.
5. Roles of the Teacher during Speaking Activities
During speaking activities, teachers need to play number of
different roles. They can be prompter, participant, even feedback
provides as viewed by Harmer (2001: 275-276) as follow:
a. Prompter
When students sometimes get lost in speaking, teacher can leave
them to struggle out of situation on their own. And indeed
sometimes, this may best option. However, teacher may be able to
help students and the activity to progress by offering discrete
suggestions.
b. Participant
Teachers should be good animators when asking students to
produce language. This can be achieved by setting up an activity

34
clearly and with enthusiasms. At other times, teachers may want to
participate in discussions or role plays themselves.
c. Feedback Provider
When students are in the middle of speaking task, over correction
may inhibit them and take the communicativeness out of the
activity. On the other hand, helpful and gentle correction may get
students out of difficult, misunderstanding and hesitations.
In summary, when teacher being a prompter, a participant, even a
feedback provider, they have to be careful that they don’t force
students, do not participate too much, and do not over correction.
6. Assessments of Speaking
Speaking is complex skill requiring the simultaneous use of
different ability which often develops at different roles. Speaking skill
is generally recognized in analysis of speech processes that are
pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension.
According to Brown (2000: 406-407), there are five categorizes
of oral proficiency scoring. It can be seen on the tables below:

35
Table 2.1
Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Fluency
Score Category
1 No specific fluency description.
2 Can handle with confidence but not with facility most
social situations, including introductions and casual
conversations about current events, as well as work,
family and autobiographical information.
3 Can discuss particular interests of competence with
reasonable ease. Rarely has to grope for words.
4 Able to use the language fluently on all levels normally
pertinent to professional needs. Can participate in any
conversation with a high degree of fluency.
5 Has complete fluency in the language such that his
speech is fully accepted by educated native speakers.
Table 2.2
Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Pronunciation
Score Category
1 Errors in pronunciation are frequent but can be
understood by a native speaker used to dealing with
foreigners attempting to speak his language
2 Accent is intelligible though often quite faulty.
3 Errors never interfere with understanding and rarely
disturb the native speaker. Accent may be obviously
foreign.
4 Errors in pronunciation are quite rare.
5 Equivalent to and fully accepted by educated native
speakers.
36
Table 2.3
Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Vocabulary
Score Category
1 Speaking vocabulary inadequate to express anything but
the most elementary needs
2 Has speaking vocabulary sufficient to express him simply
with some circumlocutions.
3 Able to speak the language with sufficient vocabulary to
participate effectively in most formal and informal
conversations on practical, social and professional topics.
Vocabulary is broad enough that he rarely has to grope
for a word.
4 Can understand and participate in any conversation within
the range of his experience with a high degree of
precision of vocabulary.
5 Speech on all level is sufficiently accepted by educated
native speakers in all its features including breadth of
vocabulary and idioms, colloquialisms, and pertinent
cultural references.
Table 2.4
Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Grammar
Score Category
1 Errors in grammar are frequent, but speaker can be
understood by a native speaker used to dealing with
foreigners attempting to speak his language
2 Can usually handle elementary constructions quite
accurately but does not have thorough or confident
control of the grammar.
3 Control of grammar is good. Able to speak the language
with sufficient structural accuracy to participate
effectively in most formal and informal conversations on
practical, social, and professional topics.
4 Able to use the language accurately on all levels normally
pertinent to professional needs. Errors in grammar are
quite rare.
5 Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker.
37
Table 2.5
Oral Proficiency Scoring Categories Comprehension
Score Category
1 Within the scope of his very limited language experience,
can understand simple questions and statements if
delivered with slowed speech, repetition, or paraphrase
2 Can get the gist of most conversations of non-technical
subjects (i.e., topics that requite no specialized
knowledge).
3 Comprehension is quite complete at a normal rate of
speech.
4 Can understand any conversation within the range of his
experience.
5 Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker.
However, there are five components usually used to analyze speech
performance, they are grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, fluency and
comprehension. The scoring also can include accuracy, articulation, eye
contact, expression, intonation and gesture of the speaker. The writer uses
those speaking scoring rubric to collect data.
E. Descriptive Text
Warriner (1982:293) states that the purpose of description is to make
the reader see, hear, or otherwise experience something. Effective
description appeals to the senses like by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,
or touching it. The best way to make a reader feel that what you are
describing is real to appeal the senses.
According to Hartmann & Blass (1999:63), descriptive text says what
a person, animal or a thing is like. Its purpose is to describe and reveal a
particular person, place, or thing.

38
1. Generic Structure of Descriptive Text:
a. Identification
First sections of descriptive that contains of the topic or
‘what’ that will be describe.
b. Description
Second sections of descriptive that describe the topic deeply
about the physic, quality, behavior, and characteristics.
2. Language Features of Descriptive Text:
a. Using simple present tense : S + is/am/are + V1s/es
b. Using have, has, had to give detailed description of the
object’s features
c. Using adjectives that describe, numbering, and classifying
the topic. Example: two strong legs, sharp white fangs
d. Using relating verb to give the information about the subject.
Example: my mom is really cool, it has very thick fur
e. Using thinking verb like believe, think, and feeling verb like
‘feel’ to reveal the writer perspective about the subject.
Example: I think she is a smart girl.
f. Using adverb to added more information about the
characteristic that describe. Example: It is extremely high.

39
3. Example of Descriptive Text:
Title A Depressing Place
Identification The pet shop in the mall is a depressing place.
Description A display window attracts passersby who stare at the
prisoners penned inside. In the right-hand side of the
window, two puppies press their forepaws against the
glass and attempt to lick the human hands that press from
the outside. A cardboard barrier separates the dogs from
several black-and-white kittens piled together in the
opposite end of the window. Inside the shop, rows of wire
cages line one wall from top to bottom. At first, it is hard
to tell whether a bird, hamster, gerbil, cat, or dog is
locked inside each cage. Only an occasional movement or
a clawing, shuffling sound tells visitors that living
creatures are inside. Running down the center of the store
is a line of large wooden perches that look like coat
tracks. When customers pass by, the parrots and mynahs
chained to these perches flutter their clipped wings in a
useless attempt to escape. At the end of this center aisle is
a large plastic tub of dirty, stagnant-looking water
containing a few motionless turtle. The shelves against
the left-hand wall are packed with all kinds of pet-related

40
items. The smell inside the entire shop is an unpleasant
mixture of strong chemical deodorizers, urine-soaked
newspapers, and musty sawdust. Because so many
animals are crammed together, the normally pleasant,
slightly milky smell of the puppies and kittens is sour and
strong. The droppings inside the unclean birdcages give
off dry, stinging odor. Visitors hurry out of the shop,
anxious to feel fresh air and sunlight. The animals stay
on.
(Langan, 2013:169).
41
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter discovers the place, time and research method. This research
is conducted in SMP N 3 Salatiga, which is discussed more in this chapter; they
are general information of SMP N 3 Salatiga; historical, research design, research
setting and sample and population of the research, method of data collection and
method of data analysis.
A. Place and Time of the Research
1. Place of the Research
This research is conducted in SMP N 3 Salatiga. The further
explanation about this school described as follows:
a. General Information of SMP N 3 Salatiga
SMP Negeri 3 Salatiga is one of junior high school in
Salatiga, Java-Indonesia. It has good building and good
facilities to support teaching learning process. This detail of
this school described as follows:
Name of School : SMP Negeri 3 Salatiga
SK : 443 / C / Kep / I / 1993
Statistic Number : 201036201003
Address : Sidomukti, Salatiga 50721
Website : www.smpn3salatiga.sch.id
E-mail : smp_netisa_ssn@ymail.com
42
Phone : (0298) 326260, 313 721
Fax : (0298) 326 260
Build : August 1st, 1954
Day school : Monday-Saturday (07.00-12.50)
Headmaster : Suyudi, M.Pd.
b. Vision and Mission of SMPN 3 Salatiga
1) Vision of SMPN 3 Salatiga
Race achievement, Pioneer in technology and Model in
attitude to create “SEGAR”(Santun Energik Gembira Arif
Reevaluasi) in SMPN 3 Salatiga
2) Missions of SMPN 3 Salatiga
a) Improve the learning motivation.
b) Develop the graduation quality.
c) Create smart, competent and creative generations who
have nationality.
d) Create familial spirit and best achievement.
e) Create harmonies condition, good emotion and
intellectual to reach the goal of national education.
c. Situation of the Teacher and the Staff
The important role in teaching learning process is a teacher.
Teacher is someone who transfers knowledge for the students.
They help the students to understand the materials in the class

43
and give knowledge to them to be better. In SMP Negeri 3
Salatiga, there are 18 teachers’ male and 32 teachers’ female.
Table 3.1
Data of the Teachers of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the
Academic Year of 2014/2015
NO CODE NAME OF TEACHER OCCUPATION

