THE INFLUENCE OF USING PRESENTATION – PRACTICE -

PRODUCTION (PPP) TECHNIQUE TOWARD STUDENTS' ENGLISH

SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF SMK PGRI 1
KOTA SERANG IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2019/2020

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
(Quasi-Experimental)

Arranged as one of the Partial Fulfillment the Requirement to obtain a Bachelor

Degree in English Education

Arranged by:

VIRA MULYA CHANIAGO

2223160027

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF SULTAN AGENG TIRTAYASA

2020
 PRONOUNCEMENT

Hereby the Author of this Undergraduate Thesis :

Title : The Influence of Using Presentation – Practice – Production

(PPP) Technique Toward Students’ English Speaking Ability At The Eleventh
Grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang In The Academic Year of 2019/2020

Name of Student : Vira Mulya Chaniago

Student Number : 2223160027

Faculty : Teacher Training and Education

Stated whole-heartedly this Undergraduate Thesis is originally made by the

researcher. It is neither a plagiarism nor made by others. The things related to other
people’s work are written in quotation and included within bibliography. If it is
proved that the researcher cheats, the researcher is ready to take the responsibility.

Serang, June 2020

Vira Mulya Chaniago

NIM. 2223160027
 ABSTRACT

The Influence of Using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

Technique Toward Students’ English Speaking Ability At The Eleventh
Grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang In The Academic Year of 2019/2020

Vira Mulya Chaniago

2223160027

The research objective was to find out the influence of using presentation –
practice – production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking
ability at the eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year
of 2019/2020. The researcher used quantitative research by applying quasi-
experimental design with the Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD)
for particularly XI TPM 3 as experimental class and XI TPM 4 as control class.
The experimental class was taught by using presentation – practice –
production (PPP) technique and the control class was taught by using scientific
learning methods.The research instruments were pre-test and post-test and
were analyzed by using content validity and inter-rater reliability to make sure
the instruments were valid and reliable. The researcher used T-test as formula
to find out the result of students’ speaking English ability and the result of T-
test calculation in post-test was obtained that T-count was higher than T-table
(8.25 ≥ 2.00) with the significance 0.05 (5%). It means the Ha (alternative
hypothesis) was accepted. It can be concluded that there is a significant
influence of using presentation – practice – production (PPP) technique toward
students’ English speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota
Serang in the academic year of 2019/2020.
Keyword : Influence, PPP Technique, Speaking English Ability
 CURRICULUM VITAE

The researcher’s full name is Vira Mulya Chaniago. She was born in

Tangerang on June 7th 1998. She lives in Perumahan Griya Aster Block A No.

9 RT 01 RW 05, Ds. Caringin, Kec. Legok, Kab. Tangerang - Banten. The

researcher began her school from Kindergarten at TK Islam As-salam in 2004.

Then, she attended her elementary school at SDN Caringin 1, then SMPN 1

Legok and SMAN 17 Kab. Tangerang and graduated in 2016. Then, she was

accepted in English Education Department of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa

University since 2016. During her study in UNTIRTA, she was actively

become some parts of some organization such as: AKMI UNTIRTA since 2016

(Aktivitas Keagamaan Mahasiswa Islam), ESA UNTIRTA in 2018 (English

Student Association), and became a scholarship awarded of KSE (Yayasan

Karya Salemba Empat) particularly joined on Paguyuban Karya Salemba

Empat UNTIRTA since 2019.

 MOTTO

Be a girl with mind,

A woman with attitude
And
A lady with class.
 DEDICATION

I dedicated this paper to:

- My beloved parents, adored brother & lovely family, who

always support my plans and dreams and always proud of

every achievements of their

daughter/sister/niece/cousin.

- All the truly kind-hearted persons who have given help and

support every steps of the researcher’s goals.

- All of the imaginations, dreams, plans and goals which help

the researcher to keep awake and trying to finished this

Undergraduate thesis.
 PREFACE

Praise to the Allah as Almighty God who has given His bless for helping

the researcher to accomplish this research paper. The researcher also wish to

express her deep and sincere gratitude her Undergraduate Thesis advisors, Drs.

Pupun Sampurna, M.Pd and Rahman Hakim M.Pd who have guided the researcher

in completing this thesis properly. This research paper is arranged as one of the

partial fulfillment the requirement to obtain a bachelor degree in English Education.

The researcher realized that in writing of this thesis is still far from not

perfection. Therefore, the researcher would welcome every suggestion, comments,

and criticism which is builds for the sake of perfection. Hopefully, this research can

be useful, add insight to the reader and provide guidance for other researchers.

Serang, June 2020

The Researcher
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Bismillahirohmanirohim…
Praise and great gratitude submitted to Almighty God, Allah SWT who

always gives the gracious mercy and blessing that enables the researcher to

accomplish the of Undergraduate Thesis entitled “The Influence of Using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) Technique Toward Students’ English

Speaking Ability At The Eleventh Grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang In The

Academic Year of 2019/2020”. This thesis is as a requirement in accomplishing the

S-1 Degree at the English Education Department of Teachers Training and

Education Faculty in University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa.

In this occasion, the researcher would like to say thank you to all of those

who have given the contribution so that this research paper can be finished. The

researcher would like to deliver this thank to:

1. Prof. Dr. H. Fatah Sulaiman, ST., MT., as a Rector of University of

Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa who bring the campus to advance.

2. Dr. Dase Erwin Juansah, S.Pd., M.Pd., as a Dean of Teacher Training

and Education Faculty for giving permission to arrange this thesis.

3. Drs. Pupun Sampurna, M.Pd, as the Head of English Education

Department who allows the researcher to arrange this paper.

4. Drs. Pupun Sampurna, M.Pd as the first advisor who has guided, helped

and given his valuable time to the researcher in finishing this thesis.
5. Rahman Hakim M.Pd as the second advisor who has helped and

supported the researcher during the process of writing this paper.

6. Rosmania Rima, S.Pd, M.P.d, as the academic advisor, for the advice

and suggestion on the thesis examination.

7. All the best lecturers of University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa,

especially for the English lecturers of English Education Department

who have taught and trained the researcher.

8. Headmaster and all teachers of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang, who helped

the researcher in doing the research.

9. Researcher’ best parents, Mr. Mulyadi and Mrs. Andriani for the pray

and du’a for the safe and success the researcher, for giving advices and

suggest to be a great person in future.

10. Researchers’ beloved brother, Aldo Mulya for colouring the

researchers’ life and helping the researchers’ whole life, hopefully it

can motivate him to achieve his own goals in education.

11. N.A family, Kosan Pak Uja (KPU) squad, Khansa Jundiyyah squad,

Abdullah Squad, as the researchers’ closer friends which always help

and support the researchers’ goals in her own life.

12. AKMI UNTIRTA, ESA UNTIRTA, LSP MPK UNTIRTA and

Paguyuban Karya Salemba Empat (KSE) Untirta as the researchers’

second house who has been another family while the researchers’

finished her own education in UNTIRTA. Thank you for all love and

support which given to the researcher.

 13. English Department A Class 2016, thank you for all the amazing and

lovely experience and you guys are the lovely classmate that the

researcher ever had. Keep supporting each other! See you on top, guys!

14. Astri Wulandari, Eka Pratiwi Putri, Zuhriyah Khairunnisa, Jopiandi,

Nitia Fatimah, Maya Kencana Dewi, Sri Dewi Lestari as the

researchers’ best friend. Thank you for accepting the researchers’

awkward behaviour and thank you for always stand for the researcher

while she almost gives up in everything.

15. Pandu Pangestu, Siti Solehah, Anggun, Tyas Asih, Siti Munaroh, Fathan

Mubina, and other seniors of English Education Department, they are

truly kind-hearted people who helped the researchers to finished this

thesis. Thank you for always given another valuable time and

opportunity for guided the researcher to finish this research.

16. All of friends and unmentioned person who helped and given support

and contribution to accomplish this thesis, the researcher sends her

apology and gratitude.

Hopefully that through this paper, it can provide a broader insight for the

reader even though this paper has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, the

researcher asks for advice and criticism from the readers to complete and evaluate

this paper.

Tangerang, June 2020

Vira Mulya Chaniago

 TABLE OF CONTENT

THESIS APPROVAL ............................................................................... i

PRONOUNCEMENT ............................................................................... ii

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................... iii

CURRICULUM VITAE ........................................................................... iv

MOTTO ..................................................................................................... v

DEDICATION ........................................................................................... vi

PREFACE .................................................................................................. vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................ viii

TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................ xi

LIST OF TABLE ...................................................................................... xii

LIST OF FIGURE .................................................................................... xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1

1.1 Research Background............................................................................ 1

1.2 Identification of the Problem ................................................................ 5

1.3 Limitation of the Research .................................................................... 6

1.4 Formulation of the Research ................................................................. 6

1.5 The Objective of the Research .............................................................. 6

1.6 The Use of Research ............................................................................. 7

1.7 Operational Definition .......................................................................... 7

1.8 Research Hypothesis ............................................................................. 8

1.9 Organization of the Research ................................................................ 9

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................ 10

2.1 Speaking ................................................................................................ 10

2.1.1 Definition of Speaking .................................................................. 10

2.1.2 The Function of Speaking ............................................................. 12

2.1.3 Components of Speaking............................................................... 13

2.1.4 Common European Framework of References (CEFR) for Language

Through Spoken Language .................................................................... 15

2.2 English Speaking Problems .................................................................. 16

2.3 Teaching English Speaking for Indonesian........................................... 18

2.4 Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP) Technique.............................. 21

2.4.1 The Concept of Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique ........................................................................................ 21

2.4.2 Teaching Speaking through Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique .......................................................................................... 28

2.4.3 Criticism through Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique .......................................................................................... 30

2.4.4 The Strength of Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique .......................................................................................... 31

2.4.5 The Weakness of Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique .......................................................................................... 32

2.5 Previous Study ...................................................................................... 32

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................. 35

3.1 Research Design .................................................................................... 35

3.2 Research Site and Participants .............................................................. 36

3.2.1 Research Population ............................................................... 37

3.2.2 Research Sampling ................................................................. 37

3.2.2 Research Sample .................................................................... 38

3.3 Research Variables ................................................................................ 38

3.3.1 Independent Variable (X) ....................................................... 38

3.3.2 Dependent Variable (Y) ......................................................... 39

3.4 Research Instruments ............................................................................ 39

3.4.1 Pre-Test .................................................................................. 41

3.4.2 Treatment ............................................................................... 41

3.4.3 Post-Test ................................................................................. 42

3.4.5 Speaking Assessment Criteria ................................................ 42

3.5 Data Collecting Technique .................................................................... 45

3.6 Data Analysis Technique ...................................................................... 45

3.6.1 Validity ................................................................................... 46

3.6.2 Reliability ............................................................................... 46

3.6.3 Normality Test........................................................................ 48

3.6.4 Homogeneity Testing ............................................................. 48

3.6.5 Hypothesis Test ...................................................................... 49

3.7 Research Procedure ............................................................................... 50

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS........... 52

4.1 Research Findings ................................................................................. 52

4.2 Data Description.................................................................................... 53

4.3 Result of Validity and Reliability ......................................................... 54

4.3.1 Content Validity ..................................................................... 54

4.3.2 Inter Rater Reliability ............................................................. 56

4.3.3 Result of Normality Distribution Test .................................... 57

4.3.4 Result of Homogeneity Test ................................................... 61

4.3.5 Result of Hypothesis Test ...................................................... 63

4.4 Research Discussion.............................................................................. 65

CHAPTER V CONCUSION AND SUGGESTION ............................... 70

5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................. 70

5.2 Suggestion ................................................................................. 71

REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 73

APPENDICES ........................................................................................... 78

REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 61

APPENDICES ........................................................................................... 66
 LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 1.1 Students’ Difficulties in Learning English ................................ 3

Figure 3.1 Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD).................... 36

Figure 3.3 Pre- Test - Treatment – Post-Test .............................................. 39

Figure 3.4 Value of Kappa .......................................................................... 47

Figure 3.5 Normal Distribution ................................................................... 48

Figure 4.1 Normality of Pre-Test in Experimental Class ............................ 58

Figure 4.2 Normality of Post-Test in Experimental Class .......................... 59

Figure 4.3 Normality of Pre-Test in Control Class ..................................... 60

Figure 4.4 Normality of Post-Test in Control Class ................................... 61

 LIST OF TABLE

Table 2.1 Overall Spoken Production ......................................................... 16

Table 2.2 Circle of PPP Technique ............................................................. 31

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistic Table .......................................................... 53

Table 4.2 Table of Content Validity ........................................................... 55

Table 4.3 Agreement of Inter Rater Reliability .......................................... 66

Table 4.4 Result of Homogeneity Test in

Experimental and Control Class ................................................................. 62

 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background

As human nature, interaction and communication are things that important for

human life. It functions as human ways in conveying their needs and sending

meaning of it. The tools of those things called as language. English is one of

universal language that used by people around the world in cross cultural

communication and called as lingua franca (Harmer, 2007, p. 13). English is an

international language that used as spoken language in the world. English is being

one of Indonesians’ subject that must be learned by the students from the primary

school up to university level. In the reality, long time of English learning that

achieved by the students from the school still obtaining some problems. One of

them is a problem in speaking ability, specifically English speaking ability.

