THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’

SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF

SMK NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG IN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2022/2023

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

(Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Attainment of Bachelor’s Degree of English Education)

By:

IIN OKTAVIANI

NPM 181220033

SEKOLAH TINGGI KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

PERSATUAN GURU REPUBLIK INDONSIA
(STKIP PGRI) BANDAR LAMPUNG
2022
 ABSTRACT

THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’

SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF
SMK NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG IN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2022/2023

By

IIN OKTAVIANI

The objectives of this research were to know the influence of Fishbowl Strategy
towards students’ speaking ability and to find whether the class which was taught
by using Fishbowl Strategy higher than the class which was taught by using
Conventional Strategy. In this research the researcher used experimental method
with pre-test and post-test control group design. The samples were 60 students in
2 classes. The sample was taken by using Cluster Random Sampling Technique.
The researcher conducted the research in 2 classes namely experimental and
control class The main technique in measuring students’ speaking ability was
speaking test. In collecting the data of research, the researcher used pre-test and
post-test. The result of validity and reliability test showed that the instrument used
in this research is valid and reliable.

In calculating the data analysis, the researcher used SPSS version 25.0 by using
Paired Sample t-test formula. Based on the data analysis, the researcher got the
result that was accepted. The result of normality was 0.102 > sig 0.05. It
means the data have normal distribution. Then, the result of homogeneity was
0.105 > α = 0.05. It means the data were homogeneous. For hypothetical test, it
was obtained that sig. (2-tailed) of the equal variance assumed in the paired
sample test where the sig. (2-tailed) was 0.023. It was lower than α = 0.05. (0.023
< 0.05). So, was accepted. It meant that there was significant influence of
Fishbowl Strategy towards students’ speaking ability at the eleventh grade of
SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023. Meanwhile, the mean score of
experimental class is higher than control class. (69.60 > 64.53). Based on the
result of the research, it is clear that Fishbowl Strategy can be used to develop the
students’ speaking ability.

Keywords: Fishbowl Strategy, Students’ Speaking Ability, Speaking

ii
 DECLARATION

I hereby certify that this paper was completed by my own work with the title “The

Influence of Fishbowl Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the

Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2022/2023” I

took some sources and they were properly acknowledged in the texts. I did not

copy or quote with the way that was against the other that occured in scientific

society. By this declaration, I am ready to accept any judgement if found there is

scientific ethnic contrary in this paper or there is a claim from other sides towards

the original work.

Bandar Lampung, September 2022

Declared by,

IIN OKTAVIANI

iii
APPROVAL

iv
 CURRICULUM VITAE

The name of the researcher is Iin Oktaviani. Her nick name is Iin. She was born in

Bandar Lampung, on October, 9th, 1995. She is the first child of the three children

of the couple named Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih. She is a Muslim.

The researcher began her study at SDN 1 Hajimena, graduated in 2009. After that,

she continued her study to SMPN 3 Natar Lampung Selatan, graduated in 2012.

After that, she continued her study to SMAN 1 Natar Lampung Selatan, graduated

in 2014. In 2018, she entered and continued his study to English Department of

STKIP PGRI Bandar Lampung.

v
 DEDICATION

This paper is dedicated to :

1. My beloved parents, Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih.

2. My beloved brothers, Abdan Sakuro and Atma Aditya S.

3. My beloved big family.

4. My almamater.

vi
 MOTTO

“I would Rather be Optimistic and Wrong rather than

Pessimistic and Right”

(Elon Musk)

vii
 PREFACE

Alhamdulillahhirobbil’alamin. Asshalatu wassalamu’ ala Muhammad

wa’ala alihi wasohbihi ajma’in. All praise to Allah SWT the Most Merciful and
the Most Grateful for giving me health to finish this paper. Eventually, the
researcher was able to finish this paper as the requirement in accomplishing the S-
1 Degree of English Department of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
The objectives of teaching and learning as foreign language is that the
students should be able to use English in listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
The researcher believes that teaching English in Senior High School level has a
good purpose in our country in which those skills are important to support
students’ knowledge of English.
Speaking is one of the skills in learning English which needs suitable
teaching strategy and has to be step by step in presenting it and it should be
followed by some ways to make the students interested and to make teaching
learning process enjoyable as well. That was why the researcher applied Fishbowl
Strategy as one of some effective strategy to develop students’ speaking ability.
Therefore, the researcher did a research entitled : “The Influence of Fishbowl
Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8
Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2022/2023”.
The researcher would like to express her gratitude to :
1. Dr. Wayan Satria Jaya M.Si, as the Head of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
2. Dr. Akhmad Sutiyono, M.Pd, as the Head of Language and Art Department of
STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
3. Dr. Andri Wicaksono, M.Pd., as the Chief of Research Institution of STKIP
PGRI Bandar Lampung.
4. Eva Nurchurifiani, M.Pd., as the First Advisor who always gives his
suggestion and guidance to the researcher in finishing this paper.
5. Tommy Hastomo, M.Pd., as the Second Advisor who always guides the
researcher in finishing this paper.