1 BG Suyudi, M.Pd Headmaster
2 TM Hj.Tri Mulyani, S.Pd History
3 TG Teguh Sugiyarto, S.Pd Physic
4 DJ H.Daroji, S.Ag Islam Religion
5 HY Sri Haryanto, S.PdI Islam Religion
6 JM Jumadi, S.Th. Christian Religion
7 YU Yustina S.Pd Chatolic Religion
8 NH Hj. Nurul Hastuti, S.Pd PKn
9 BD Budiarto, S.Pd..M.Si PKn
10 DY Dwi Estuningdyas, S.Pd Indonesian Language
11 ED Endang Srinowo D,S.Pd Indonesian Language
12 AM Siti Aminah S.Pd Indonesian Language
13 DW Dewi Wardah, S.Pd Indonesian Language
14 RS Retno Setyowati, S.Pd Indonesian Language
15 DR Dwi Retno BW, S.Pd Mathematic
16 JS Jusmaniar, S.Pd Mathematic
17 AA Anastasia Tri Astuti, Mathematic
S.Pd
18 YN Hj.Sri Mulyani, S.Pd Mathematic
19 AP Anik Prihati , S.Pd Mathematic
20 IK Ika Resmanawati, S.Pd Mathematic
21 PR Patricia RK, S.Pd Mathematic
22 CA Chatarina TSR, S.Si Physic
23 IS Ismanto,A.Md.Pd Physic
24 EP Dra.Endang Pratiwi TP Biology
25 JH Johan Ananto TL, S.Pd Biology
26 RW Retno Wigati, S.Pd Biology
27 RN Eleanore Harini, S.Pd History/PKn/TIK
28 TA Titik Amggraini, S.Pd Geography
29 GI Drs.Giyono Geography
30 DP Danny Pranindyo, S.Pd Economy/Geography
31 KR Kristanto Adni N, S.Pd Economy/TIK
32 CH Chomsatun, S.Pd English
44
33 HA Hariyati, M.Pd English

34 YT Yulia Tri Wahyuni, S.Pd English
35 DS Dik Sindu, S.Pd English
36 AD Aditya Ibnu Nugroho, English
S.Pd
37 WI Widodo, S.S Javanese Language
38 RT Y Rini Tri P, S.Pd Javanese Language
39 EN Eny Setyowati, S.Pd Javanese Language
40 EL Elly Maharani Shakti, Art and Culture
S.Pd
41 AN Sri Andewi DA, S.Pd Art and Culture
42 MP Monica Diah P, S.Sn Art and Culture
43 SM Sri Mulyaningsih Sport
44 SL Slamet Riyadi, S.Pd Sport
45 LS Leny Septiyani, S.Pd Sport
46 EH Endro Harlono, S.Pd Electronics
47 TY Tiyono Spd Electronics
48 NU Dra. Wst. Nurhayati BK
49 SM Sri Mulyaningsih BK
50 DT Dewi Prawasti, S.Pd BK
51 AK Ary Sasongkono, S.Pd BK
52 PM Dwi Puji M, S.Kom TIK
Table 3.2
Data of the Staff of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the
NO NAME POSITION
1 Indriyati Triningsih, S.Pd Administration
2 Retno Setyowati,S.Pd Library
3 Sugiarti Laboratory
4 Sularno Canteen
5 Daryono Security
6 Slamet Gardener
45
d. Situation of the students
The total numbers of students of SMP Negeri 3 Salatiga are
688 students. They come from various areas with different
background, age, religion, economic status and characteristics.
e. Situation of Educational Facilities
Table 3.3
Data of the Infrasstructure of SMP N3 Salatiga in the
NO NAME SIZE(m2) CONDITION TOTA

L
1 Classroom 2583 Good 24
2 Library 84 Good 1
3 Laboratory 88 Good 1
4 Art and Culture 84 Good 2
Room
5 Multimedia 72 Good 2
6 Aula 243 Good 1
7 Head Master Room 112 Good 1
8 Vice Chairman 24 Good 1
Room
9 Teacher Office 144 Good 1
10 Administration 72 Good 1
Office
11 Storeroom 24 Good 1
12 Kitchen 20 Good 1
13 Teachers’ Toilet 30 Good 5
14 Student’s Toilet 60 Good 10
15 “BK” Room 42 Good 1
16 “UKS” Room 18 Good 1
17 “OSIS” Room 25 Good 1
18 “KOPERASI” 35 Good 1
Room
19 Mosque 64 Good 1
20 Canteen 25 Good 3
21 Post Security 4 Good 1
22 Parking Area 46 Good 1
23 Sport Field 492 Good 1
46
25 Ceremony Field 1476 Good 1

TOTAL AREA 7218 65
2. Time of the Research
This research was conducted in SMP N 3 Salatiga in the academic
year of 2014/2015. The research was carried out from March 3rd 2015
up to March 12th 2015. Before doing the research, the researcher
prepared the instrument that would be used to measure students
improvement when using realia method in speaking process. After
obtaining approval from the school principal and doing consultation
with the English teacher who taught in VIII B as the experimental class
and VIII A as the control class. There are some steps that the writer did
to conduct this research, they are preparation and implementation.
Those steps described briefly as follows:
a. Preparation
1) Application for Research : 3 rd March 2015
2) Research Permission : 10thMarch 2015
b. Implementation
1) Data Collection : 10th– 12rd March
2015
2) Pre-Test:
Experimental Class : 11th March 2015
Control Class : 11th March 2015
3) Treatment:
47
Experimental Class : 11-12thMarch 2015
4) Post-Test:
Experimental Class : 12th March 2015
Control Class : 12th March 2015
B. Research Method
1. Type of Research
In this research, the writer uses true experimental research to find
out the the use of realia in improving students’ speaking skill. True
experimental research is defined as “experimental design which is
conducted as if it is look like the real situationl. (Yunus, 2010: 334). In
this experimental design, the researcher evaluates the experimental
class before and after given a treatment. Meanwhile, the other class
stand as control class and isolated from the treatment.
In this research, the writer used quasi experimental research to find
out the implementation of realia whether it can improve students’
speaking skill or not. Finally, the researcher compares the influence of
the treatment toward an experimental class. The research design in this
research can be seen as follows:
O1 X O2
O3 - O4
O1 : Pre-test before given treatment for experimental class
O2 : Post- test after given treatment for experimental class

48
O3 : Pre-test for control class
O4 : Post-test for control class
X : Treatment for experimental class; speaking through realia
2. Population
Arikunto (1997: 115) states that population is defined as overall
object of the research target. The population of this research is the
second grade students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the academic year of
2014/2015. There are 9 classes and each class consists of 23- 26
students.
3. Sample
Arikunto (1997:117) states that sample is part of population
representative which written. The sample of this research is two
classes in the second grade students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the
academic year of 2014/2015 chosen purposely using Purposive
sampling. Purposive sampling is a sampling technique with particular
consideration, for example by specifying specific criteria to be selected
to the sample Arikunto (1997: 127).
In this research, the writer used purposive sampling to choose the
sample according to the English teacher’s recommendation. The
English teacher in SMP N3 Salatiga who teaches English for the
second grade students is Mrs. Hariyati. She recommended VIII B as
experimental class with expectation that realia can help them in

49
improving their speaking skill. Mrs. Hariyati also recommended VIII
A as the control class because some of the students in that class have
same speaking ability with the previous class. Therefore, the samples
of this research are VIII B as the experimental class and VIII A as the
control class. There were 26 students in VIII B class and 26 students in
VIII A. The experimental class was given treatment using realia and
the control class did not given any treatment.
List of respondents in this research is presented on the table 3.5
and 3.6 bellow:
TABLE 3.4
List of Respondent in Experimental Group
NO NAME GENDER
1 Alida Nur Fitriani Female
2. Angela GriyaAdinda Rosa Female

3. Anggi Prasasti Mahadewi Female
4. Antonius Adi Kurnia Male
5. Bagas Angger Panuntun Male
6. Clara Arnesty Putri Female
7. David Aryo Wicaksono Male
8. Dinda Selvyra Sekar Aulia Female
9. Erika Putri Hapsari Female
10. Felik Tegar Pribadi Utomo Male
11. Firda Ardiani Female
12. Galang Sukma Bangsa Male
13. Henna Widanis Female
14. Herdian Dwi Rahma Male
15. Muhammad Novarizal Male
16. Nanda Erika Saputri Female
17. Nataniel Ardian Pratama Male
18. Novi Permata Sari Female
19. Oktavia NurulKhotimah Female
50
20. Pandu Dhipa Raharja Male

21. Puspitaratna Dyah Irawati Female
22. Rahayu Novita Sari Female
23. Septiani Indah Fajarwati Female
24. Tiffani Naufal Male
25. Wahyuningsih Female
26. Yannake Yondya Muriazhendy Female
TABLE 3.5
List Respondent in Control Group
NO NAME GENDER
1. Aditya Surya Lesmana Male
2. Albert DeoSaputra Male
3. Alfiana Glory Yunanda Christy Female
4. Anggit Widyantoro Male
5. Anninditya ArddinFadillah Female
6. Bagas Ari Nugroho Male
7. Bungakayana Suci Female
8. Calvin Adjie Santoso Male
9. Condro Ariadi Male
10. DendyYudhaNugroho Male
11. Desi Alvitriyani Female
12. Gaizka Devara Cristiano Male
13. Giskha Novelinda Olvyrasari Female
14. Ihsan Fuadi Male
15. Ira Fatma Satya AyuWardani Female
16. Ivania Putri Puspita Sari Female
17. Khoirul Faizin Male
18. Klara Dwi Nur Asiyah Female
19. Lailiya Sofiana Female
20. Naftalia Intan Paramesti Female
21. Prisel Jonathan Yedija Male
22. Rensa Sekar Avodina Female
23. Salsabila Aisya Yulianto Female
24. Siti Amrina Rosyidah Female
25. Wening Cahyani Female
26. Yasmin Tiara Meilina Sari Female
51
4. Data Sources
Arikunto (2002:22) states that data sources of qualitative research
are presented in spoken or written accurately. In order to know
whether there is significant differences between students who are
taught using realia technique and students who are not. The writer uses
the data sources both primary and secondary data that described as
follows:
a. Primary Data
The primary data sources of this research taken from students test
during pre-test and post- test from both experimental and control
class.
b. Secondary Data
The secondary data of this research taken from the writer’s
observation in both experimental and control class while the
research is conducted.
5. Hypothesis
According to Arikunto (2002:7), hypothesis is temporary
assumption for the problem of research to reasonable show with the
grouping of data.
There are two kinds of hypothesis state by Kasiram (2010:252) on his
book Methodologi Penelitian Kualitatif-Kuantitatif, they are:

52
a. Alternative Hypothesis (Ha)
: is hypothesis which use positive sentence.
In this research the alternative hypothesis (Ha) says that realia can
improve students’ speaking skill.
b. Null/Nol Hypothesis (Ho)
: is hypothesis which is formulated in negative sentence.
In this research the null hypothesis says that realia cannot improve
students’ speaking skill.
6. Technique of Collecting Data
The writer presents the act of collecting data as follows:
a. Test
According Arikunto (1997:139) test is used to measure the basic
capabilities and achievements. In order to collect the data, the
writer gives tests which consists of pre-test and post-test after
treatment.
1) Pre-test
Pre-test is given to both experimental and control class. Pre-
test is administrated to know and measure the students’
speaking ability overall.
2) Treatment
After giving pre-test, the experimental class is given treatment
using realia to teach speaking meanwhile the control class is
isolated from the treatment.

53
3) Post-test
In the end, the writer given post-test to both groups
experimental and control group. Post-test is administrated to
know whether there is significant difference before and after
the treatment.
b. Observation
In observation, the most effective way complete the
observation format or form as the instrument. The arranged form
consists of items about occurrences or behaviors that drawn will
be happened, Arikunto (1997: 146).The writer also observes the
students while they are studying in the class to analyze the data.
The writer observes the second grade students of SMP N 3
Salatiga after the research permission accepted on March, 10th
2015 until the research is conducted on 11- 12th March 2015.
c. Documentation
According Arikunto (1997: 149), documentation is a
method that is used to find the related data by using variables like
notes, transcript, book, newspaper, magazine, epigraphy, etc In
this research, the writer uses documentation as a method of
collecting the data. The documentation is done by taking the
picture and transcript students speaking using recording while this
research is conducted. The writer asked the observer to record the
students’ performance .In this research, the writer also collects the
54
data by asking the staff administration related to the school’s
profile.
d. Field Note
The writer also takes some note to collect the data. It is
intended to know which one of the students’ who has mastery
speaking skill and those who still inadequate and need more
exercise. This method helps the writer with what the students need
and what feedback to give after all.
7. Technique of Analyzing Data
To analyze the result of the data from pre-test and post-test, the
writer uses the following steps:
a. Scoring the students’ test
In this step, the writer scores the result from the pre-test and
post-test from experimental class and control class. The writer
uses 1-5 point scale to measure the students’ oral speech using
oral rubric. In giving score, the writer looked at the aspects of
speaking that stated by Brown (2000: 406-407).

55
Table 3.6 Rubric of Evaluation of Scoring Students’
Speaking Ability
Name : _____________________/ Score: ______/20
Content 5 points 4 points 3 point 2 point 1 point

Fluency Quick, Fluently, Fluently Fluently not No specific
fluently, Occasiona enough, good enough, fluency
continuo l hesitation several many description,
us with unnatural unnatural not
no hesitations hesitation complete
hesitatio and utterance
n and searching
clear for words
Pronunciation Pronunci Errors in Require Pronunciatio Errors in
ation is pronunciat guessing at n has many pronunciati
excellent ion are meaning, problems on are
like quite rare accent may frequent but
native be can be
speaker obviously understood
foreign by native
speaker
Vocabulary Very Good, Good No enough Very little
good; appropriat enough, vocabulary or vocabulary
Use e rarely have incorrect use Vocabulary
appropri vocabular to look for a repeated
ate and y and word
new response
words
Grammar Excellen Good; Good Many Errors in
t; No Two or enough; problems like grammar
grammat fewer listener in verb are frequent
ical grammatic understand forms but speaker
errors al errors enough Errors in can be
basic understood
structures by native
speaker
Comprehension Understa Understan Understand No enough Confusing
nding the ding the ing the understandin in
concept concept concept g the concept understandi
very good good ng the
good enough concept
56
b. Calculated the Results of the test
After scoring the students’ test, the writer calculated the
data using t-test to determine whether there is significant
difference before and after the treatment both from
experimental and control groups. If the mean improves, it is
suggested that students’ speaking skill also improves. The steps
to calculate the data according Sudjono (2002:66-67) described
as follows
1. Mean
a) Pre-test of experiment group
X1 =
∑ x1
N
b) Pre-test of control group
X2 =
∑ x2
N
c) Pot-test of experiment group
Y1 =
∑ y1
N
d) Post-test of control group
Y2 =
∑ y2
N
57
2. Standard deviation (SDD)
∑ 2 (∑ )2
SDD =
N
∑D = X-Y
∑D2 = (X-Y)2
SDD = Standard deviation
X = Pre Test
Y = Post Test
N = Total of Respondents
3. Standard error of mean difference (SEMD)
SD D
SEMD =
√N 1
SEMD = Standard error of mean difference
SDD = Standard Deviation
N = Total of Respondents
58
4. Calculating the T-test using: t-value (to)
MD
to =
SEMD
The formula of MD is as follow:
∑D
MD =
N
59
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSION
In this chapter, the writer will presented the data and the analysis
from the result of pre-test and post-test both from experimental and control
groups. The writer collected the data from 52 first grade students of SMP
N 3 Salatiga in the academic year of 2014/2015. They were consist of 26
students from Class VIII B as experimental group who were taught using
realia and 26 students from class VIII A as control group who were not
taught using realia. The writer listed the students’ pre-test and post-test
scores. The results of the research presented as follows:
A. Use of Realia to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill in the Eighth
Grade Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga
The result of this research analyze in numeral form. Those data
described the improvement of students’ speaking skill using realia. The
writer listed the students’ scores in pre-test and post-test. The result of
the research presented as follows:
1. Experimental Group
a. Pre – test
The Experiment Group was given a pre-test on March, 11th
2015. In the pre-test, the students were asked to speak in front
of class. Each of them gives description about their favorite
pet. The students’ speaking ability was scored using five scales
60
speaking rubric presented in chapter III. The result of the pre-
test can be seen on the table below:
Table 4.1
Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre
Test Experimental Group
Classification Score Rating Frequency Percentage

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8%
Very Good 18-22 4 4 15.4 %
Good 13-17 3 19 73.1 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 2 7.7%
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0
Total N=26 100%
The percentage was counted using this formula:
X 100%
In the above table 4.1, there are 26 respondents in this
research before given treatment. From all of the respondents,
there is 1student (3.8%) who get excellent, there are 4 student
(15.4 %)who get very good score, there are 19 students (73.1
%) who get good score, and there are 2 students (7.7%) get
good enough score. The details of the students’ score on the
pre-test presented on the table below:

61
Table 4.2
Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre – test
Experimental Group
NO R F P V G C TOTAL SCORE
1 R1 2 2 2 2 3 11 2
2 R2 3 3 2 2 4 14 3
3 R3 3 3 3 3 3 15 3
4 R4 2 2 3 2 3 12 2
5 R5 3 2 3 3 4 15 3
6 R6 4 4 2 3 4 17 3
7 R7 4 4 2 3 4 17 3
8 R8 4 4 3 2 4 17 3
9 R9 5 5 5 4 5 24 5
10 R10 2 2 3 2 4 13 3
11 R11 3 3 3 3 3 15 3
12 R12 3 3 2 3 4 15 3
13 R13 3 3 3 4 5 18 4
14 R14 3 2 4 4 4 17 3
15 R15 3 3 4 3 5 18 4
16 R16 3 2 2 2 4 13 3
17 R17 3 2 2 3 4 14 3
18 R18 3 2 4 4 4 17 3
19 R19 3 3 3 2 5 16 3
20 R20 3 2 3 4 4 16 3
21 R21 3 3 3 4 5 18 4
22 R22 3 3 3 3 4 16 3
23 R23 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
24 R24 2 2 3 3 4 14 3
25 R25 2 2 2 3 4 13 3
26 R26 4 4 4 3 4 19 4
Notes: Score =
R = Respondent V = Vocabulary
F = Fluency G = Grammar
P = Pronunciation C = Comprehension
62
The students’ score was counted using above formula and
the writer rounded decimal numbers. If the decimal point less than
five then it rounded down, but if the decimal point five or more
than five then rounded up. Example 3.4 rounded to 3; 3.6 rounded
to 4 and soon.
Based on the table 4.2, it can be seen that the most of the
students get good score. There are 19 students get good score with
rate between 13-17 points. There is 0nly 1 students get excellent
point with rate between 23-25 points. There are 4 students get very
good score with rate between 18-22 points and there are 2 students
get good enough score. It can be concluded that the most of the
students’ speaking skill before given treatment in
experimental group is good with rate between 13-17 points.
The writer also made score of the students’ speaking skill
before given treatment by using realia. It was classified based on
English speaking proficiency consists of fluency, pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary and comprehension. The details of the
students’ speaking proficiency were presented as follows:
1) Fluency
The students’ fluency in experimental group before
given treatment presented as follows:

63
Table 4.3
Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the
Students’ Speaking Skill in Fluency
Score Rating Frequency Percentage

Classification
Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8%
Very Good 18-22 4 4 15.4 %
Good 13-17 3 16 61.6%
Good Enough 8-12 2 5 19.2 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.3 shows that the students’ fluency
before given treatment (pre-test). Based on the above table,
there is 1 student (3.8 %) get excellent score. There are 4
students (15.4%) get very good score, there are 16 students
(61.6 %) get good score, and there are 5 students (19.2%)
get good enough score.
According to the above table, it can be concluded
that the most of the student’ fluency before given treatment
is good with 3 score. Most of students presented in English
with several unnatural hesitations and sometimes grope for
words they want to say.
2) Pronunciation
The students’ pronunciation in experimental group
before given treatment presented as follows:

64
Table 4,4
Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’
Speaking Skill in Pronunciation

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8%
Very Good 18-22 4 4 15.4 %
Good 13-17 3 10 34.5 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 11 42.3 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.4 shows that the students’ pronunciation
before given treatment ( pre-test). Based on the above table,
there is 1 student (3.8%) get 5 score. There are 4 students
(15.4 %) get 4 score, there are 10 students (34.5 %) get 3
score and there are 11 students (42.3 %) get 2 score.
According to the above table, it can be concluded that the
most of the students’ pronunciation before given treatment
is good with 3 score and good enough with 2 score. It
means that errors in pronouncing words or sentences are
quite rare.
3) Vocabulary
The students’ vocabulary mastery in experimental
group presented as follows:

65
Table 4.5
Speaking Skill in Vocabulary

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8%
Very Good 18-22 4 4 15.4%
Good 13-17 3 13 50 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 8 30.8 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.5 shows that the students’
vocabulary mastery before given treatment (pre-test). Based
on the above table, there is 1 student (3l.8%) get 5 score.
There are 4 students (l5.4 %) get 4 score, there are 13
students (50 %) get 3 score and there are 8 students (30.8
%) get 2 score.
that the most of the students’ vocabulary mastery before
given treatment is good with 3 score. It means that almost
the students in experimental group are able to speak the
language with sufficient vocabulary.
4) Grammar
The students’ grammar mastery in experimental
group before given treatment presented as follows:

66
Table 4.6
Speaking Skill in Grammar

Excellent 23-25 5 - -
Very Good 18-22 4 7 27 %
Good 13-17 3 12 46 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 7 27 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
grammar mastery before given treatment (pre- test). Based
on the above table, there are 12 students (46 %) get 3 score,
there are 7 students (27 %) get 4 score, and there are 7
students (27 %) get 2 score.
that most of the students’ grammar mastery is good with 3
score. There are 40 % of the students in experimental group
are good in control of the grammar
5) Comprehension
The students’ comprehension in experimental group
before given the treatment presented as follows:
Table 4.7
Speaking Skill in Comprehension

67

Excellent 23-25 5 5 19.2 %
Very Good 18-22 4 17 65.4 %
Good 13-17 3 4 15.4 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 - -
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
comprehension before given treatment (prêt-test). Based on
the above table, there are 5 students (19.2 %) get 5 score,
there are 17 students (65.4 %) get 4 score and there are 4
student (15.4%) get 3 score. According to the above table, it
can be concluded that most of the students’ comprehension
before given treatment is very good with 4 score. More than
60% of experimental group students have complete
comprehension at a normal rate of speech.
b. Post –test
After giving pre-test, the experimental group was give
treatment by using realiato teach speaking skill. The technique
is differentiated in order to know whether realia is effective to
improve students’ speaking skill. The treatment was given two
times. In the treatment, the writer delivered material of
descriptive text by using realia( the writer used realia of dogs
and cats) . The students were given realia of dog and cat. Then,
the students were asked to make description of realia that they

68
have received and presented their work orally in front of class.
The result of the post–test can be seen on the table below:
Table 4.8
Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post –Test
Experimental Group

Excellent 23-25 5 8 30.8%
Very Good 18-22 4 18 69.2 %
Good 13-17 3 - -
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
X 100%
In the above table 4.8, there are 26 respondents in this
research after given treatment (post-test). From all of the
respondents, there are 8 students (30.8 %) who get excellent,
there are 18 students (69.2 %) who get very good score. The
detail of the students’ scores on the post-test presented on
the table below

69
Table 4.9
Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post – test
Experimental Group
1 R1 4 4 4 4 4 20 4
2 R2 4 4 5 5 5 22 4
3 R3 4 4 4 4 4 20 4
4 R4 3 3 4 5 4 19 4
5 R5 4 3 4 4 5 20 4
6 R6 5 5 5 3 5 23 5
7 R7 4 4 3 4 4 19 4
8 R8 5 4 5 4 5 23 5
9 R9 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
10 R10 3 3 4 4 4 18 4
11 R11 4 4 4 5 5 22 4
12 R12 4 4 4 5 5 22 4
13 R13 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
14 R14 4 3 5 5 5 22 4
15 R15 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
16 R16 3 3 3 4 5 18 4
17 R17 3 3 5 5 5 21 4
18 R18 3 4 5 4 5 21 4
19 R19 4 4 3 3 5 19 4
20 R20 4 3 3 4 4 18 4
21 R21 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
22 R22 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
23 R23 4 3 5 3 5 20 4
24 R24 3 3 5 5 5 21 4
25 R25 4 4 3 4 4 19 4
26 R26 4 4 5 5 5 23 5
Notes: Score =
70
Based on the above table, it can be seen that most of the
students get very good score. There are 16 students get 4 score
with score rate between 18-22 points. There are 8 students get
excellent score with score rate between 18-22 points, and there are
2 students get 3 score with score rate 13-17 points. It can be
concluded that most of the students’ speaking skill after given
treatment in experimental group is very good with 4 score. More
than 60 % of the students are able to use language fluently and
accurately on almost all levels.
Besides that, the writer also made score of the students’
speaking proficiency after given treatment by using realia. The
details of the students’ speaking proficiency were presented as
follows:
1) Fluency
Table 4.10
Speaking Skill in Fluency

Excellent 23-25 5 2 7.7 %
Very Good 18-22 4 18 69.2 %
Good 13-17 3 6 23.1%
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
71
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.10 shows that the students’ fluency after
given treatment (post test). Based on the above table, there are
2 students (7.7%) who get excellent score with score rate
between 23-25 points. There are 18 students (69.2 %) who get
very good score with score rate between 18-22 points, and
there are 6 students (23.1 %) who get good score with score
rate 13-17 points.
According to above table, it can be concluded that most of
the students’ fluency after given the treatment improve from 3
to 4 score. It means that students’ fluency after the treatment is
very good score with 4 score. More than 60 % of the student
are able to use the language fluently on all levels and presented
in English with several unnatural hesitations.
2) Pronunciation
Table 4.11

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8 %
Very Good 18-22 4 16 61.6%
Good 13-17 3 9 34.6 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
72
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.11 shows that the students’ pronunciation
after given treatment (post-test).based on the above table, there
is 1 student( 3.8%) get 5 score, there are 16 students (61.6 %)
who get 4 score and there are 9 student (34.6 %) who get 3
score.
According to the above table, it can be concluded that most
the students’ pronunciation after given treatment improve from
2 to 3 score and 3 to 4 score. More than 60 % of the students
are very good in their pronunciation. The errors they made in
pronunciation are quite rare.
3) Vocabulary
Table 4.12

Excellent 23-25 5 13 50%
Very Good 18-22 4 8 30.8%
Good 13-17 3 5 19.2%
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.12 shows that the students’ vocabulary
after given treatment (post-test). Based on the above table,
there are 13 students (50%) get 5 score. There are 8 students

73
(30.8%) get 4 score, and there are 5 students (19.2 %) get 3
score.
According to the above table, it can be concluded that t
most of the students’ vocabulary mastery after given treatment
is excellent with 5 score and very good with 4 score. It means
that almost the students in experimental group are able to
speak the language with sufficient vocabulary.
4) Grammar
Table 4.13

Excellent 23-25 5 13 50 %
Very Good 18-22 4 10 38.5%
Good 13-17 3 3 11.5 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.13 shows that the students’ grammar
mastery after given treatment (post- test). Based on the above
table, there are 13 students (50%) get 5 score. There are 10
students (38.5 %) get 4 score, and there are 3 students (11.5%)
get 3 score.
74
of the students of experimental group are able to use the
language accurately and errors in grammar are quite rare.
5) Comprehension
The students’ comprehension in experimental group after
given the treatment (post-test) presented as follows:
Table 4.14