Speaking is the process of process of constructing ideas and feelings into verbal

utterances by sending the meaning of it. It refers to Burns & Joyce (1997) in Leong

& Ahmadi (2017, p. 35) stated that speaking is defined as a collaborative

development of creating value that involves constructing, receiving, and dealing out

evidence. Basically, speaking is the way human communicate each other orally.

Based on Nunan (2003) said many people thought speaking in a new language is

harder than other abilities (p. 48). In addition, Nunan (2003) stated that learning

spoken ability is not easy for FL learners, because they have a limited chance to use

the language in their own environment (p. 54). Learn to speak and comprehend

English as the foreign language probably need extra time inside and outside the
classroom, because it can not be learnt naturally without any opportunities to

enhance the ability in daily communication.

According to the preliminary observation that was taken from 45 students

at the eleventh grade of vocational school when the Pre-service Teacher Training

Program (PPLK) was going on, specifically at SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang about the

desire of students’ English ability by using platform Google Form, the researcher

find some findings that corelated with the research variable, that is dependent

variable (Y) which is English speaking ability. The findings that explained the

desire of students’ English ability were percentage in 86.7 % of 45 students which

basically consists of 39 students chose to wants to have any specific time in English

speaking training and activities than other abilities in the classroom. While, 13.3 %

of 45 students which precisely consists of 6 students stated that they wanted to get

another different and variative English teaching method that might be apply by the

English teacher.

The other findings of the preliminary observation in the figure 1.1, the

researcher found some difficulties that felt by the students as follows: 1) lack of

vocabularies that showed by the percentage in 66.7 % that stated by 30 students, 2)

limited understanding through spoken English which showed in 13.76 % of 6

students, 3) students was bored with the English learning method by the English

teacher that showed as 8.9 % of 4 students, 4) students’ lack of motivation in

learning English subject that showed in 6.7 % of 3 students, and the last 5) students’

lack of structure and grammar in English subject that presented as 5.32 % of 2

student.
 Figure 1.1
Students’ Difficulties in Learning English

What is your difficulties in learning English subject?

5.2%
6.7%
Lack of Vocabularies

8.9% Limited understanding of English

Bored of teaching English

11.1% 66.7% methods
Lack of Motivation

Structure & Grammar

Based on the figure 1.1 of the preliminary observation above, the technique

of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) assumed good enough to be apply as

English speaking technique toward the eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota

Serang. Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique is the combination of

three phrases and activities in the same time which emphasize the development of

understanding about meaning of utterances by doing and producing anything.

According to those statements and evidences above, it related to the

students’ behaviour of vocational school students which concerned in practical skill

in almost of all subjects in the school. It supported with the statement from Laukia

(2013, p. 8) that practical skills have been probable to learn with traineeship

education, school-based job-related education or dissimilar categories of on the job

learning systems. One of practical skills in language learning is speaking, because

it associated with some practical activities, such as: practicing, pronouncing, and

drilling or repeating. Therefore, implementing PPP technique to vocational school

students toward speaking English ability assumed as an acceptable and appropriate

technique in exercise speaking ability, because it could rise the students’ attraction,

improve students’ motivation, and give another new experience in learning English

speaking ability to the students that can make the students enjoy while the teaching

and learning English speaking ability were taken place.

Related previous studies on the Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique towards students’ speaking ability in English have been conducted by

some researchers. The first study from Yuliani (2017) is about “The Influence of

Using PPP Technique Toward Students’ Speaking Ability of the Eighth Grade at

MTS Darul Ulum Tanjung Bintang in the Academic Year of 2017/2018”. The

second study from Yusuf (2015) is about “A PPP (Presentation, Practice, And

Production) Phase Method of Teaching Speaking to University Students”. The third

study from Maksum (2012) is about “Teaching Speaking Use 3P (Presentation –

Practice – Production) Approach for Second Grade Student in MTS At - Tauhid

Surabaya”. The last study from Badaruddin & Sahabuddin (2019) is about “The

Use of PPP Model in Enhancing the Students’ Speaking Ability”. However, those

previous studies that related to the use of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique are different with this research. Some previous studies above were

conducted at junior high school and university level, therefore this research

conducted in vocational school, especially at the eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1

Kota Serang.

This research method used quantitative method with quasi experimental

design. The research focused on the influence of using Presentation – Practice –

Production (PPP) technique toward students’ speaking English ability. The research

instruments concerned on the performance test, that is speaking performance test.

The test separated into two types of test, such as: pre-test and post-test which

function to find out and to measure the influence of using Presentation-Practice-

Production (PPP) technique toward students' English speaking ability. According

to the statements and data statistic directly above, the researcher conducted the

research with title: “The Influence of Using Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

Technique Toward Students' English Speaking Ability at the Eleventh Grade of

SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the Academic Year of 2019/2020”.

1.2 Identification of The Problem

Based on the background of the research and the preliminary observation,

the researcher found some problems, especially in English speaking ability from

some sides that can be identified as research subject through the eleventh grade of

students in SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year of 2019/2020, such as:

1. Students are lack of vocabularies in speaking English.

2. Students have limited understanding through English spoken language.

3. Students are low of English speaking proficiency.

4. Limited time of speaking English training and activities in the classroom.

5. Teachers are lack of creativity in applying various techniques in teaching

English subject.

6. Lack of motivation in learning English subject.

1.3 Limitation of The Research

The research focused on the influence of using of Presentation – Practice –

Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking ability at the

eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year of

2019/2020.

1.4 Formulation of The Research

According to the research background and the research limitation, the

researcher arranged the problem as follows:

“Is there a significant influence of using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique toward students’ English speaking ability at the eleventh grade students

of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year of 2019/2020?”.

1.5 The Objective of The Research

The objective of the research is to find out the influence of using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English

speaking ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

academic year of 2019/2020.

1.6 The Use of Research

The result of this research is expected to be beneficial in the practical and

theoretical contribution.

1.6.1 Practical Use

a) Teachers

It is expected to give useful contribution for teacher to be one of

techniques that can be implement in learning activity, particularly in training

and improving students’ speaking ability by using Presentation – Practice –

Production (PPP) technique.

b) Students

It is expected to be beneficial for students to facilitate and develop

their speaking ability. Furthermore, by using Presentation – Practice –

Production (PPP) technique the students are going to enjoyed and motivated

to learn English both spoken and written.

1.6.2 Theoretical Use

Theoretically, this research expected to enrich the theory of speaking

ability and being a relevant reference of the research about the use of

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique.

1.7 Operational Definitions

In this research, there are three terms that need to clarified, as follows:
 1.7.1 Speaking

Speaking is the process of constructing ideas and feelings into verbal

utterances by sending the meaning of it. It refers to Nunan (2003, p. 48) stated that

speaking refers to the productive aural and oral skills, so it consists of producing

systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning.

1.7.2 Presentation - Practice – Production (PPP) Technique

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique is the combination of

three phrases and activities in the same time which emphasize the development of

understanding about something by doing and producing anything.

1.8 Research Hypothesis

Based on the research formulation, the researcher is ought to find out and

measure the influence of using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique toward students’ English speaking ability. Therefore, there are two

hypotheses in this research, such as:

1. Ho (Null Hypothesis) : There is no influence of using Presentation

– Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking

ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

academic year of 2019/2020.

2. Ha (Alternative Hypothesis) : There is a significant influence of using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’

English speaking ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota

Serang in the academic year of 2019/2020.

1.9 Organization of The Research

The writing of this Undergraduate Thesis would be systematically divided into five

chapters. These followings are how the paper organized:

1) Chapter I is an Introduction.

This chapter consists of research background, research identification,

research limitation, research formulation, research objectives, the use of

research, operational definition, research hypothesis and proposal organization.

2) Chapter II is a Literature Review.

This chapter consists of speaking, English speaking problem, teaching

English speaking for Indonesian, Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)

technique, and related previous study.

3) Chapter III is a Research Methodology.

This chapter consist of research design, research site and participants,

research variables, research instruments, data collecting technique, data analysis

technique, and research procedure.

4) Chapter IV is a Research Findings and Discussion.

This chapter consist of research findings, data description, result of validity

and reliability, and research discussion.

5) Chapter V is Conclusion and Suggestion.

This chapter present the conclusion and suggestion of the research.

 CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Speaking

2.1.1 Definition of Speaking

Speaking is one of four language basic skills in learning a new language,

especially learning a foreign language. Speaking is the process of constructing ideas

and feelings into verbal utterances by sending the meaning of it. Nunan (2003, p.

48) state that speaking refers to the productive aural and oral skills, so it consists of

producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning. It refers to Burns &

Joyce (1997) in Leong & Ahmadi (2017, p. 35) stated that speaking is defined as

an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving,

and processing information. While, Bygate (1987) in Leong & Ahmadi (2017, p.

35) defined speaking as the production of auditory signals to produce different

verbal responses to listeners. Speaking is being one of primary elements in daily

communication. Speaking more than producing the right sound and choosing the

right words into verbal utterances, but it emphasized on people’s understanding

toward the message and meaning of the utterances itself. Harmer (2007, p 275)

stated that speaking and writing are parts of productive skills. Louma (2013, p. 1)

state that “Speaking skills are an important part of the curriculum in language

teaching, and this makes them an important object of assessment as well.”. It is

related enough to the statements from Nation & Newton (2009) in Septiany
(2014, p. 11) stated that “speaking as a part of work or academic study may involve

presenting reports or presenting a view point on a particular topic”. Related to the

experts’ statement before, English become an important subject in Indonesians’

curriculum which expecting the students would be able to communicate with

English properly. Choosing a suitable topic and task based on the students’

knowledge and ability proficiency are being an important thing, because it can

enhance the students’ English speaking ability. An appropriate topic in speaking

English apparently related to the requirement of social interaction. It also explained

by Richards & Renandya (2002, p. 204) that speaking is oral communication that

requires the ability to use the language appropriately in social interactions.

Based on the quotations and statements above, it can be summarized that

speaking is an essential element in learning a language, especially in

communication through a new language. Speaking can not be separated in teaching

and learning a new or foreign language, because it can be a measurement of the

improvement through language learning itself. Speaking sessions allow students to

investigate their thoughts and feelings about something (Harmer, 2007, p. 275).