viii
6. Drs. Adenan Damiri., M.M., as the examiner who gives his suggestion to the
researcher in finishing this paper.
7. Drs. Firdaus., M.M., as the Headmaster of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung and all
the Teachers and Staffs who have given a chance and guidance in collecting
the data for this paper.
8. Susanti Octiani, S.Pd, as the English teacher of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung
who has accompanied me to finish my research.
9. All the Lecturers and Staffs of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung for all their
available knowlegde given to the researcher during she studied S-1 Degree at
STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
10. All the students of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, especially for the eleventh
grade.
11. My friends, Hany Nuraini, Licencia Poetica, Winda Ayu and all of my
classmates.
Finally, the researcher thanks to those who have contributed their ideas to
the writing of this paper, and the she would appreciate any constructive criticism
and suggestion concerning the improvement of this paper.

Bandar Lampung, September 2022

Declared by,

IIN OKTAVIANI

ix
 LIST OF CONTENTS

COVER .......................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... ii
DECLARATION ............................................................................................ iii
APPROVAL.................................................................................................... iv
CURRICULUM VITAE ................................................................................ v
DEDICATION ................................................................................................ vi
MOTTO .......................................................................................................... vii
PREFACE ....................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF CONTENT ..................................................................................... x
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................... xii
LIST OF APPENDICES................................................................................ xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Problem ..................................................................... 1
B. The Identification of Problem................................................................... 4
C. The Limitation of Problem ....................................................................... 4
D. The formulation of Problem ..................................................................... 4
E. The Objectives of The Research .............................................................. 4
F. The Uses of The Research ........................................................................ 5
G. The Place of The Research ....................................................................... 5

CHAPTER II FRAME OF THEORIES, THINKING AND HYPOTHESIS

A. The Frame of Theories ........................................................................... 6
1. Speaking ........................................................................................... 6
2. Purpose of Speaking......................................................................... 8
3. Problems in Speaking Performance ................................................. 9
4. Elements of Speaking..................................................................... 10
5. Teaching Speaking ......................................................................... 13
6. Problem in Teaching Speaking ....................................................... 15
7. Principles of Teaching Speaking .................................................... 17
8. The Role of Teacher Teaching Speaking ....................................... 18
9. Definition of Fishbowl ................................................................... 19
10. The Advantages and Disadvantages............................................... 20
11. Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Fishbowl Technique . 21
B. Related Research Study......................................................................... 22
C. Frame of Thinking................................................................................. 25
D. The Hypothesis ........................................................................................... 26

CHAPTER III THE METHOD OF RESEARCH

A. Method of the Research ........................................................................ 27
B. Population, Sample and Sampling Technique ...................................... 27
1. Population ....................................................................................... 27

x
 2. Sample ............................................................................................ 28
3. Sampling Technique........................................................................ 28
C. Variable of the Research ....................................................................... 29
D. Operational Definition of Variable ....................................................... 29
E. Technique and Data Collection Instrument .......................................... 30
1. Data Collecting Technique .............................................................. 30
2. Data Collection Instrument ............................................................. 30
F. Research Instrument and Research Measuring Instrument .................. 32
G. Validity of the Test................................................................................ 34
H. Data Analyzing Technique .................................................................... 35
1. Normality of the test........................................................................ 35
2. Homogeneity Test of Variance ....................................................... 36
3. Hypothesis Test ............................................................................... 36
4. Equality Test of Two Average ........................................................ 37
5. Different Test of Two Average ....................................................... 37

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A. Report of Research ................................................................................ 39
1. Data Pretest Experimental and Control Class ................................. 39
2. Data Posttest Experimental and Control Class................................ 40
3. Data Normality Test ........................................................................ 41
4. Data Homogeneity Test................................................................... 42
5. Data Hypothesis Test ...................................................................... 43
a. The Influence of Fisbowl Technique towards Student’s
Speaking Ability........................................................................ 43
b. The Mean Scores of Students Who Were Taught Using
Fishbowl Strategy Were Higher than Students in
Conventional Strategy ............................................................... 45
B. Discussion ............................................................................................. 46

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

A. Conclusion............................................................................................. 50
B. Recommendation................................................................................... 50
1. For English Teacher ........................................................................ 50
2. For Students .................................................................................... 50
3. For School ....................................................................................... 51
4. For Further Research ....................................................................... 51