Excellent 23-25 5 19 73.1%
Very Good 18-22 4 7 26.9 %
Good 13-17 3 - -
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.14, shows that the students’ comprehension
after given treatment (post-test). Based on the above table,
there are 19 students (73.1%) get 5 score, there are 7 students
(26.9 %) get 4 score.
of the students’ comprehension after given treatment is
excellent with 5 score. More than 70% of experimental group
students have complete comprehension at a normal rate of
speech.
75
2. Control Group
a. Pre –test
The Control Group was given a pre-test on March, 11th
2015. In the pre-test, the students were asked to speak in front
of class. Each of them gives description about their favorite
pet. The students’ speaking ability was scored using five scales
speaking rubric presented in chapter III. The result of the pre-
test can be seen on the table below:
Table 4.15
Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-test
Control Group

Excellent 23-25 5 2 7.7 %
Very Good 18-22 4 4 15.4 %
Good 13-17 3 19 73.1 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 1 3l.8 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
X 100%
In this above table 4.14, there are 26 respondents in this
research as control group. From all of the respondents, there

76
are 2 students (7.7 %) who get excellent, 4 students (15.4%)
get very
good score . There are 19 students (73.1%) get good score, and
there is 1 student (3.8%) get 3 score.
The detail of the students’ score on the pre –test presented
on the table below:
Table 4.16
Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-test
Control Group
1 R1 3 3 3 3 4 16 3
2 R2 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
3 R3 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
4 R4 3 3 3 3 4 16 3
5 R5 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
6 R6 3 2 3 3 4 15 3
7 R7 4 2 3 3 5 17 3
8 R8 3 3 4 4 3 17 3
9 R9 3 2 3 4 4 16 3
10 R10 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
11 R11 3 2 4 4 4 17 3
12 R12 3 2 3 3 4 15 3
13 R13 4 5 4 5 5 23 5
14 R14 3 2 2 2 3 12 2
15 R15 3 4 4 4 5 20 4
16 R16 2 3 4 3 4 16 3
17 R17 3 2 2 2 4 13 3
18 R18 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
19 R19 4 2 4 3 4 17 3
20 R20 3 4 4 3 3 17 3
21 R21 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
22 R22 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
23 R23 4 4 4 4 5 21 4
77
24 R24 4 4 4 4 5 21 4
25 R25 5 4 4 5 5 23 5
26 R26 4 4 3 4 5 20 4
Notes: Score =
Based on the above table 4.16, it can be seen that the most
of the students get very good score. There are 17 (65.4%) students
get very good score with score rate between 18-22 points. There
are 2 students get excellent score, there are 6 students (23.1%) get
good score, and there is 1 student (3.8%) get good enough score.
It can be concluded that the most of the students’ speaking
ability in control group is very good with 4 score. Besides that, the
writer also made score of the students’ speaking skill in control
group. The writer was classified based on English proficiency
consist of fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar and
comprehension. The details of the students’ speaking proficiency
presented as follows:
78
1) Fluency
Table 4.17
Speaking Skill in Fluency

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8 %
Very Good 18-22 4 6 23.1%
Good 13-17 3 18 69.2 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 1 3.8 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table shows the students’ fluency of control
group in pre –test. Based on the above table, there are 1 student
(3.8 %) get 5 score, there are 6 students (23.1 %) get 4 score
there are 18 students (69.2%) get 3 score and there is 1 student
(3.8 %) get 2 score. According to the above table, it can be
concluded that most of the students’ fluency of control group in
the pre-test is good with 3 score. It means that most of the
students can presented English with few unnatural hesitations.
2) Pronunciation
Table 4.18

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.8 %
79
Very Good 18-22 4 6 23.1%

Good 13-17 3 11 42.3 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 8 30.8 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.18 shows the students’ pronunciation of
the control group in pre –test. Based on the above table, there is
1 students (3.8%) get 5 score, there are 6 students (23.1 %) get
4 score, there are 11 students (42.31%) get 3 score and there
are 8 students (30.8%) get 2 score.
of the students’ pronunciation of control group in the pre-test is
good with 4 score. It means that most of the students generally
used correct pronunciation and the errors they made are quite
rare.
3) Vocabulary
Table 4.19

Very Good 18-22 4 13 50 %
Good 13-17 3 11 42.3 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 2 7.7 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
80
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.19 shows that the students’ vocabulary
before given treatment (pre-test). Based on the above table,
there are 13 students (50 %) get 4 score, there are 11 students
(42.3 %) get 3 score and there are 2 students (7.7 %) get 2
score.
of the students’ vocabulary mastery before given treatment is
very good with 4 score. It means that almost the students in
control group are able to speak the language with sufficient
vocabulary.
4) Grammar
Table 4.20

Excellent 23-25 5 2 7.7 %
Very Good 18-22 4 11 42.3 %
Good 13-17 3 11 42.3 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 2 7.7 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.20 shows the students’ grammar mastery
of the control group in the pre-test. Based on the above table,

81
there are 2 student (7.7%) get 5 score. There are 11 students
(42.3 %) get 4 score, there are 11 students (42.3 %) get 3 score
and there are 2 students (7.7%) get 2 score.
of the students’ grammar mastery in pre-test is very good with
4 score, and good with 3 score. It means that most of the
students in control group are able to use the language
accurately; the Grammars’ errors of they made are quite rare.
5) Comprehension
The students’ comprehension in control group before given
the treatment presented as follows:
Table 4.21

Excellent 23-25 5 7 27%
Very Good 18-22 4 16 61.5%
Good 13-17 3 3 11.5 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
comprehension before given treatment (pre-test). Based on the
above table, there are 7 students (27 %) get 5 score. There are
16 students (61.5%) get 4 score and there are 3 students

82
(11.5%) get 3 score. According to the above table, it can be
concluded that most of the students’ comprehension before
given treatment is very good with 4 score. More than 60% of
control group students have complete comprehension at a
normal rate of speech.
b. Post-test
In the post-test, the students were asked to speak about their
favorite pet. The control group did the post-test by speaking
about their favorite pet using group discussion. The writer
gives explanation about descriptive text. Then, the students
were divided into 5 groups, and each group consists of 5 – 6
students. The groups were given a picture related to the topic
“My favorite pet”. After that, they have to discuss with their
group. The result of the post-test can be seen on the table
below:
Table 4.22
Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-test
Control Group

Excellent 23-25 5 2 7.7 %
Very Good 18-22 4 11 42.3%
Good 13-17 3 13 50 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
83
X 100%
In this above table 4.22, there are 26 respondents in this
research as control group. From all of the respondents, there
are 2 students (7.7 %) who get excellent, 11 students (42.3 %)
get very good score and there are 13 students (50 %) get good
score. The detail of the students’ score on the pre –test
presented on the table below:
Table 4.23
Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-test
Control Group
1 R1 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
2 R2 3 3 4 3 3 16 3
3 R3 3 3 3 4 4 17 3
4 R4 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
5 R5 4 4 4 5 4 21 4
6 R6 3 3 3 4 3 16 3
7 R7 3 3 4 3 3 16 3
8 R8 4 4 4 4 4 20 4
9 R9 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
10 R10 4 4 4 4 5 21 4
11 R11 3 3 4 3 3 16 3
12 R12 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
13 R13 4 5 4 5 5 23 5
14 R14 3 3 2 3 4 15 3
15 R15 4 4 4 4 4 20 4
16 R16 3 3 4 3 4 17 3
17 R17 3 2 3 4 4 16 3
18 R18 3 3 4 4 3 17 3
19 R19 4 3 4 4 4 19 4
84
20 R20 4 4 4 3 4 19 4
21 R21 4 4 4 4 5 21 4
22 R22 4 5 4 4 5 22 4
23 R23 4 5 4 4 5 23 5
24 R24 4 4 5 4 5 22 4
25 R25 4 4 4 5 4 21 4
26 R26 4 4 4 4 4 20 4
Notes: Score =
Based on the above table 4.23, it can be seen that the most
of the students get very good score and good score. There 2 are
students (7.7 %) who get excellent, 11 students (42.3 %) get
very good score and there are 13 students (50 %) get good
score.
It can be said that the most of the students’ speaking ability
in control group is good with 3 score. Besides that, the writer
also made score of the students’ speaking skill in control
group. The writer was classified based on English proficiency
consist of fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar and
comprehension. The details of the students’ speaking
proficiency presented as follows:

85
1) Fluency
Table 4.24
Students’ Speaking Skill in Fluency

Very Good 18-22 4 13 50%
Good 13-17 3 13 50 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table shows the students’ fluency of
control group in pre –test. Based on the above table, there
are 13 students (50%) get 4 score, and there are 13 students
(50 %) get 4 score. According to the above table, it can be
concluded that most of the students’ fluency of control
group in the pre-test is very good with 4 score and good
with 3 score. It means that most of the students can
presented English with few unnatural hesitations.
2) Pronunciation
Table 4.25
Students’

86
Excellent 23-25 5 3 11.5 %

Very Good 18-22 4 9 34.7%
Good 13-17 3 13 50 %
Good Enough 8-12 2 1 3.8%
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
The above table 4.25 shows the students’
pronunciation of the control group in post –test. Based on
the above table, there is 3 students (11.5%) get 5 score,
there are 9 students (34.7 %) get 4 score, there are 13
students (50 %) get 3 score and there is 1 student (3.8%)
get 2 score.
that most of the students’ pronunciation of control group in
the post-test is good with 3 score. More than 50% students
get good score. It means that most of the students generally
used correct pronunciation and the errors they made are
quite rare.
3) Vocabulary
Table 4.26
Students’ Speaking Skill in Vocabulary