Nunan (2003, p. 64) says that “speaking in a language other than our own is quite

a complex undertaking which involves using all the different levels of language”.

While, Harmer (2007, p. 340) stated that speaking is a part of a longer planning

sequence which must be mastered by everyone in order to achieve the goals of

speaking itself (Harmer, 2007, p. 340). Although those statements above state that

speaking English is a complex ability, but it can be runs well if the planning of

speaking itself is clear and purposeful. It related to Richards & Renandya (2002, p.
201), speaking in second or foreign language is actually a complex task if the nature

of what appears to be involved were understandable.

2.1.2 The Function of Speaking

The general function of speaking is the way to bring message, ideas, opinion

and thoughts to others in order to deliver the meaning of the spoken or written form

of a language. Some people have been classified the function of speaking toward

human interaction that happen in our daily life. Brown & Yule (1983) in Richards

(2008, p. 19) made a useful distinction between the interactional functions of

speaking (in which it serves to establish and maintain social relations), and the

transactional functions (which focus on the exchange of information).

1. Talk is interaction

Interaction is focus on the speaker as the beginner of the interaction itself.

Interaction happens as human behaviour to communicate with others to know

each other. Interaction that conducted periodically can be the effect of an

effective communication between the utterer and the hearer in the same time.

Richards (2008, p. 19) stated that this function is focus more on the speakers

and how they wish to present themselves to each other than on the message.

2. Talk as transaction

Jones (1996, p. 14) in Richards (2008, p. 21) explained that the focus

features in speaking as transaction is the message and the meaning or on

talking their way to understanding. In such transaction term, speaking is

associated with other activities and the participants of the speaking itself is
 not being a main focus of it. The example of talk as transaction such as a

transaction that happen in the classroom between the teacher and the students

about the learning rules, the transaction that happen in the restaurant between

the customer and the waiter, etc.

3. Talk as performance

This type of speaking refers to public speaking, that is, talk which

transmits information before an audience such as morning talks, public

announcements, and speeches (Richards, 2008, p. 23). The main focus of

speaking as performance is on both message and performance (Richards,

2008, p. 23). Talk as performance tend to pointed on monolog form than

dialog form. The form of performance and accuracy is important in this

function. An appropriate format of speaking as performance can affect the

audience engagement itself.

2.1.3 Components of Speaking

The components that are chosen to be assessed are vocabulary,

pronunciation, grammar, fluency, comprehension.

1. Vocabulary

Vocabulary means the election of appropriate words which used to

communicate with others. Dash (2013, p. 68) state vocabulary skill involves

word meaning recognition and guessing the meaning of unknown word

structure and context (as cited in Harahap, Antoni, & Rasyidah, 2015, p. 3).

2. Pronunciation
 Pronunciation is the way people produce word in spoken language.

Harmer (2007, p. 251) said that pronunciation is not a separate skill and not

a part of such language ability, but it is part of the way we speak. In oral

communication, pronunciation become one of important thing in order to

prevent the misunderstanding between the speaker and the listener. When

learners start to learn pronunciation, they make new habits and overcome the

difficulties resulting from the first language

3. Grammar

Grammar is the structure of constructing a sentence in order to make it

meaningful and acceptable. While, Brown (2004) in Harahap, Antono, &

Rasyidah (2015, p. 2) stated that “grammar is the rule by which put together

meaningful a part of a language to communicate messages that are

comprehensible.”. A sentence will be understandable and acceptable if it

constructs structurally.

4. Fluency

Fluency can be described as the capability to say something without

stammered and spontaneously in the same time. According to Thornbury

(2000, p. 7) stated that fluency is the length of run, the number of syllables

between pauses. Fluency is an ability to practice the language spontaneously

and surely and without unnecessary gaps and hesitancy (Harahap, Antono, &

Rasyidah, 2015, p. 2). Fluency of a language can be achieved by habitually

speaking in a new language.

 4. Comprehension

The aim of communication is comprehending others’ message of

something. Comprehension means the ability to understand and getting

meaning of peoples’ word toward a language. Based on Longman in

Pernanda (2009, p. 10) comprehend means understand everything in normal

educated conversation except for very colloquial or low frequency items, or

exceptionally rapid or slurred (Harahap, Antono, & Rasyidah, 2015, p. 3).

2.1.4 Common European Framework of References for Language Through

Spoken Language

According to Cambridge English, Common European Framework of

Reference for Languages (CEFR) is an international standard for describing

language ability. It describes language ability on a six-point scale, from A1 for

beginners, up to C2 for those who have mastered a language. Specifically, A1 &

A2 describes the Basic User, B1 & B2 explains about the Independent User and

C1 & C2 describes about Proficient User. CEFR concept makes anyone easy to

involved language teaching and testing, such as teachers or learners, to see the

level of different qualifications. It also means that employers and educational

institutions can easily compare our qualifications to other exams in their country.

CEFR is used for European and being an accuracy standard qualification of

English skill that more recognized by all people around the world. CEFR can be

used to measure other language proficiency, although it mostly used to measure

English proficiency skills.

 The Overall Spoken Production function to explain every users’

qualification on English speaking proficiency, as follows:

Table 2.1
Overall Spoken Production

C2 Can produce clear, smoothly flowing well-structured speech with

an effective logical structure which helps the recipient to notice and
remember significant points.

C1 Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on complex

subjects, integrating sub themes, developing particular points and
rounding off with an appropriate conclusion.
Can give clear, systematically developed descriptions and
presentations, with appropriate highlighting of significant points,
and relevant supporting detail.

B2 Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on a wide

range of subjects related to his/her field of interest, expanding and
supporting ideas with subsidiary points and relevant examples.

B1 Can reasonably fluently sustain a straightforward description of

one of a variety of subjects within his/her field of interest,
presenting it as a linear sequence of points.

A2 Can give a simple description or presentation of people, living or

working conditions, daily routines. likes/dislikes etc. as a short
series of simple phrases and sentences linked into a list.

A1 Can produce simple mainly isolated phrases about people and

places.

2.2 English Speaking Problems

According to Byrne (1986) in Irnawati (2016, p.10) stated that oral

communication is a type of two-way communication between speaker and

listener which includes of ability to produce language (for the speaker) and
ability to listen and understand what is delivered by the speaker (for the listener).

Oral communication in other words can called as speaking. In the reality,

speaking English still being a problem for foreign learners, because one and other

reasons. According to Doris and Jessica (2007) in Fitriani, Apriliaswati &

Wardah (2015, p. 4) state that language problems actually serve as one of the

important reasons behind poor academic performance. The reasons why the

students are having problems in their speaking are they are poor in grammar,

vocabulary, and pronunciation which belongs to linguistics problems. Other

problems that might become a barrier for the students to speak fluently is the

psychological problems (as cited in Fitriani, Apriliaswati & Wardah, 2015, p. 4).

Xinghua (2007) state that psychological problems are those problems which

often interfere emotional and physical health, your relationships, work

productivity, or life adjustment such as nervous, lack of self-confident and

anxiety (as cited in Fitriani, Apriliaswati & Wardah (2015, p. 4)).

Normazidah, Koo, & Hazita (2012), Trawiński (2005) presented the

factors that impact the EFL learners to have poor performance in English

language learning as followings (as cited in Rany, Abidin, & Mei, 2013, p. 184):

1) English is regarded as a difficult subject to learn.

2) Learners’ learning depends on the English teachers as authorities.

3) There is a lack of support to use English in the home environment

and the community.

 4) Learners have insufficient or lacking of exposure to the language

as there is a limited opportunity to use English outside the

classrooms

5) Students have a limitation of vocabulary proficiency as well as

English reading materials are not always available.

6) Learners have an unwillingness and lack of motivation to learn

English as they do not see the immediate need to use the language.

7) Lack of motivation for learning or the negative attitude towards

the target language.

Based to those statements above, it can be summarized that English

speaking problems can come from two main problems: linguistic problem and

psychological problem.

2.3 Teaching English Speaking for Indonesian

Learning a new language, especially a foreign language that rarely used

by the society is different thing rather than learning a new language that is

traditional language. Learning a foreign language means that learn new

vocabulary, new structure and grammar, new spoken language, etc. While Nunan

(2003, p. 54) stated that “A Foreign Language (FL) context is one where the

target language is not the language communication in the society”. Learning a

new language probably not an easy thing for some people, because it needs a

habitual activity and a lot of practicing in the long term. Nunan (2003, p. 54)

says that “learning speaking skill is very challenging for students in FL context,
because they have very few opportunities to use the target language outside the

classroom. Learning to speak and comprehend a new language probably need

more time than traditional language or the mother tongue. It because learning a

new language cannot be learn naturally without any memorizing and practicing

activities.

English have learnt by the students starting from primary level up to

university, but English still become a terrifying problem for some people who

does not get the value of learning English itself. Teaching English means teach

the students toward some abilities that must be learnt, such as writing, speaking,

reading, listening and so on. The aim of teaching English is to involve the

students’ comprehension in English spoken and written form.

According to Broughton, Brumfit, Flavell, Hill, & Pincas (1980, p. 7)

“learners of English as a foreign language have a choice of language variety to a

larger extent than second language learners.”. The choice of language variety

comes from some factors such as political influence, educational system,

society’s needs, etc. The main purpose of learning English for learners are not

just focusing on the mastering the skills themselves, but also emphasizing on the

skills development and confidence. Especially in teaching speaking English, the

students need to speak English deliberately and repeatedly. At the end of English

teaching and learning process, the students’ able to communicate in English

properly and fluently in many occasions is still being the main goal of its course.
 Brown (2007, p. 7) in Khomarudin (2012, p. 5) said that teaching means

as controlling and facilitating the students to learn and set up the learning

situation. Based to the main goals of English training and learning process,

teaching English speaking is being a concern topic which related to its goal.

Teaching speaking means that the teachers are facilitating and guiding the

students in learning English speaking with different styles, approaches, methods,

and certain technique to formulate the teaching learning process (Khomarudin

(2012, p. 6). Brown (1994, p. 268-270) considers seven principles of teaching

English speaking. Its principles are articulacy and accurateness, offer

intrinsically inspiring motivation, inspire the reliable language use, deliver

proper response and suggestion, capitalize on the relation both speaking and

listening, give students occasion to initiate verbal communication, and encourage

the progress of speaking approaches (Khomarudin, 2012, p. 6).

According to the statements above, learning speaking English for foreign

learners probably not an easy thing for some people. English learning methods

must be appropriate with the students according to their background of

knowledge. Teachers’ role and guidance are being important elements that

support the learning English process itself, especially in learning speaking

English. The principles in teaching speaking itself must be applied in teaching

procedure in the English classroom. The teachers’ guidance in spoken training

process is a crucial thing that can inspired the students to speak in English.
2.4 Presentation – Practice – Production (3P) Technique

2.4.1 The Concept of Presentation – Practice – Production (3P) Technique

According to Harmer (2007, p. 64) stated that “A variation of

Audiolingualism is the procedure most often referred to PPP, which stands for

Presentation-Practice-Production.”. Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique is the combination of three phrases and three activities in the same time

that functions to improve students’ English ability. PPP technique can be applied

based on the situational context. It related to the statement from Harmer (2007, p.

64) says “it grew out of structural-situational teaching whose main departure from

Audiolingualism was to place the language in clear situational context”. The

teachers’ role in applying PPP technique in teaching speaking English is

introducing a situation which contextualises the language to be taught (Harmer,

2007, p. 64). It has been explained by Harmer (2007, p. 66) that PPP technique is

the simple way to teach foreign language, especially in communicative classroom.

PPP technique attract the students to be energetic and communicative in the

speaking process according to something that related to their interest and habitual.

Brown (2001, p. 406-407) in Yuliani (2017, p. 24) state that PPP or

Presentation, Practice and Production is kind of organization typical of many

published English language teaching course. In the PPP technique, the teacher

introduces the technique with invite the students to discuss about a situation which

can be related to their habitual in learning process. In applying PPP technique into

teaching English speaking, relationship between the teacher and the students must
be cooperative. The teacher and the students can able to decide at which them stage

to enter the procedure of PPP technique (Harmer, 2007 p. 66). It related with the

students’ condition and readiness in learning English speaking. The procedures will

begin with the presentation that given by the teacher related to the materials that

going to be discuss. Then, the teachers try to practice something which related to

the materials and it called as “practicing activity”. After doing something in

practicing activity, it would like to accompany the learning process to the process

of “production” which means as the final activity after those previous activities.

According to Woodward (2001, p. 126) in Yuliani (2017, p. 25) stated

that PPP technique involves of setting up a situation, eliciting or modelling the

language that fits with the situation, taking some topics that related to the

students’ experience and then invite the students to speak up. Involving a setting

up situation and the students themselves in the teaching speaking process can

establish the students’ critical thinking and confidence to speak up. It is

supported by Harmer (2007, p. 64) with statement “In this procedure, the teacher

introduces a situation which contextualises the language to be taught.”. In

studying a new language, the students must be acquired a new knowledge that

functions to solve the problem of the learning process itself. It correlated to the

statement from Walker (2005) in Hakim, Sariyatun, & Sudiyanto (2018, p. 180)

that critical thinking skills are a thinking process that allows students to acquire

new knowledge through problem-solving and collaboration processes. PPP

technique also can facilitate the teacher to be more encourage the students to

speak up in the controlled way.

 According to the article “PPP Framework: Presentation – Practice and

Production”, actually before doing the Presentation stage, there is an activity called

as Warm-Up process. Warm-Up is actually a process to warm-up the students. It

tends to be a short activity and it can be a dynamic activity. The warm-up activity

must be related to the related materials, especially speaking English ability (2020,

para. 2). In this stage, the teacher can ask the students some question through the

related materials.

Harmer (2007, pp. 65-66) explained PPP technique as follows:

1. Presentation

According to Harmer (2007, p. 65) stated that presentation is the activity of

showing and explaining some materials about specific things to the audience or

learners. While Vystavelova (2009, p. 21) stated that presentation is the way teacher

presents new words or structures, gives examples, writes them on the board, etc.

Based on the article “What is Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)?”, stated

that presentation stage is also the stage that the target language introduced (2019,

para. 3). In the presentation activity, the question and answer session are being one

of procedures that going to be something important to do in order to build the

students’ right perception through the materials. This activity represents the

introduction to the materials by using pictures, dialog, text, etc to demonstrate the

situation and the activity. In addition, Thornbury (2005, p. 94) says that presentation

is the experience of standing up in front of many people and speaking for a sustained

turn is excellent preparation for real-life speaking. It means that all people need
their experience to speak up in any situations. The presentation stage can be

implements with other steps that related with the procedures of Harmer (2007, p.

65) with:

1. Teacher show a picture to the students according to the materials.

2. Teacher ask the students’ opinion about the picture.

3. Teacher give the students natural clue and a little direction, e.g physical clue

when the students find difficulties in producing some words.

Based on the article “PPP TEFL Teaching Methodology” in the presentation

stage, the English teacher must to speak in English to proficient users of the English

language about something familiar, first. The English teacher itself have to be

careful of the language that used and be clearly in present the foreign language in

order to avoid misunderstanding in the students’ perception (2020, para. 20). There

are 4 key things that should pay attention in the Presentation stage (“PPP TEFL

Teaching Methodology,” 2020, para 21-26):

1) Attention in the Classroom

The English teacher invite the students to an interesting material through the target

language itself. The use of facial expression, visual associated might be needed in

order to make this stage feels fun and easy to perceive by the students.

2) Perception and Grading of Language

The English teacher can use various colour when write the materials down into the

board, showing some images, etc. The teacher does not allow to use any

unnecessary language.
 3) Target Language Understanding

The teacher must be checking the students’ understanding in the context of the

related materials.

4) Short-term Memory in the Classroom

The teacher must comprehend the acceptance ability from different students in the

different ways. The teacher must to make sure the presentation has something to

enable all types of learners to retain the information.

2. Practice

According to Harmer (2007, p. 66) stated that “practice is the way teachers

get the students to repeat the sentences”. Practice means as learning by repetition

or learning by doing. The practice activity is the important stage in learning to a

new language, especially a foreign language. Thornbury (2005, p. 85) says that by

repeating a task can shows the gain in the accuracy, fluency and complexity toward

something. Practicing a new language continuously can build a good stigma and a

habitual term to become fluent in that language. Harmer (2007, p. 65) explain some

procedures through practice stage, as follows:

1) Students repeat the words or sentences that have been made.

2) Teacher ask the students to repeat their sentences personally.

3) Teacher do some correction to correct some mistakes that have been done

by the students.

4) The students do coral and individual repetition personally.

5) Teacher put the students in pairs and ask them to practice simultaneously.
 Practicing a foreign language, in this case practicing English speaking

basically is a rehearsal or repetition through certain behaviour of a language

learning. The article “PPP Framework: Presentation – Practice and Production”

stated that practice stage of PPP technique aims to provide opportunities to the

students to use the second language ability during the English learning process.

This stage controlled practiced since the teacher give the students task through

English speaking ability (2020, para. 6). There are some characteristics that

indicates an effective practice stage of PPP technique (PPP TEFL Teaching

Methodology,” 2020, para 27-32):

1. Practice Validity : rehearsing the skill or materials to be

practiced.

2. Pre-learning : make sure the students understanding

through the materials in the presentation stage.

3. Volume (Amount) of Practice : give the students task through

practicing English activities, such as: fill and practice a simple

dialogue, etc.

4. Success Orientation : a success orientation is founded from the

successful of the students’ score and accomplishment through the

task and practice activities.

5. Issuing Activity Instructions and Managing the Activity: the teacher

should offer praise to the students’ achievement and giving some

suggestion through something ambiguous and unclear.

 The practice stage can be applicable to some interactive and communicative

ways, such as: drilling and pronouncing difficult words orally, gap fill exercises,

pair work asking and answering question, etc. In this stage, the teachers’ role is to

direct the activities, to provide the students through positive feedback, correct some

mistakes and provide the correct form (Kostoulas, 2012, p. 2).

3. Production

Production stage is the result of the learning activity that have been applied

in the presentation and practice stage. The result product of this stage can be written

or oral form in the teaching and learning process. Harmer (2007, p. 65) mentioned

production stage with immediate creativity stage. The typical production activities

can be creating a dialogue, oral presentation, etc. The teachers’ role on this stage is

somehow facilitate the students to overcome their lack of vocabulary or structure

and to motivate them to be confidence in producing their own language products.

Harmer (2007, p. 65) describes some procedures in production stage, as follows:

1. The students are asked to use the new language in sentences of their own.

2. The students present their all tasks by oral presentation in front of the

classroom.

Basically, the article “PPP TEFL Teaching Methodology” explained that in the

production stage the students allow to use their opportunities to speak in English as

much as possible. This stage actually similar to the practice stage, but there is a key

difference of both of them that is, students’ autonomy. The students produce their

own speaking task with minimal assistance and help from the teacher (2020, para.
30). Production stage can be presented in some ways, such as: role playing,

discussion activities, etc (What is Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP), 2019,

para. 10). There are some key aspects that indicates a production stage activity of

PPP technique (PPP TEFL Teaching Methodology,” 2020, para 33-38):

1) Volume (Amount) of Production : in this process, the teacher reduces

the students’ chances to questioned and spoke to her/him. The activities in

this stage can be speaking in pairs, speak to each other as much as possible.

2) Production Validity : the teacher allows the students to produce some

sentences in the target language that must be presented.

3) Production Contextualization : the teacher must set the production stage

situation into a simulation of real-life situation.

4) Student autonomy : the students must speak in English with ideally no

support or help from the teacher.

5) Issuing instruction for an Activity : the teacher must create a clear

instruction through the task that has been given. The instruction must be a

fun and enjoyable instruction to make them feel interest through the task.

6) Correcting Errors during the Activity : the teacher should not drown them

out by speak too length while correcting the students’ mistake.

2.4.2 Teaching Speaking through Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

Teaching speaking ability using PPP technique basically can assist the

learning process. PPP technique is one of instruction technique that can establish

and enable the students to increase their foreign language ability, especially
speaking English ability. By using this kind of teaching speaking technique, it

means that the students are going to have a deep understanding over the things that

going to be delivered by the teacher and the students are going to have more

experiences in acquiring their spoken ability through the learning process was going

on. In the teaching speaking process with PPP technique, the teacher is going to

arrange some activities that related to the three stages of PPP technique itself. There

are some activities that can be useful to achieve the goals of teaching English

speaking by using PPP technique, such as:

• Warm-Up stage : the teacher should set the classroom situation as

good as possible which related to the materials that going to discuss. In this process,

the English teacher can ask the students some question through the related

materials.

• Presentation stage : The English teacher invite the students to an

interesting material through the target language itself. Then, the teacher arouses the

students' critical thinking about related material by asking them some question and

the teacher ask the students to conclude their answer that related to the materials

correctly. This stage basically is teachers learning centre, but in this research the

collaboration between teacher and students are going to do. The teacher roles’ in

this stage is delivering specific materials with using some media and the students

will get some guidance in learning process.

• Practice stage : the teacher gives some exercise and instruction to

the students that related to the speaking activity itself, such as: creating and
practicing a simple dialogue in pairs, drilling some difficult words, delivering their

own opinion individually through discussion activity, etc. In this stage, the students

have many opportunities to practice and develop their speaking ability and the

students are still getting guidance by the teacher.

• Production stage : in this stage, the students allow to speak English

properly with no or minimal assistance from the teacher. The students will create

their own speaking production that related to a real-life situation. The teachers’ role

is just giving them feedback and correction through their production wisely.

2.4.3 Criticism through Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) Technique

According to Harmer (2007, p. 66) PPP technique actually was offered to

teacher trainees as a significant teaching procedure from the middle of the 1960s

onwards. It was, critics argued, that the used of PPP technique was clearly teacher-

centred, not students centred. It also seems to assume that students learn in straight

lines' - that is, starting from no knowledge, through highly restricted sentence-based

utterances and on to immediate production. In response to these criticisms many

people have offered variations on PPP and alternatives to it (Harmer, 2007, p. 66).

A few years later, Donn Byrne suggested much the same thing (Byrne 1986:3),

joining the three phases in a circle. Teachers and students can decide at which stage

to enter the procedure. Byrne (1986) swaps the ‘straight line’ of Presentation-

Practice and Production for a flexible circle like this (Harmer, 2007, p. 66):
 Table 2.2

Circle of PPP Technique

In globalization era, PPP technique can be a suggested teaching English

speaking technique. PPP technique assumed good enough to teach English speaking

ability in one form or another all over the world. Harmer (2007, p. 66) also stated

that PPP technique is the case that students and the teacher itself are exposed to

many other technique and procedure. While, Thornbury (1999) in Maftoon &

Sarem (2012, p. 32) view PPP technique has a logic that appealing to teachers and

students in reflects a notion of practice makes perfect, common in many skills.

2.4.4 The Strengths of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) Technique

The strengths of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique as follows:

1. The advantage of using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique can make students interested in learning English, especially in

learning speaking ability.

 2. The Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique can invite the

students to be more active and also avoid them from being bored in teaching

and learning process.

3. By applying this technique, the students can improve their critical

thinking to find their own interesting things and increase their confidence in

speaking English.

4. By using this technique, the students will get a new experience in learning

speaking and it can motivate them to speak English continuously.

5. By using PPP technique, the teacher will have a better communication

with the students in dealing with some procedures that might be apply.