Excellent 23-25 5 1 3.85%
Very Good 18-22 4 21 80.8%
Good 13-17 3 3 11.5 %
87
Good Enough 8-12 2 1 3.85%

Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
vocabulary after given treatment (post-test). Based on the
above table, there is 1 student (3.85 %) get 5 score. There
are 21 students (80.8%) get 4 score, there are 3 students
(11.5) get 3 score, and there is 1 student (3.85%) get 2
score.
that t most of the students’ vocabulary mastery after given
treatment is very good with 4 score. It means that almost
the students in control group are able to speak the language
with sufficient vocabulary.
4) Grammar
Table 4.27
Students’ Speaking Skill in Grammar

Excellent 23-25 5 3 11.5 %
Very Good 18-22 4 13 50 %
Good 13-17 3 10 38.5 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
88
The above table 4.27 shows the students’ grammar
mastery of the control group in the post-test. Based on the
above table, there are 3 student (11.5 %) get 5 score. There
are 13 students (50 %) get 4 score, and there are 10
students (38.5 %) get 3 score.
that most of the students’ grammar mastery in post-test is
very good with 4 score.
5) Comprehension
The students’ comprehension in control group after
given the treatment presented as follows:
Table 4.28
Students’

Excellent 23-25 5 6 23.1 %
Very Good 18-22 4 15 57.7%
Good 13-17 3 5 19.2 %
Poor 5-7 1 - -
Very Poor <5 0 - -
Total N=26 100%
comprehension after given treatment (post-test). Based on

89
the above table, there are 6 students (23.1 %) get 5 score.
There are 15 students (57.7%) get 4 score, and there are 5
students (19.2%) get 3 score. According to the above table,
it can be concluded that most of the students’
comprehension after given treatment is very good with 4
score. More than 50 % of control group students have
complete comprehension at a normal rate of speech.
B. Discussion
1. Use of Realia to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill
In order to know the use of realia to improve students;
speaking, the writer computes the data from the result of the pre-
test and post-test of experimental and control group as follows:
a. Experimental Group
The students’ speaking skill score in Pre – test and Post-
test of Experimental Group, can be seen in the table below:
Table 4.29
Students’ Speaking Skill Score in Pre-test and Post-test
Score
NO RESPONDENT PRE-TEST POS-TEST D D2

1 R1 2 4 -2 4
2 R2 3 4 -1 1
3 R3 3 4 -1 1
4 R4 2 4 -2 4
5 R5 3 4 -1 1
6 R6 3 5 -2 4
7 R7 3 4 -1 1
90
8 R8 3 5 -2 4
9 R9 5 5 0 0
10 R10 3 4 -1 1
11 R11 3 4 -1 1
12 R12 3 4 -1 1
13 R13 4 5 -1 1
14 R14 3 4 -1 1
15 R15 4 5 -1 1
16 R16 3 4 -1 1
17 R17 3 4 -1 1
18 R18 3 4 -1 1
19 R19 3 4 -1 1
20 R20 3 4 -1 1
21 R21 4 5 -1 1
22 R22 3 5 -2 4
23 R23 3 4 -1 1
24 R24 3 4 -1 1
25 R25 3 4 -1 1
26 R26 4 5 -1 1
N=26 82 112 -30 40
b. Control Group
The students’ speaking skill score in Pre – test and Post-
test of Control Group, can be seen in the table below:
Table 4.30
Students’ Speaking Skill Score in Pre-test and Post-test
Score
NO RESPONDENT POST-TEST POST-TEST D D2

1 R1 3 3 0 0
2 R2 3 3 0 0
3 R3 3 3 0 0
4 R4 3 3 0 0
5 R5 3 4 -1 1
91
6 R6 3 3 0 0
7 R7 3 3 0 0
8 R8 3 4 -1 1
9 R9 3 3 0 0
10 R10 3 4 -1 1
11 R11 3 3 0 0
12 R12 3 3 0 0
13 R13 5 5 0 0
14 R14 2 3 -1 1
15 R15 4 4 0 0
16 R16 3 3 0 0
17 R17 3 3 0 0
18 R18 3 3 0 0
19 R19 3 4 -1 1
20 R20 3 4 -1 1
21 R21 3 4 -1 1
22 R22 3 4 -1 1
23 R23 4 5 -1 1
24 R24 4 4 0 0
25 R25 5 4 1 1
26 R26 4 4 0 0
N=26 85 93 -8 10
c. Mean
a) Experimental group
X1 =
∑ x1
N
82
X1 =
26
X1 = 3.2
Y1 =
∑ y1
N
112
Y1 =
26
92
Y1 = 4.3
b) Control group
X2 =
∑ x2
N
85
X2 =
26
X2 = 3.3
Y2 =
∑ y2
N
93
Y2 =
26
Y2 = 3.6
d. Standard deviation (SDD)
a) Experimental Group
∑ (∑ )
SDD =
∑ (∑ )
SDD =
( )
SDD =
SDD = 1.5 − (−1.2)
SDD = √2.25 − 1.44
SDD = √0.81
SDD = 0.9
93
b) Control Group
∑ (∑ )
SDD =
∑ (∑ )
SDD =
( )
SDD =
SDD= 0.38 − (−0.31)
SDD = √0.1444 − 0.0961
SDD = √0.0483
SDD = 0.22
e. Standard error of mean difference (SEMD)
a) Experimental group
SEMD =
√
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
SEMD = 0.18
94
b) Control group
SEMD =
√
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
√
.
SEMD =
SEMD = 0.04
f. Determining the standard error mean difference of M1(
mean experimental group ) and M2( mean control group )
SEM1.M2 =√ 1 + 2
SEM1.M2=√0.18 + 0.04
SEM1.M2=√0.0324 + 0.0016
SEM1.M2=0.18
95
g. Determining t-value (to)
to=
.
. .
to=
.
.
to= .
to= 3.888
h. Determining ttablein significance level 5% and 1% with df
df = ( N1 + N2 ) - 2
df= ( 26 + 26 ) – 2
df= 50
the writer gained ttable
5% = 2.009
1% = 2.678
Tscore= 2.009 < 3.888 > 2.678
i. The Comparison between tscore with ttable
In the table of significance or in ttable ,we can see on the df =
50 on degree 5% and 1% the result 2.009 and 2.678 , tscoreis
3.888 , so we can include that tscoreis higher than ttable..
Table.4.31
Pre-Test and Post-Test Students’ Average Scores
of Experimental and Control Group
N Component Group The The

o Average Average
Percentag Percentag
96
e of Pre- e of Post-
Test Test
1. Fluency Experimenta 3.0 3.9
l
Control 3.3 3.5
2. Pronunciation Experimenta 2.8 3.7
l
Control 3.0 3.5
3. Vocabulary Experimenta 3.0 4.3
l
Control 3.4 3.9
4. Grammar Experimenta 3.0 4.4
l
Control 3.5 3.7
2. Comprehensio Experimenta 4.0 4.7
n l
Control 4.2 4.2
Based on table 4.31, experimental and control group
realized a rise of average score in each aspect of speaking. The
experimental group average score was higher than control
group. In fluency, the average scores of experimental group
was 3.9 (post-test) from 3.0 (pre-test) while the average scores
of control group was 3.5(post-test) from 3.3 (pre-test).
In the pronunciation, the average scores of experimental
group was 3.7 (post-test) from 2.8 (pre-test) while the average
score of control group was 3.5 (post-test) from 3.0 (pre-test).
In vocabulary, the average scores of experimental group was
4.3 (post-test) from 3.0 (pre-test) while the average score of

97
control group was 3.9 (post-test) from 3.4 (pre-test). In
grammar, the average scores of experimental group was 4.4
(post-test) from 3.0 (pre-test) while the average score of
control group was 3.7 (post-test) from 3.5 (pre-test),and in
comprehension, the average scores of experimental group was
4.7 (post-test) from 4.0 (pre-test) while the average score of
control group was 4.2 (post-test) from 4.2 (pre-test). It means
that the average score of students’ speaking skill in
experimental group is better than control group. Therefore, it
can be concluded that realia is effective to improve students in’
speaking skill of the second grade students of SMP N 3
Salatiga in the academic year of 2014/2015.1
C. Significant Improvement of Students’ Speaking Skill before and
after Teaching Speaking using Realia in Second Grade Students of
SMP N 3 Salatiga.
To analyze the significant improvement of students’ speaking skill
before and after using realia between experimental group and control
group, the writer makes a table of calculating research and the diagram
of figure pre-test and post-test and gain score of experimental and
control group.
98
Table 4.32
Result of Calculating Research
Result Experiment Control