2.4.5 The Weakness of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) Technique

The first weakness of PPP technique is if the teacher do not prepare the

technique and the materials well, it can be a teacher centred learning method. The

next deficiency of PPP technique is lack of teachers’ attention and takes time too

long to be practice as the speaking instrument of test. The students’ knowledge and

lack of confidence somehow can be the weakness to applying this technique in the

classroom activity.

2.5 Previous Study

In this part, the researcher explains some related previous studies that are

applicable with this paper:

1. The first study was conducted by Yuliani (2017) is about “The Influence

of Using PPP Technique Toward Students’ Speaking Ability of The Eighth Grade
At MTS Darul Ulum Tanjung Bintang In The Academic Year Of 2017/2018”. She

was applied quasi experimental design. The research were conducted to 59 students

of the eighth grade with three times of giving treatment. In collecting the data, oral

test was used. The effect founded that the research was there is a significant

influence of using Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP) towards students’

speaking ability.

2. The second study from Adi Yusuf (2015) is about “A PPP (Presentation,

Practice, And Production) Phase Method of Teaching Speaking To University

Students”. He was applied a qualitative research. This research is useful to identify

the students’ difficulties and mistakes in English speaking to the fluency and

accuracy of English itself. It functions to make the teacher give an instant correction

toward the mistakes of students’ English speaking.

3. The third study from Maksum (2012) is about Teaching Speaking Use 3P

(Presentation – Practice – Production) Approach for Second Grade Student in MTS

At - Tauhid Surabaya. The action research used which described in the data in the

form of words rather than in number. It was done in two cycles. Each cycle

contained four steps namely planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. The

research instruments used in this study consisted of questionnaire, interview and

field notes. The research was conducted by 40 students that consist of 20 boys and

20 girls. According to the research, the PPP technique founded that 76% students

stated that they are enjoying and feel interested in learn speaking with using the

PPP technique. It means that the research, especially the PPP technique itself got a

good respond from the students and the teacher.

 4. The last study from Badaruddin & Sahabuddin (2019) is about The

Use of PPP Model in Enhancing the Students’ Speaking Ability. This study was

applied in a quasi-experimental design, with two group namely experimental

class and control class. The sample were consisted of 55 students that was chosen

using cluster random sampling technique. The data were showed by the mean

score of pre-test was 45.33 and the post-test was 72. 83. In the same line, the

result of t-test value was 2.102 and t-table value was 2.004 in post-test. It means

that the t-test value (2.102) was higher than t-table value (2.004). Those indicate

that Ha was accepted and H0 was rejected. According to the research, the PPP

model gives significant influence through the students’ speaking ability.

From the studies above, the researcher concluded that the Presentation –

Practice – Production (PPP) technique has a significant influence and an applicable

technique in teaching English speaking to improve students’ speaking ability. In

this research, the researcher found some similarities and differences toward some

previous studies above. The similarity used of Presentation – Practice – Production

(PPP) technique as the technique in teaching speaking ability. The differences from

the previous study are in the research subject, the research design, the research

procedures, and the point of variables. This research was conducted with using a

Quasi Experimental research as the research design. It consisted of two classes in

the research subject, that are experimental class and control class. The researcher

ought to find out the influence of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique toward students’ English speaking ability by using Factual Report as the

research materials which related to the continuous materials of the school.

 BAB III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

In this research, the researcher used the quantitative research method

because this method focuses on the statistical analysis. The researcher used the

Experimental design used, specifically a quasi-experimental design. Based on

Hatch & Farhady (1982) stated that “Quasi experimental design are practical

compromises between true experimentation and the nature of human language

behaviour which we wish to investigate” (p. 24). Quasi experimental design used

to minimize other variables that can not be controlled in the research process and

the researcher could controlled some threats in the validity testing. This design

purposed to explained the cause-effect relation with using the experimental class

and control class in the same time, however the sample did not choose nonrandomly

assign. In this research, the researcher took the research sample specifically based

on the objective of the research and the purpose of the researcher.

The kinds of quasi-experimental design which chosen by the researcher is

the Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD). According to Creswell

(2009) Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD) is “a popular approach to

quasi-experiments, the experimental Group A and the control Group B are selected

without random assignment.” (p. 220). In the implementation of NECGD, the

researcher used the intact groups which separated into any specific classes and the
 The function of the control class was the basic determinants of any changes.

The chosen groups were taken a pre-test and post-test as the research instruments.

The experimental group was received the specific treatment that is using the

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique. While, the control group

received another treatment that is scientific learning method.

Figure 3.1
Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD)

Group A O____________X____________O

_______________________________________

Group B O__________________________O

According to the figure above, there are two classes of the research

participants. One as experimental class which would get the treatment using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique. Other one as control class

which would get another teaching method, that is scientific learning method. The

control class would not get the same treatment with the experimental class, because

the aims of the control class only as the comparison of the research.

3.2 Research Site and Participants

This research was conducted in SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang, which located

at Jl. Ciwaru Raya No.55, Cipare, Kecamatan Cipare, Kota Serang. This school

were chosen because of several reasons. The first reason is because this school uses

English subject as one of the important lessons. The second reason is taken from

the researchers’ preliminary observation toward the desire of the students’ English
spoken proficiency which concluded that the students wants to have additional time

to do the English spoken training than other abilities. The last reason is based on

the experience of Pre-service Teacher Training Program (PPLK) that has done

there. Thus, it made the researcher understood about the students’ characteristic and

the school conditions, so it made the research felt suitable for doing the research.

3.2.1 Research Population

According to Creswell (2012) “population is a group of individuals

possesses one characteristic that distinguishes them from other groups” (p. 204). In

this research, the researcher took the population from the eleventh grade of SMK

PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the second semester in academic year of 2019/2020. The

eleventh grade students are consist of six department, as follows: Technical

Engineering (TPM), Electricity Engineering (TITL), Computer Engineering (TKJ),

Motorcycle Engineering (TBSM), Vehicle Engineering (TKR), and Industrial

Automotive Engineering (TOI). To sum up, the total population of the eleventh

grade are 419 students.

3.2.2 Research Sampling

Sampling is a technique to take a research sample. In this research, the

researcher used random sampling with specifically used proportionate stratified

random sampling category. Sugiyono (2018, p. 134) disproportionate stratified

random sampling is used when the population separated into homogeneous groups.

The criteria that must be filled were variables that have the intact relation with the

research variables themselves. The sample taken based on the consideration of the
research objective and the researchers’ purpose which have been stratified of the

specific criteria of the population. The classes which taken as the research sample

have the similar average of English proficiency, especially on speaking ability.

3.2.3 Research Sample

The research sample is the small part of population that that will be chosen

to be participants in a research. Based on the sampling technique that taken by the

researcher, this research taken two classes as the research sample. One classroom

sample as the sample of experimental class and other class as the control class. The

experimental class was XI TPM 3 and the control class was XI TPM 4. The

experimental class was accepted the treatments of using PPP technique in the

research process. Meanwhile, the control class was received the scientific learning

method in the research procedure.

3.3 Research Variables

According to Creswell (2009, pp. 49-50) “a variable refers to a characteristic

or attribute of an individual or an organization that can be measured or observed

and that varies among the people or organization being studied”. In this research,

the researcher divided the variables into two kinds, as follows: independent variable

and dependent variable.

3.3.1 Independent Variable (X)

According to Creswell (2009, pp. 49-50) “Independent variables are those

that (probably) cause, influence, or affect outcomes”. The independent variable in

this research is Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique.

3.3.2 Dependent Variable (Y)

Based on Creswell (2009, pp. 49-50) “Dependent variable are those that

depend on the independent variables: they are the outcomes or results of the

influence of the independent variables”. In this research, the dependent variables

that chosen by the researcher would be students’ English speaking ability.

3.4 Research Instruments

Research instrument is the tools to measure, collect and analyse the

participants into the variables of a study. In this research, test is used as the research

instruments. The kinds of test would be divided into two kinds, such as: Pre-test

and Post-test. The researchers’ purpose of used tests as the research instrument was

the researcher wanted to find out and measure the students’ speaking English score

in applying any kinds of speaking components.

To know every specific activity that applied in the experimental class and

control class while the research process were taken place, the table below were

explained specifically about the activities that had been applied, as follows:

Figure 3.3

Table of Pre- Test - Treatment – Post-Test Processes

Class Pre-Test Treatment Post-Test
Oral test 1. The students were Oral test guided
guided by accepted the related by answering
(Experimental answering materials with using the some question
Class) some PPP technique. related to the
question
 related to the 2. The students got factual reports
factual specific treatments and text.
reports text. speaking training, e.g: the
researchers’ simulation,
video views, role playing
and dialogue in pairs, etc.
3. The students got an
assignment as a group to
make their own speaking
task in role playing form.
4. The students
individually was created
their own speaking task
and present the task in
front of classroom.
Oral test 1. The students was Oral test guided
guided by accepted the scientific by answering
answering learning method related some question
(Control Class) some to the continuous related to the
question materials. factual reports
related to the 2. The students would not text.
factual get more specific
reports text. treatments and speaking
training.
3. The students would get
an assignment as a group
to make their own
speaking task in dialogue
form.
4. The students
individually was created
 their own speaking task
and present the task in
front of classroom.

3.4.1 Pre-Test

Pre-test is a test which conducted at the first meeting. Pre-test was

conducted before the treatment was accepted to the experimental class and before

the materials was given to the control class. The kind of test that used in Pre-Test

and Post-Test is Oral test guided. Based on Thoha (2003, p. 61) Oral test guided is

oral test which use written guidelines in asking the questions to the research sample

(as cited in Aliyah, 2014, p. 20).

The test was related to the continuous materials, which is Factual Report

Text. The students would come forward to do oral test guided that given by the

researcher. The students individually would get three minutes each other in

answering the questions. The students’ spoken answers assessed through the

speaking elements.

3.4.2 Treatment

The treatment that given to the experimental class with using the

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique in two until three meetings.

The PPP technique were being a collaborated technique through the teacher

learning centre and the students learning centre. In the experimental class, the

researcher was given some activities which emphasized on speaking training than
in the control class. Meanwhile, the control class got the scientific learning method.

Each class was got the same assignment that related to the materials given.

3.4.3 Post-Test

Post-test is a test which was conducted at the last meeting of the research

process. Post-test also is conducted after the treatment given to the experimental

class and after the materials given to the control class. The test was related to the

continuous materials. The students were come forward to do oral test guided that

given by the researcher. The students individually got three minutes each other in

answering the questions. The students’ spoken answers assessed through the

speaking elements.

3.4.4 Speaking Assessing Criteria

To assess the students’ English speaking ability there are five components

that used in speaking assessment that cited by Brown (2001, pp.406-407) in Brown

(2004, pp. 172-174) , as follows:

a) Vocabulary

Elements Scores Scoring Categories

5 Speech on all levels in fully accepted by educate

native speaker in all its features including breadth
Excellent
of vocabulary and idioms, colloquialism and
pertinent cultural references.

Can understand and participate in a conversation

within the range of his experience with a high
Very Good 4
degree of precision of vocabulary.
 Able to speak the language with sufficient vocabulary
to participate effectively in most formal and
Good 3
informal conversation in practical, social, and
professional topics. Vocabulary is broad enough that
he rarely has to grope a word.
Has speaking vocabulary sufficient to express
himself simply with some
Average 2
circumlocutions.

Poor ≤1 Speaking vocabulary inadequate to express anything

but the most elementary needs.

b) Pronunciation

Elements Scores Scoring Categories

Excellent 5 Equivalent to and fully accepted by educated native

speakers.

Very good 4 Errors in pronunciation are quite rare

Good 3 Errors never interface with understanding and rarely

disturb the native speaker. Accent may be
obviously foreign.

Average 2 Accent is intelligible often quite faulty.

Errors in pronunciation are frequent but can be

understand by native speaker used dealing with
Poor ≤1
foreigners attempting to speak his language.

c) Grammar

Elements Scores Scoring Categories

Excellent 5 Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker

Very good 4 Able to use the language accurately on all levels
normally pertinent to professional needs, errors in
grammar are quite rare.

Good 3 Control of grammar is good. Able to speak the

language with sufficient structural accuracy to
participate effectively in most formal and informal
conversation on
practical, social, and professional topics.

Average 2 Can usually handle elementary construction quite

accurately but does not have through or confident
control of the grammar.

Poor ≤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.

d) Comprehension

Elements Scores Scoring Categories

Excellent 5 Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker

Very good 4 Can understand any conversation within the range of

his experience.

Good 3 Comprehension is quite complete at normal rate

speech.

Average 2 Can get the gist of most conversation of non-test

subject (i.e., topics that require no specialized
knowledge)

Poor ≤1 Within scope of his limited language experience

can understand simple question and statements
delivered within slowed speech, repetition or
paraphrase.
e) Fluency
Elements Scores Scoring Categories

Excellent 5 Has complete fluency in the language such that his

speech is fully accepted by educated native
speakers

Very good 4 Able to use language fluently on all level normally

pertinent to professional needs. Can participate in
any conversation within the range of the experience
with a high degree of fluency.

Good 3 Can discuss particular interest of competence with

reasonable ease. Rarely has to grope for words.

Can handle with confidence but not with facility

most social situations, including introduction and
Average 2
casual conversation in about current events, as well
as work, family, and autobiographical information.

Poor ≤1 No specific fluency description. Refer to other four

language areas for implied level of fluency.

3.5 Data Collecting Technique

The students’ speaking tests were collected by using some tests (Pre-test

and Post-test) and collected in the form of video recording and audio recording. The

tests were applied in oral guided test, which invited the students individually to

answered the questions that asked by the researcher both pre-test and post-test. Each

student has maximum three minutes to answered the question.

3.6 Data Analysis Technique

Data analysis technique is a technique that organized and collected the data,

so the conclusion would be gotten. The data was taken from pre-test and post-test

and collected or measured as specified by using Microsoft Excel.

3.6.1 Validity

In this research, the content of validity is used. The purpose of validity test

in this research is to find out the validity score of the instruments which used to

collect the research data. A valid research indicated with there is the similarity

between the collected data with the real data which occur to the research. In this

research, the researcher used the Content Validity which measure the content of the

test based on the research proposal. This technique was done by proposing a test

which was based on the curriculum that used by that school. The test was done

appropriate of the school materials that function to did not obstruct the learning

process. The validity sheet was analysed by the English teacher of that school.

3.6.2 Reliability

Reliability is related to the consistency and stability a data or research

discovery. In this research, the researcher used the Inter-Rater Reliability. Based on

Garson (2013, p. 63), Inter-Rater Reliability is administering the same form to the

same people by two or more raters / interviewers so as to establish the extent of

consensus on use of the instrument by those who administer it. The raters that rated

the reliability of research instruments were: the researcher and the English teacher

of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang. The scores from two rates were calculated to get the

correlation coefficient of the data. The two rates were observed the students’ oral

guided test in Pre-Test and Post-Test. The Cohen Kappa formula is used to

measured Inter-Rater reliability based on Arikunto, 2013, p. 251 (as cited in

Rizkiana, 2019, p. 31):

 1
𝑃𝑒 = ∑(𝑁1+ + 𝑁+1 )
𝑁2

Notes:
Pe : Chance of the agreement inter-observe

N1+ : Total value of the first category for the first observer

N+1 : Total value of first category for the second observer

N : Total values that shows the phenomenon which is being observed

Finally, input the data into this formula:

𝑃𝑜−𝑃𝑒
𝐾𝐾 = 1−𝑃𝑒

Notes :

KK : Coefficient of agreement of the observation

Po : Proportion of the frequency of the observation agreement

Pe : Chance of the agreement

The interpretation value of Kappa as follows based on Altman (1991) as cited

in Pangestu (2019, p. 26) :

Figure 3.4
Value of Kappa

Kappa Statistic Strength of Agreement

< 0.20 Poor
0.21 – 0.40 Fair
0.40 – 0.60 Moderate
0.61 – 0.80 Good
0.81 – 1.00 Very good
3.6.3 Normality Test
In order to calculate the normality score of pre-test and post-test, the

researcher used a graphical method for normality of distribution test. The graphic

showed and indicated whether the distribution data were normal or not. Based on

Hatch and Lazaraton (1991) there are three possessions to showed the normal

distribution as follows.

Figure 3.5

Normal Distribution

(as cited in Pangestu, 2019, pp. 26 - 27)

3.6.4 Homogeneity Testing

Homogeneity test is a test that functioned to collected the homogeneity

score through the pre-test and post-test score based on the research data. The

homogeneity test only used to measure in the post-test score toward the

experimental class and the control class. According to Sugiyono (2013, p. 276) the

formula of homogeneity test that used to measure was:

𝑩𝒊𝒈𝒈𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝑽𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆
Fcount =
𝑺𝒎𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝑽𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆
 Criteria:

- If fcount  ftable : it indicates that the test is not homogenous.

- If fcount  ftable : it indicates that the test is homogenous.

3.6.5 Hypothesis Test

Based on the research formulation, the researcher was ought to found out and

measured the influence of using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique toward students’ speaking ability. Therefore, there were two hypothesis

in this research, such as:

1. H0 (Null Hypothesis) : There is no influence of using Presentation

– Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking

ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

academic year of 2019/2020.

2. Ha (Alternative Hypothesis) : There is an influence of using Presentation

– Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking

ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

academic year of 2019/2020.

Hypothesis were formulated as follows:

𝑴𝒙 − 𝑴𝒚
𝑻𝒙𝒚 =
∑ 𝒙² + ∑ 𝒚𝟐 𝟏 𝟏
√{
𝑵𝒙 + 𝑵𝒚 − 𝟐} {𝑵𝒙 + 𝑵𝒚}
Notes:

Txy : T-Test

M1 : Mean of deviation of Experimental Class

M2 : Mean of Deviation of Control Class

X1 : Sum of the squared deviation score of Experimental Class

X2 : Sum of the squared deviation score of Control Class

N1 : The number of students of Experimental Class

N2 : The number of students of Control Class

2 : Constant number

(Arikunto, 2010, p. 280 as cited in Amelia, 2019, p. 33)

The hypothesis criteria were indicated some statements, as follows:

1. If t-test (to) ≥ t-table (tt) in significant degree of 0.05, Ho (Null

hypothesis) was rejected and Ha (Alternative hypothesis) was

accepted.

2. If t-test (to) ≤ t-table (tt) in significant degree of 0.05, H0 (the Null

hypothesis) was accepted and the Ha (Alternative hypothesis) was

rejected.

3.7 Research Procedure

The description of the research procedure functions to guiding the research

process. The procedure of conducting the research explained in ten procedures, as

follows:
 1. The researcher asked permission to conduct the research to the staff of SMK

PGRI 1 Kota Serang.

2. Then, the researcher determined the research sample.

3. The researcher decided to the related materials of the research.

4. The instruments were designed for pre-test and post-test.

5. The researcher conducted Pre-test and Post-test, analysed the data and

arranged the result of the research:

For Control Class:

a) The Pre-test and Post-Test were given as individual task and

collected as audio recording.

b) The continuous materials were delivered with using scientific

learning method.

For Experimental Class:

a) The Pre-test and Post-Test were given as individual task and

collected both in audio recording or video recording.

b) The continuous materials were delivered with using Presentation-

Practice-Production (PPP) technique.

6. The researcher analysed the data by using Microsoft Excel.

7. The researcher arranged the result of the research.

8. Lastly, the researcher was concluded the result of the research.

Those were the procedures that were conducted in this paper. Every steps of the

research procedure above were managed carefully.

 CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Research Findings

The research objective was aimed to finding out the influence of using

Presentation – Practice - Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English

speaking ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

academic year of 2019/2020. This research taken with quasi-experimental with

Non-Equivalent Control Group Design (NECGD) as the research design. This

research divided two groups as the research participants, such as: XI TPM (as

experimental class) and XI TPM 4 (as control class). There were some steps that

used by the researcher to analyzed the data. First, the researcher analyzed the

validity and reliability using content validity and inter-rater reliability to make sure

the instruments were valid and reliable. Second, the researcher analyzed the

normality of data whether the students’ score of Pre-test and Post-test were

normally distributed or not. The researcher used the graphical method to analysed

the normality of the data. Third, the homogeneity variance of the data used to know

whether the data from experimental and control class were homogeneous or not.

Last, hypothesis test used to know whether the alternative hypothesis was accepted

or not and it function to prove the influence of using Presentation – Practice -

Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking ability at the

eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year of

2019/2020.
4.2 Data Description

In this research, test is used as the research instruments means to get the data

which is the students’ speaking score from Pre-Test and Post-Test. Oral Test

Guided with using Short Answer Question (SAQ) form is used by the researcher

and it related to the continuous materials in that school, that is factual report text.

The result of the test showed as follow:

Table 4.1

Descriptive Statistic Table

Min. Max. Std.

Instruments N Mean Median Mode
Score Score Deviation

Pre-test of
30 56.7 65.35 56.5 35 73 10.13
Experimental class

Pre-test of Control
30 55.63 55.75 55.1 30 70 11.7
Class

Post-test of
30 66 68.5 79.5 40 88 11.75
Experimental class

Post-test of
30 64 64 64 40 83 11.48
Control Class

Based on the table above, found that there were significantly different

between the Pre-test score of the experimental class and control class. Then,

according to the Post-test score of the experimental class and control class

established that there were not really significantly differences. If this data viewed

from other side, there were a really significant differences between the score of Pre-
test and Post-test from experimental class, for example: the score of standard

deviation in the pre-test was 10.13, but in the post-test was 11.75. In the other side,

there were a little difference between the standard deviation score of Pre-test and

Post-test of control class. In the pre-test of control class the score was 11.7, but the

post-test score was 11.48. In other words, there were a discharge between both of

the instruments’ score. Based on the data and the description, it can be concluded

that there were significantly differences between the experimental class that

received the specific treatment from the researcher than the control class that did

not receive the treatment specifically.

4.3. Result of Validity and Reliability

4.3.1. Content Validity

In this research, the content of validity is used. Content validity functions to

know and find out whether the data of pre-test and post-test were valid or not. In

determining the content validity of this research, the researcher was compared the

validity sheet to the Kurikulum 2013 (K13) of the eleventh grade of vocational high

school. The content validity of this research was analyzed the English teacher of

SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang. The result of content validity was valid, based on the

English teachers’ analysis. Thus, the content validity did not need a trial and statistic

graphical analytic, because the content of validity sheet was related to the daily

question that used in the English subject in the school. The parameter of the validity

of the test shown by the following table:

 Table 4.2
Table of Content Validity
3.21 Analyzing structure and linguistic features to carry out the
social function of factual reports text by stating and asking
about factual scientific data of people, animals, objects,

Basic symptoms and natural and also social events, in accordance

Competences with the context of learning in other lessons.

4.21 Compile factual text, oral and written about people,

animals, objects, symptoms and natural and social events,
related to other lessons.

3.21.1 Identifying social functions, text structure and linguistic

features in scientific texts is factual according to the context of
their use.

3.21.2 Distinguish social functions, text structures and

Indicators of linguistic features from various factual reports text according
Competence to the context of their use.
Achievement
4.21.1 Compile oral and written texts about factual reports text
(IPK)
based on structures and linguistic features in accordance with
the context of learning in other lessons.
4.21.2 Communicate oral and written about factual reports text
based on structures and linguistic features in accordance with
the context of learning in other lessons.