No Group Group
1 Mean of
a. Pre- 3.2 3.3
test 4.3 3.6
b. Post-test
2 Standard Deviation 0.9 0.22
3 T-table vs. T-test 2.009 <3.888> 2.678
Table 4.33
Diagram of Figure Pre-test, Post-test and Gain Score of
Experimental and Control Group
3
Pre-test
2 Post-test
Gain Score
1
Gain Score
0 Post-test
Experimental Group Pre-test
Control Group
99
The above table 4.33 and 4.34show that in Experimental group, the
mean of pre-test is 3.2 and 4.3 for the post-test and in Control group, the
mean for pre-test is 3.3 and 3.6 for post-test. The standard deviation in
experimental group is 0.9 and 0.22 for control group.
Then, looking for the degree of freedom (df) =(N1+ N2)-
2=(26+26)-2=50. In this research, the level of signifigant is df= 50 on
degree 5% and 1% the result 2.009 and 2.678. if to> t-table, it means that
null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected and alternative hypothesis (Ha) is
accepted.T –table for standard of significance with df of 50 shows 5%
2.009 and 1% 2.6 according to this result, it can be concluded that
tovs. t-test
2.009 <3.888> 2.678
It is assumed that null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected and alternative
hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a
significant improvement of post-test between experimental (the students
who were taught using realia and control group( the students who were
not taught using realia).Thus, it can be concluded that realia is effective in
improving students’ speaking skill of the second grade students of SMP N
3 Salatiga in the academic year of 2014/2015.
Therefore, the result of this experiment proves the theories in
chapter II. The first theory is stated by harmer (2001:140),”Realia or real
items are useful for teaching and learning in the classroom. Objects that
100
are intrinsically interesting provide a good starting point for a variety of
language work and communication activities. Realia also make learning
process more enjoyable”. Based on the result of this research, realia proves
effective to improve students speaking skill. It is proven by looking at the
t-table and t-value. Since the t-value is higher than t-table. It proves that
realia to improve students speaking skill.
Second theory is stated byMustain (2009:21)”Realia is one of way
to build students interests in teaching learning speaking. Realia can
motivate students to express their idea orally. Because realia is real objects
which are brought into classroom, it allows the students to see or hear and
in some cases touch the material directly”. This experiment proves that
realia can motivate students to be more active in learning process.
In other word, this research also proves the previous research
conducted by Nugroho (2010), has conducted a research of the use of
realia in teaching speaking .On his research he used an experimental
research to find out the effectiveness of realia to improve students
speaking skill in procedure and descriptive text. The object of his research
is the students on first year of Senior High School PGRI 3 Jakarta.
According to his research, realia is effective to be used in teaching
speaking procedure and descriptive text.
Moreover, Petter (1983:115) in his book entitled “A Training
Course for TEFL” stated that realia is real life object that enable the
students to make connections to their own lives. Finnochiaro assumed that

101
students understand and retain the meaning of words better have seen or
have touched some object associated with it.
Based on the calculation and the analysis above, it can be said that
students in experimental group have higher speaking ability after given
treatment using realia than students in control group who were not taught
using realia. In sort, it can be said that realia can inprove the students’
speaking score in second grade students of SMP N 3 Salatiga.

102
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
After conducting the research, presenting the data, analyzing the data and
discussing the result, in this chapter the writer would like to present the
conclusion and suggestion of this research which is entitled “The Use of Realia to
Improve Students’ Speaking Skill ( an Experimental Study in the Second Grade
Students of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the Academic Year of 2014/2015).
A. Conclusion
After presenting and analyzing data in the previous chapter, the
writer accomplishes to the conclusion as follows:
1. The calculation indicates that the value of the score of to is 3.888
and the value of the df 5% is 2.009 and 2.678 of 1%. It means to is
bigger than tt. It is assumed that null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected
and alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. Therefore, it can be
concluded that there is a significant improvement of post-test
between experimental (the students who were taught using realia
and control group( the students who were taught without using
realia ).Thus, it can be concluded that realia is effective in
improving students’ speaking skill in the second grade students of
SMP N 3 Salatiga in the academic year of 2014/2015.
2. Based on finding and discussion in chapter IV, in Experimental
group, the mean of pre-test is 3.2 and 4.3 for the post-test and in
103
Control group, the mean for pre-test is 3.3 and 3.6 for post-test.
The gain score in experimental group is 0.9 and 0.22 for control
group. it can be concluded that teaching speaking using realia can
improve the students’ speaking ability in the second grade students
of SMP N 3 Salatiga in the academic year of 2014/2015.
B. Suggestion
After conducting the experiment, analyzing the data and discussing the
result, the writer gives some suggestions to those who might be benefited
to the result of this research; they are English teacher, the students, and
future research.
1. English Teacher
a. The English teacher should be creative in developing the
teaching-learning activities to improve students’ speaking
skill. For example the teachers use realia in teaching
speaking skill in class.
b. While this speaking is going on, the English teacher is
supposed to check the students’ pronunciation, grammar,
and vocabulary as it progresses.
c. The English teacher should increase the students’
motivation in learning English especially speaking by using
suitable technique, teaching material, and game as much as
possible in the classroom. The teacher can use realia since
it has some advantages as said before.

104
2. Students
a. The students should take part actively and participative in
learning to improve their ability. Teaching in speaking
through realia make the students are more enjoy, relax and
fun in following teaching learning process.
b. The Students should be more pay attention in learning
process and keep spirit in studying English exactly in
speaking.
3. Future researcher
a. The future researcher would understand more about realia.
Then, they must expand their knowledge in teaching
speaking through the other creative media, and the
researcher must be more creative, studying in teaching in
speaking.
b. it is also recommended for them to develop this media for
teaching other skills, such as: writing,reading and listening;
or teaching speaking in different level of the students, such
as : senior high school and university students.
c. The writer also hopes, this study can be reference for
further researchers to conduct further researchers with the
similar problem of speaking ability improvement or also
continue the same study in other skills.

REFERENCES
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Metodologi Penelitian. Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 1997. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu PendekatanPraktik.Jakarta:

RinekaCipta.
Arsyad, Azhar. 2003. Media Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
Brown, H, Douglas. 1994 .Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom

Practices. New York: Longman.
Broughton,et,al.1978. Teaching English as a Second Lnguage.London: Rontledge

and Kegan Paul.
Brown, H, Douglas. 2000 .Teaching by Principle, an Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy . New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Brown, H, Douglas.2004 .Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom

Practices. New York: Longman.
Burn, A. & Joyce, H.1997. Focus on Speaking. Sydney: NCELTR.
Chaney, A.L.,&T.L. Burk.1998.Teaching Oral Communication in Grade k

8.Boston: Allyn& Bacon.
Harris,David.P.1969. Testing English as a Second Lnguage. London: Mc.Graw-

Hill Book Company.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1989. The Practice of English Language Teaching.England:

Pearson Education Limited.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001.The Practice of English Language Teaching.England:

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

Hartanti, Titi.2010.The Effect of Using Realia toward Students’ Reading Ability in

Narrative Text (an Experimental Study to the Eight GradeStudents of
SMPN 2 Randudangkal Pemalang Regency in the Academic Year
2010/2011).Tegal: Pancasakti University. Graduating Paper.
Hartmann,P.& Blass, L. 1999. Quest Reading and Writing in the Academic

World.The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Horby.1974.Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary.

Hubbard, Petter.1983.A Training Course for TEFL.Oxford University Press.
Hutchinson,T.&A.Waters.1987.English for Specific Purpose. London: Cambridge

University Press.
Kasiram, Muh. 2010. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif-Kuantitatif. Malang:UIN

Maliki Press.
Langan, John. 2013. Exploring Writing: paragraphs and essays. New York:
McGraw-Hill Companies.
Mackey,William F.1983. The Description of Billingualism. Paris : Manton De

Hague.
Noor, Mustain. 2009.Pengaruh Bermain Peran terhadap Minat Belajar Anak

pada Kelompok Bermain Zahrotuth Tholibin Desa Undaan Lor.
Graduating paper. Kudus: Universitas Muria Kudus.
Nugrogo, Muhammad.2010.The Use of Realia in Teaching Speaking at the First

year of Senior High School in the academic year 2010/2011.Jakarta: UIN
Jakarta. Graduating Paper.
Nunan, David. 1995. Language Teaching Methodology.London: Phoenix ELT.
Nunan, David. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw-
Hill Companies.
Sudjono, Drs. Anas. 2002. Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT. Raja
Gratindo.
Sumardi, Mulyanto. 1974. Pengajaran Bahasa Asing : Sebuah Tinjauan dari Segi
Metodologis. Jakarta : Bulan Bintang.
Sumardiyani,Listyaning&Sakhiyya,Zulya.2007.SpeakingforInstructional
Purpose.Semarang: IKIP PGRI.
Susanti, Ayu.2007.Using Role Play in Teaching Speaking (A-Pre- Experimental

Study at Islamic Junior High School Soebono Mantofani Jombang-
Ciputat.UIN Jakarta: Graduating Paper
Ur, Penny.1990.The Practice of Language Teaching Practice and Theory.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Warriner, J. E. 1982. Warriner’s English Grammar and Composition. Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Wright, A. 1989. Pictures for Lnguage Learning. Cmbridge: Cambridge

University Press.
Writson,Nessa & Jadd, Eltan .1983.Sociolinguistic and Language Acquisition

Series Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yule, George &Brown, Gillian. 1983. Teaching the Spoken Language: an

Approach based on the analysis of conversational English. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Yunus, Syarifudin.2010. Jurnalistik Terapan. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.

CURRICULUM VITAE
Full Name : Endang Mulyani
Nick Name : Endang
Place/ Date of birth : Kab.Semarang/ November 24th, 1991
Address : Kalilondo RT 03 RW 04, Kec. Tingkir,
Kota Salatiga
Faculty : English Department( TBI)
Education History :
1. SDN Sumberejo 01 Graduated in 2004
2. SMP Muhammadiyah Salatiga Graduated in 2007
3. SMA Muhammadiyah Salatiga Graduated in 2010
4. IAIN Salatiga Graduated in 2015
Salatiga, August 7th 2015
Endang Mulyani
11310149
DAFTAR NILAI SKK
Nama : Endang Mulyani Dosen PA : Maslihatul Umami, M.A
NIM : 11310149 Jurusan : Tarbiyah/TBI
NO PELAKSANAAN NAMA KEGIATAN KETERANGAN NILAI

1. 25-27 Agustus 2010 Piagam Penghargaan Opak Peserta 3
2010STAIN Salatiga
“ Optimalisasi Nalar Kritis
Mahasiswa : Upaya
Mengawal Perubahan
Bangsa ke Arah yang Lebih
Baik”
2. 20- 25 September Sertifikat UPT Peserta 2
2010 Perpustakaan STAIN
Salatiga
“User Education”
3 23- 24 Oktober 2010 Certificate of Appreciation Peserta 2
“ English Friendship Camp”
CEC STAIN Salatiga.
4 15 Februari 2011 Sertifikat Panitia peringatan Panitia 3
Maulid Nabi di Ds.
Kalibening, Kec. Tinggkir
Salatiga.
5 19 Maret 2011 Sertifikat Seminar Peserta 2
“ Heal the World with
Voluntary Service “ oleh
CEC (Communicative
English Club)
6 28 April 2011 Sertifikat Peserta 2
Peringatan Maulid Nabi di
masjid Sabilal Muttaqin
Tingkir Lor Salatiga.
7 09 Mei 2011 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“ Membangun Karakter
Bangsa Melalui Kaum
Intelektual Muda” HMI.
8 17 Aggustus 2011 Sertifikat Panitia 2
Panitia peringatan Hari
Kemerdekaan Republik
Indonesia Ds. Kalibening,
Kec. Tinggkir Salatiga.
9 15 Februari 2012 Sertifika Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“Reklamasi Pantai
Berwawasan Lingkungan:
UI
10 28 April 2012 Sertificate Peserta 2
“ Book Resume “
STAIN Salatiga.
11 6 Juni 2012 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“Pendidikan Multikultural
Sebagai Pilar Karakter
Bangsa”
HMJ Tarbiyah
“ Mewaspadai Gerakan
Islam Garis Keras di
Perguruan Tinggi”
DEMA STAIN Salatiga.
13 05 Juli 2012 Sertifikat Peringatan Peserta 2
Maulid Nabi di masjid
Sabilal Muttaqin Tingkir
Lor Salatiga.
14 08- 09 Agustus 2012 Certificate Peserta 2
“ Training ESQ Character
Building 1”
ESQ Leadership Training.
15 17 Agustus 2012 Sertifikat Panitia 2
16 10 September 2012 Sertifikat kegiatan ODK ( Peserta 2
Orientasi Dasar Keislaman)
“Membangun Karakter
Keislaman Bertaraf
Internasional di Era
Globalisasi Bahasa” CEC.
17 24 September 2012 Certificate Peserta 2
“DRAMA” STAIN
Salatiga.
18 29 September 2012 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6

Mahasiswa
“Urgensi Media dalam
Pergulatan Politik”
LPM Dinamika.
19 5 Desember 2012 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6

“Structure Strengthening
System”
Himpunan Mahasiswa Sipil
UNS
20 25 Maret 2013 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“ Ahlussanah Waljamaah
dalam Perspektif Islam
Indonesia“
DEMA STAIN Salatiga.
21 02 Mei 2013 Certificate National Peserta 6
Workshop of
“ Teacher Training
Workshop on
Communicative Language
Teaching”
IALF Jakarta
22 25 Mei 2013 Sertifikat Peserta 2

Peringatan Hari Besar
Islam(PHBI)
23 01 Juni 2013 Certificate National Peserta 6
Seminar
“How to Develop the Best
Generation “
CEC
Politik
“Peran Nyata Mahasiswa
Dalam Menyikapi
Perpolitikan Indonesia”.
Senat Mahasiswa
25 08 Juli 2013 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“ Mengawal Pengendalian
BBM Bersubsidi, BLSM
yang Tepat Sasaran serta
Pengendalian Inflasi Dalam
Negeri sebagai Dampak
Kenaikan Harga BBM
Bersubsidi”
DEMA STAIN Salatiga dan
ASWAJA Jawa Tengah.
26 11 Agustus 2013 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“Smartphone for Education
“
Indosat.
27 17 Agustus 2013 Sertifikat Panitia 2
28 10 Oktober 2013 Piagam Penghargaan dalam Peserta 2
acara KISMIS
“Agar Shalat Bukan
Sekedar Kewajiban, namun
Kebutuhan”.
LDK STAIN Salatiga
29 08-09 November Sertifikat Peserta 2
2013 “Training SIBA-SIBI”
CEC dan ITTAQO
30 18 November 2013 Certificate CEC Festifal Panitia 2
“Youngsters Today is the
Leader of Tomorrow”
CEC.
31 07 Desember 2013 Sertifikat Seminar Nasional Peserta 6
“Mengembangkan Minat
Pemuda dan Mahasiswa
dalam Dunia Teknologi”
INDOSAT.
32 10-11 Januari 2014 Sertifikat Panitia Kegiatan Panitia 2
SIBW-SIBI Training
CEC dan INTTAQO
33 02-03 Februari 2014 Certificate of Appreciation Panitia 2
“Welcoming Foreigner”
CEC STAIN Salatiga.
34 17 Februari 2014 Certificate of Appreciation Peserta 2
Study Club
CEC STAIN Salatiga.
35 15 Maret 2014 Certificate of Appreciation Panitia 2
“Scholarship Forum”
CEC STAIN Salatiga.
36 14 April 2014 Sertifikat Penghargaan Peserta 2
“Pelatihan Fasilitator
Wanita Cemerlang”
Wanita Cemerlang
Indonesia
37 20-22 November Certificate of Appreciation Peserta 2
2014 “ CEC Festival ”
CEC STAIN Salatiga
38 27 November 2014 Sertifikat Kegiatan Panitia 2
“PERBASIS (Perbandingan
Bahasa Arab Bahasa
Inggris”
CEC dan INTTAQO
STAIN Salatiga
39 19-20 Desember 2014 Sertifikat Kegiatan SIBW- Peserta 2
SIBI Training
CEC dan INTTAQO
STAIN Salatiga
Jumlah 132

Endang Mulyani - 11310149 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Endang Mulyani - 11310149 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE USE OF REALIA TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’

Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfillment of the

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

“Itis never too late to be what you might have been.”

upon what you think”

This work is sincerely dedicated for:

me, and gives me the best thing ever.

 My parents, my mother (Rumini) and my father (M. Sarimin) who always

pray, guide, motivate me to become better person.

 My beloved brother (Kusmin ) and my grandmother (Yatinem) who

always support me.

 My big family who fill my life with love and affection.

paper as one of requirement to finished study in English Department faculty of

States for Institute Islamic Studies.

express special thanks to:

Studies ( IAIN) Salatiga.

2. Suwardi, M.Pd. as a Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of

3. Noor Malihah, Ph.D. as Head of English Education Department of IAIN

4. Maslihatul Umami, M.A as counselor who has educated, supported,

patience and care.

5. All lecturers in English Education Department of IAIN Salatiga. Thanks

for all guidance, knowledge, support, and etc.

praying) no one better than you.

7. My beloved brother (Kusmin ) and my grandmother (Yatinem). Thanks

8. My big family who fill my life with love and affection.

Any who always help me and standing beside me.

graduating paper administration.

12. Everybody who has helped me in finishing this graduating paper.

Salatiga, August 8th 2015

Mulyani, Endang. 2015. “The Use of Realia Technique to Improve Students’

Keywords: Realia, Speaking Skill

A. Place and Time of the Research.................................................................41

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

A. Use of Realia to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill in the Second Grade

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Table 3.4 List respondents in Experimental Group.............................................51

Table 3.5 List respondents in Control Group......................................................52

Table 3.6 Rubric of Evaluation of Scoring Students’ Speaking Ability.............56

Table 4.1 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-Test Experimental

Table 4.2 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre – test Experimental

Table 4.8 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post –Test

Table 4.9 The Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post – testExperimental

Table 4.15Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-testControl

Table 4.16 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Pre-testControl

Table 4.22 Classification of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-test Control

Table 4.23 Score of Students’ Speaking Skill in Post-testControl

Table 4.25 Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’Speaking Skill

Table 4.28 Frequency Distribution and Percentage of the Students’Speaking Skill

Table 4.32 Result of Calculating Research……………………………………102

involves into education curriculum that every school runs. It becomes a

local content in Elementary school, a compulsory subject in Junior and

Senior High school and a complementary subject of higher education

institution. This is because of the situation we are facing now;

globalization era, which is very competitive. In learning English language,

reading and writing. Listening and writing regarded as a receptive skill

while speaking and writing skill are considered to be productive skills,

Harmer (1989:16). Ur (1990:120) states that of all four skills, speaking

seems intuitively the most important.

Compared within these two categorize skills, most people think

listening. In order to produce something such as written and utterance,

people need more creativity and consideration to do so. Meanwhile, Nessa

&Jadd (1983:19) on their book entitled “Sociolinguistic and Language

Acquisition Series: an Issue as a Second Language Research” states that