Technique Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) Technique

Materials Factual Report Text (Sheet of the passage)

Speaking Scoring Sheet

Media
Individual Worksheet
 Pre-test

Each student should answer some question toward a text orally

in front of the researcher with following requirements…

a) The material is about Factual Report Text with the

Theme: Natural Phenomenon.
b) The duration is three minutes for each student
c) The researcher and teacher assess and give the score
through the students’ speaking performance
Instrument of Test
Post-Test

Each student should answer some question toward a text orally

in front of the researcher with following requirements…

a) The material is about Factual Report Text with the

theme: Social phenomenon.
b) The duration is three minutes for each student
c) The researcher and teacher assess and give the score
through the students’ speaking performance

Time Allocation 3 X 45 Minutes

4.3.2 Inter Rater Reliability

In this research, the researcher will use the Inter-Rater Reliability. The raters

were analysed the students’ speaking score in this research were : the researcher

and the English teacher of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang. The scores from two rates

calculated to find out the correlation coefficient. The two rates analysed the

students’ oral guided test in Pre-Test and Post-Test. In this research, the formula of

Cohen Kappa is used to measure the students’ speaking score.

 Table 4.3
Agreement of Inter-rater Reliability

Group Class Pre-test Post-test

Experimental Class 0.71 Agreement 0.85 Agreement
Control Class 0.42 Agreement 0.7 Agreement

From the table above, it can be concluded that :

• Pre-test in experimental class was 0.71, the interpretation was good.

It showed that the data was reliable.

• Post-test in experimental class was 0.85, the interpretation was very

good. It showed that the data was reliable.

• Pre-test in control class was 0.42, the interpretation was moderate.

It showed that the data was reliable.

• Post-test in control class was 0.7, the interpretation was good. It

showed that the data was reliable.

From the Agreement of Inter rater reliability table above, it can be

concluded that the students’ score between Pre-test and Post-test were reliable. The

agreement of inter-rater reliability above showed that the data were stable and

consistent.

4.3.3 Result of Normality Distribution Test

The researcher conducted the normality test to examined whether the data

was normally distributed or not. The normality test focused on test (Pre-test and

Post-test) that conducted in two classes: experimental and control class. The
experimental class was XI TPM 3 and the Control class was XI TPM 4. The details

of statistical and graphical calculation of normality test showed in appendix 3.

Figure 4.1

Normality of Pre-Test in Experimental Class

8
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
3 3
3
2
2

0
35-40 41-46 47-52 53-58 59-64 65-70 71-76

Based on the result of graphic above, it showed that the graphic was

symmetric and well-shaped. In this researcher, the researcher used the theory of

statistics parametric that stated the research variable that need to be analyzed based

on the normal distribution. The normality table above is called as the normal curves.

Based on the curves, it can be concluded that the Pre-Test of Experimental Class

was normally distributed.

 Figure 4.2

Normality of Post-Test in Experimental Class

9 8
8
7
6 6
6
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
40-47 48-55 56-63 64-71 72-79 80-87 88-85

Based on the result of graphic above, it showed that the graphic was

symmetric and well-shaped. In this researcher, the researcher used the theory of

statistics parametric that stated the research variable that need to be analyzed based

on the normal distribution. The normality table above is called as the normal curves.

Based on the curves, it can be concluded that the Post-Test of Experimental Class

was normally distributed.

 Figure 4.3
Normality of Pre-Test in Control Class

9
8
8
7
6
6
5
4
4 4
3
3 3
2
2
1
0
30-36 37-43 44-50 51-57 58-64 65-71 72-78

Based on the result of graphic above, it showed that the graphic was

symmetric and well-shaped. In this researcher, the researcher used the theory of

statistics parametris that stated the research variable that need to be analyzed based

on the normal distribution. The normality table above is called as the normal curves.

Based on the curves, it can be concluded that the Pre-Test of Control Class was

normally distributed.
 Figure 4.4
Normality of Post-Test in Control Class

9
8
8
7
6
5 5
5
4 4
4
3
2 2
2
1
0
40-46 47-53 54-60 61-67 68-74 75-81 82-88

Based on the result of graphic above, it showed that the graphic was

symmetric and well-shaped. In this researcher, the researcher used the theory of

statistics parametric that stated the research variable that need to be analyzed based

on the normal distribution. The normality table above is called as the normal curves.

Based on the curves, it can be concluded that the Post-Test of Control Class was

normally distributed.

4.3.4 Result of Homogeneity Test

Homogeneity test is a test that function to measure the homogeneity score

of the Pre-test and Post-test based on the research data. According to Sugiyono

(2013, p. 276) the formula of homogeneity test measured to the is:

𝑩𝒊𝒈𝒈𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝑽𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆
Fcount =
𝑺𝒎𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝑽𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆
Criteria:

- If fcount  ftable : it indicates that the test is homogenous.

- If fcount ≥ ftable : it indicates that the test is not homogenous.

Based on the data, the homogeneity test of Pre-test was 1.157 and the Post-

test was 1.0174. Then, it was obtained by comparing the value of highest variance

and the lowest variance with significant level of 0.05 with the 𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 57 with the

Ftable = 4.010. The calculation of the data of Pre-test was Fcount ≤ Ftable or 1.157

≤ 4.010 and the data calculation of the Post-test was Fcount ≤ Ftable or 1.0174 ≤

4.010. The result of data calculation indicated that the data of pre-test and post-test

in experimental and control class were homogeneous, because the score of Fcount

were smaller than the score in Ftable.

The details of the data calculation could be seen in appendix 3.

Table 4.4

Result of Homogeneity Test in Experimental and Control Class

Group 𝑭𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕 Pre-test 𝑭𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕 Post-test

𝑭𝒕𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆

Experimental and
1.157 1.0174 4.010
Control Class

Pre-test : Fcount ≤ Ftable = 1.157 ≤ 4.010

Post-test : Fcount ≤ Ftable = 1.0174 ≤ 4.010

4.3.5 Result of Hypothesis Test

In this research, there was alternative hypothesis (Ha) and Null Hypothesis

(H0). Therefore, there are two hypotheses in this research, such as:

1) H0 (Null Hypothesis) : There is no influence of using Presentation

– Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking

ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

2019/2020 academic year.

2) Ha (Alternative Hypothesis) : There is an influence of using Presentation

– Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking

ability at the eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the

2019/2020 academic year.

To prove the hypothesis of this research, the statistic calculation of T-test

formula with the degree of significance 5% was used. The researcher measured the

tcount and 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 and then compared them. The formula as follow:

𝑀𝑥 − 𝑀𝑦
𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 =
∑ 𝑥2 ± ∑ 𝑦2 1 1
√(𝑁 + 𝑁 − 2) (𝑁 + 𝑁 )
𝑥 𝑦 𝑥 𝑦

Mx : Mean score of experimental group (X)

My : Mean score of control group (Y)

∑x2 : Sum of square deviation score in experimental group

∑y2 : Sum of square deviation score in control group
Nx : The number of students of experimental group

Ny : The number of students of control group

Step 1 : Students’ scores and sum of square deviation score in experimental class

and control class

Step 2: Calculated the value of 𝒕𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕

𝑀𝑥 − 𝑀𝑦
tcount =
∑ 𝑥2 ±∑ 𝑦2 1 1
√(𝑁 +𝑁 − 2)(𝑁 + 𝑁 )
𝑥 𝑦 𝑥 𝑦

68,1−63,6
tcount =
129,46333 + 128,22667 1 1
√( )( + )
30 + 30−2 30 30

4,5
tcount =
257,69 2
√( )(30)
58

4,5
tcount =
√(4,443)(0.067)

4,5
tcount =
√0,297681

4,5
tcount =
0,5456

tcount = 8.25

Step 3: Calculated the value of 𝒕𝒕𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆

To find the value of𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 , the researcher used the formula as follows:

d.f = (𝑁𝑥 + 𝑁𝑦 – 2)

= (30 + 30 – 2)

Ttable = 58

𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 with the level of significance 0.05 (5 %) of 58 was 2.00.

Step 4: Compared 𝒕𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕 and 𝒕𝒕𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆
The criteria of testing as follows:

If 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≥ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒, it means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is received.

If 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≤ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒, it means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is refused.

Based on the result of test of mean difference significant (independent 𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 ),

it was Calculated 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≥ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 or 8.25 ≥ 2.00. Based on the criteria of testing the

hypothesis test, the calculation of Tcount was higher than the Ttable, so it meant

that the alternative hypothesis was received and the null hypothesis was refused. It

can be concluded that there was an influence of using Presentation – Practice –

Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English speaking ability at the

eleventh grade students of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic year of

2019/2020.

4.4 Research Discussion

This research was aimed to finding out the influence of using Presentation –

Practice – Production (PPP) technique as a technique in teaching speaking for the

eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang, Banten. The researcher took the data

for measuring some test, such as: reliability, normality, homogeneity and t-test

analysis. For the validity of the instruments, the researcher took from the English

teachers’ approval. Related to the research objectives, this research functions to find

out the influence of using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique in

speaking ability. In this term, the researcher focused on continuous material of the

curriculum, that is: Factual Report Text and focused on how the students presented

their own text and answered some question related to the text appropriately.
 The population of this research were the students of eleventh grade in SMK

PGRI 1 Kota Serang, that consisted of 6 department with the total population

consisted of 419 students. The sample were taken with disproportionate stratified

random sampling which had the similar average of English proficiency, especially

on speaking ability based on the English teacher in that school. The researcher taken

two classes as research participants, such as: XI TPM 3 as the experimental class

which consist of 30 male students and XI TPM 4 as the control class which consist

of 30 male students, also.

Based on the formula, the result of the statistic calculation indicated that the

value of to = 8.25 and the value of df (degree of freedom) 58 with significance 0.05

was 2.00. Based on the result of test of mean difference significant

(independent 𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 ), it calculated that 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≥ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 or 8.25 ≥ 2.00. The T-test

score was higher than t-table. The 𝑡𝑜 score in the table is higher than 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 score

obtain from the result of calculating, so the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted

and the null hypothesis (𝐻𝑜) is rejected.

According to the explanation through the result of the statistic calculation

above, it can be concluded that using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP)

technique in teaching speaking was succeed in increasing students’ score in

speaking ability, whether it was applied by online learning method. In this research,

the students not only increased their own speaking score but also increased their

own knowledge through some aspects in English speaking proficiency, such as: the

right pronunciation, a deep comprehension, and a great delivery.

 In the first meeting of the experimental class with the students with applying

the scenario of online learning, the researcher given the students Pre-test and let the

students finished the test in 1 week by using Whatsapp as the media. The Pre-test

session itself taken from the students by asking some short answer question (SAQ)

correlated to the text. In the second meeting, the researcher asked the students to

find out some information related to factual report text, then the researcher gave the

students a short video about how to pronounce the text in the Pre-test session. Then,

the researcher asked them to taken a sound recording through the text. These kinds

of processes called as Practice steps.

In the third meeting, the researcher gave a little explanation through the

materials by sending a video in the Whatsapp group, then the researcher required

the students to analyse the text that used in Pre-test based on the researchers’

classification. The analysis was a spoken term, by recording their own sound

through a video or sound recorder. In the fourth meeting, the teacher asked the

students to create a little conversation that related to Factual report text. Then, the

last meeting was taken for doing the Post-test.

Different with experimental class, the researcher did not apply online

learning method through the control class, but offline class activity. In the first

meeting, the researcher was given the students Pre-test and let the students test in

20 minutes. The process of taking score of Pre-test, the researcher was done a little

interview through the related Pre-test question. In the second meeting, the

researcher asked the students to do a presentation through the related materials as a

group, then asked them to complete the question of Task 4 in book: Forward An
English Course for Vocational School Students Grade XI. In the third meeting, the

researcher enquired the students to analyse a factual report text of the text that used

in Pre-test based on the researchers’ classification. In the fourth meeting, the

researcher asked the students to do presentation about the form of Singular and

Plural things. Then, in the last meeting the researcher was taken for doing the Post-

test.

According to the students’ score of Pre-test in experimental class and

control class, the researcher took some points, such as: there was a significant

difference through the score in the Pre-test of both the groups from 0.71 agreement

for experimental class and 0.42 agreement. It can be summed up that the Pre-test

score of the experimental class and control class were reliable. According to the

results’ test of mean difference significant (independent 𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 ), it were calculated

𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≥ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 or 8.25 ≥ 2.00. It can be concluded that there was an influence of

using Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’

English speaking ability.

The researcher analyzed the normality of pre-test from experimental and

control class with the graphical method. It can be indicated from the graphical

method that the data was normally distributed. The researcher used homogeneity

test to find out the homogeneity or similarity between experimental and control

class. The researcher used homogeneity test to find out the similarity between

control class and experimental class. Based on the data, the result sample of the

homogeneity of Pre-test was 1.157 and the result sample of Post-test was 1.0174.

Then, it was obtained by comparing the value of highest variance and the lowest
variance with significant level of 0.05 with the 𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 58 with the Ftable = 4.010.

It were calculated in Pre-test score was 1.157 ≤ 4.010 and the Post-test was 1.0174

≤ 4.010. It means that the data of pre-test and post-test in experimental and control

class were homogeneous.

The use of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique as a

learning technique in teaching English speaking ability, it could be stated that it is

a substantial way compared to the use of other method. It can be inferred that there

are some differences between students’ speaking score who were taught by using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique and not. The influence of

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique towards students’ speaking

ability can be seen from the score of experimental class students that increased after

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique was applied in the class. This

study also confirms what has been found by Yuliani (2017); Yusuf (2017); Maksum

(2012); Badaruddin & Sahabuddin (2019) and all of them found that there was an

influence in students’ speaking ability with the application of using Presentation –

Practice – Production (PPP) technique as a teaching speaking English technique,

although the research design, sample differed, instruments differed and so on

between the researchers. The technique assumed as a beneficial technique, because

it brings together the formal and functional properties of a foreign language in

speaking procedures and it acknowledge that there are strong relational term

between them.
 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the result of analysis of the research, it is proven that the students’

score of speaking after being taught by using Presentation – Practice – Production

(PPP) technique is better than before being taught by using Presentation – Practice

– Production (PPP) technique. In this research, the researcher chosen the research

sample with using the disproportionate stratified random sampling and divided the

sample into two groups, experimental group and control group. The result of

analysis in independent T-Test calculation showed that 𝐹𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≤ 𝐹𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 were 1.157

≤ 4.010 and 1.0174 ≤ 4.010 meant that the students’ score in experimental class and

control class were homogeneous. The result of hypothesis text can be seen from the

score of to is higher than ttable. From the result of statistical calculation, the value

of to or ttest was calculated 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 ≥ 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 or 8.25 ≥ 2.00 with the degree of freedom

(df) was 58. The alternative hypothesis was accepted and the null hypothesis (H0)

was refused. Therefore, it can be concluded that there was an influence of using

Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique toward students’ English

speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK PGRI 1 Kota Serang in the academic

year of 2019/2020.
5.2 Suggestion

According to the result of the research, the researcher would like to give

some suggestions as follows:

1. For the Teacher

The researcher is expected that the English teacher, especially would use this

technique by doing some specific steps that emphasize the students’ ability by

asking the students’ to do more interesting activities or on the other hand, the

teacher need to minimize her participation in the classroom activity which

related to the national curriculum that is K13 in order to ask the students learn

something by themselves, first. By applying this technique and use specific

interesting activities in it, the students would have and experienced another

speaking English training and activities in the classroom and it would support

the students to enhance their speaking English proficiency.

Teacher also should be inspired and advanced in applying various ways

to arise students’ motivation in learn English. Thus, the teacher should manage

the classroom situation in order to build the students’ understanding to focused

in doing the speaking English training using Presentation – Practice – Production

(PPP) technique. Lastly, hopefully this technique can be an alternative technique

that use by many teacher as the specific teaching English speaking procedure in

the classroom and hopefully this technique would always give the positive

influence through the students’ English proficiency.

 2. For Students

a. The students should learn and be more active in speaking English in

the classroom activities in other to develop their ability in speaking

English.

b. Students should to improve their own self-confidence helped with the

teacher herself by doing some performance activities which ask the

students to speak up in front of many people.

c. Students need to use the language in daily communication meanwhile

just the simple conversation in spoken or written form because it can

build a positive behaviour for themselves and their own environment.

3. For Other Researcher

a) In this research, the treatments were done in 3-4 meeting. Other

researchers hopefully can spend more time in giving treatments to the

students so that they can get more opportunities to practice the language in

the classroom situation.

b) Hopefully, the other researchers improve this technique with using

the other materials that related to the level of education and the level of

students’ English proficiency.

Lastly, the researcher expected that this research can enrich the theory of

speaking ability and being a relevant reference of the research about the influence

of the use of Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP) technique.

 REFERENCES

Amelia, R. (2019). The effect of vlog toward students’ speaking skill at the tenth
grade of MAN 2 Serang. Banten : Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa
University.

Aliyah, H. (2014). Studi analisis butir-butir soal objektif. Semarang: UIN

Walisongo.

Ary, Jacobs, Sorenson, & Razavieh. (2010). Introduction to research in education

(8th ed.). Wadsworth, USA: Wadsworth CENGANGE Learning.

Arikunto, S. (2013). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: Rineka

Cipta.

Badaruddin & Sahabuddin. (2019). The use of PPP model in enhancing the
students’ speaking ability. EDUVELOP Journal of English
Education and Development, Vol 2, No.2.
https://ojs.unsulbar.ac.id/index.php/eduvelop/article/view/258.

Broughton, Brumfit, Flavell, Hill, & Pincas. (1980). Teaching English as foreign
language (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Routledge Education Books.

Brown, H., Douglass. (2004). Teaching by principle: an interaction approach to

language pedagogy. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching,

assessment. Council from Europe: Conseil De ‘l Europe.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Education research: planning, conducting and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson: Pearson.

Fitriani, Apriliaswati, & Wardah. (2015). A study on student’s english speaking

problems in speaking performance. Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Pembelajaran.https://scholar.google.com/scholar?client=firefoxbd
 &um=1&ie=UTF8&lr&q=related:D6K5OUkxsYxPJM:scholar.goo
gle.com/.

Garson, G., David. (2013). Research design (2013 ed.). Asheboro, USA: North
California State University.

Gay, Lorraine, Mills, & Geoffrey. (2011 10th ed.). Educational research
competencies and analysis and applications. USA: Pearson.

Gilakjani, A. (2016). English pronunciation instruction: a literature review.

International Journal of Research in English Education. Vol 1, 1,
2016. www.ijreeonline.com.

Hakim, Sariyatun,. & Sudiyanto. (2018). Constructing student`s critical thinking

skill through discovery learning model and contextual teaching and
learning model as solution of problems in learning history. Vol 5,
No 4, 2018. https://ijmmu.com/index.php/ijmmu/article/view/240.

Harahap, Antoni,. & Rasyidah. (2015). An analysis on students’ speaking skill at

second grade SMP 8 Rambah Hilir. http://docplayer.net/32114789-
An-analysis-on-students-speaking-skill-at-second-grade-smp-8-
rambah-hilir.html.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). New York
: Longman.

Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied
Linguistics. Los Angeles: University of California.

Irmawati, D. (2016). Faktor-faktor penghambat peningkatan kemampuan

berbicara Bahasa Inggris mahasiswa jurusan Bahasa Inggris di
Kota Malang. https://vokasindo.ub.ac.id.

Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching speaking: activities to promote speaking in a second

language. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol.XII, No. 11.
Khomarudin, M. (2012). A descriptive study on speaking teaching-learning process
at the second year of SMAN 2 Sukoharjo. Surakarta: Muhammadiyah
University of Surakarta.

Kurniati, Eliwarti,. & Novitri. (2015). A study on the speaking ability of the second
year students of SMK Telkom Pekanbaru. Pekanbaru, Riau: Riau
University.

Kostoulas, A. (2012). Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP).

https://achilleaskostoulas.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/ppp.pdf.

Laukia, J. (2013). Practical skills, education and development – Vocational

education and training in Finland. HAAGA-HELIA University of
Applied Sciences: School of Vocational Teacher Education.

Leong, Lai., Ahmadi, S. (2017). An analysis of factors influencing learners’ English

speaking skill. International Journal of Research in English
Education, 2,1,2017. doi: 10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.1.34.

Louma, S. (2009). Assesing speaking. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Maftoon, P & Sarem. (2012). A critical look at the Presentation, Practice,

Production (PPP) approach: Challenges and promises for ELT.
Volume 3, Issue 4, "Brain and Language", December 2012, 2067-
3957.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297702625_A_Criti
cal_Look_at_the_Presentation_Practice_Production_PPP_Approac
h_Challenges_and_Promises_for_ELT.

Maksum. (2012). Teaching speaking use 3P (Presentation – Practice – Production)

approach for second grade student in MTS At - Tauhid Surabaya.
Surabaya : State Institute for Islamic Studies Sunan Ampel.

Nunan, D. (2001). Second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York: McGrawHills
Companies.

Pangestu, P. (2019). The influence of task based approach toward students'

speaking ability at the 10th grade students of SMAN 4 Kota Serang.
Serang, Banten: University Of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa.

PPP Framework: Presentation – Practice and Production. (2020).

https://englishpost.org/ppp-method-presentation-practice-
production/.

PPP TEFL Teaching Methodology. (2020).

https://www.myenglishlanguage.com/teacher-resources/ppp-
technique/.

Rany, Abidin, & Mei. (2013). Factors causes students low English language
learning: A case study in the National University of Laos.
International Journal of English Language Education, 1, No. 1,
2325-0887. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v1i1.3100.

Richard, J & Renandya, Willy. (2002). Methodology in language teaching.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: from theory to practice. t:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255634567.

Saroh, Fitin. (2014). The Use of Presentation Practice and Production (PPP)
method to improve students’ speaking ability of the VIII A class at
SMP Muhammadiyah 6 Wuluhan in the 2013/2014 academic year.
Jember : Muhammadiyah University of Jember.

Septiany, L. (2014). The effect of using fluency workshop technique toward

students’ speaking ability in performing monolog of second year at
MAN 1 Pekanbaru. Riau : Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif
Kasim.
Solehah, S. (2019). The effect of Genre-Based Approach GBA) towards students’
narrative writing at the tenth grade students of vocational high school
(SMK PGRI) 1 Kota Serang in academic year 2018-2019. Serang,
Banten: University Of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa.
Sugiyono. (2017). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan r&d (26th print).
Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta.

Thornbury, S. (2000). How to teach speaking. Essex: Longman.

Vystavělová, L. (2009). Common EFL methods applied at language schools in the

Czech Republic: PPP or TBL. Czech Republic: Masaryk University.

Wallace, Stariba, Walberg. (2005). Teaching speaking, listening and writing.

Geneva: International Bureau of Education.

What is Presentation – Practice – Production (PPP). (2019). https://seetefl.com/ppp-

tefl-teaching-methodology/.

Yuliani, D. (2017). The Influence Of Using PPP Technique Toward Students’

Speaking Ability Of The Eighth Grade At Mts Darul Ulum Tanjung
Bintang In The Academic Year Of 2017/2018. Lampung : Raden
Intan Lampung State Islamic University of Lampung.

Yusuf, A. (2015). A PPP (Presentation, Practice, and Production) phase method

of teaching speaking to university students.
https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/242126-a-ppp
presentation-practice-and-producti-b574f301.pdf.