REFERENCES
APPENDICES

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

1. The Population of Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung ...............28

2. The Rubric Score of Speaking ......................................................................33
3. Pre-Test Experimental Class and Control Class ...........................................40
4. Post-Test Experimental Class and Control Class ..........................................41
5. Test of Normality ..........................................................................................41
6. Test of Homogeneity of Variance .................................................................42
7. Paired Samples Test (Post-test).....................................................................43
8. Paired Samples Test (Pre-Test) .....................................................................44
9. The Mean Score ............................................................................................46

xii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

1. Approval Letter of the Paper Title ................................................................57

2. Seminar Approval Letter of the Research Proposal ......................................58
3. Improvement Letter of Proposal ...................................................................59
4. Letter of approval of proposal .......................................................................60
5. Letter of the Paper Guidance Committee ......................................................61
6. Letter of the Permission of STKIP PGRI Bandar Lampung .........................60
7. Letter of School Permit Reply.......................................................................63
8. Card of Student Consultation ........................................................................64
9. Letter of Paper Guidance Recommendation .................................................66
10. Lesson Plan (RPP).........................................................................................67
11. Instrument .....................................................................................................68
12. Result of All Score in Experimental and Control Class................................70
13. Pre-test Experimental Class ..........................................................................71
14. Pre-test Control Class....................................................................................72
15. Post-test Experimental Class .........................................................................73
16. Post-test Control Class ..................................................................................74
17. Normality Test ..............................................................................................75
18. Homogeneity Test .........................................................................................83
19. Paired Sample t-test.......................................................................................84
20. Paired Sample experimental class .................................................................85
21. Paired Sample Control Class.........................................................................86
22. The Pre-test Result of Experimental test .......................................................87
23. The pre-test Result of Controlled test ...........................................................88
24. The post-test Result of Experimental test .....................................................89
25. The post-test Result of Controlled test ..........................................................90
26. Transscript Pre-Test and Post-Test experimental class .................................91
27. Transcript Pre-Test and Post-Test Controlled class ......................................94
28. Research Documentation ..............................................................................97

xiii
 1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Problem

English has become essential part of International communication
throughout the world. Communication is one of the most significant aspects
for a personal survivor. Communication helps students to deal with numerous
real life problem and issues. Language and communication are two distict
aspects that involve each other while skill occuring independently. It means
that language plays a vital role. In the process of communication, people use a
particular language to interact by others.
In English, there are four basic skills of English (listening, reading, writing
and speaking); all those are including some component such as vocabulary,
grammar, pronunciation, spelling etc. The one about speaking was assumed
that the ability to speak fluently followed naturally from some aspects of the
teaching of grammar, vocabulary and also pronunciation.
Nowadays, speaking is much more complex than this and it involves both
a command of certain skills and several different types of knowledge. It means
that the important things to accomplish objective of communication as being
taught through grammar and vocabulary is to produce high quality
understanding of communication in which each of the communicating agents
understands each other and be understood by others.
All of skills in English are equality important to be learnt, these skills
should be learned and mastered equal degrees it means that the student should
not learn and mastere a skill only and ignore the other skills. One of objective
of learning a language is to use the language in communication so one form of
communication is the any interactive between speaker and listener. The
interaction is facilitated by the communication function of language.
 2

Speaking is a productive oral skill that consists of producing systematic

verbal utterance to make ideas, feelings, etc. known to somebody. It means
that speaking skill is the one important thing that should be mastered by
students, because speaking is the productive skill that can highly influences in
communication. Speaking is the ability to work collaboratively in speech turn
management as interactive and needs. Therefore that speaking is needs, in a
way that cannot be avoided in certain situation to be able to communicate.
The speaker delivers ideas or opinion about a topic to the listener, which
the listener understand and respond to. It means to create sounds using many
parts of body; that involves the lungs, vocal chords, tongue, teeth and lips. An
understanding of the nature of speaking has undergone considerable in recent
years. It means that speaking is difficult enough to be mastered, almost of
student find difficulties to speak because they rare to practice maybe by
practicing the language is the one ways to improve the students’ speaking
ability.
There are some factors that make students feel difficult to speak English
such as: they are lack of motivation, shyness, anxiety, lack of confidence, and
fear or mistake. Speaking is the utterance of intelligible speech. To make the
students understand about English text but they have limited skill to be able to
communicate fluently. Some factors such as unlikely to reading, writing, and
listening activities because students worried about making mistakenness,
fearful of critism or shame of the attention that speech attracts.
Some of students have difficulties in learning speaking are influenced by
their limited of vocabulary used, grammar and do not understand how to
pronounce words correctly and almost all of students are lazy to do their
assignment given by the teacher, when they to learn a language in classroom,
nervous or embarrassed about speaking to other people and when the teacher
asks the students to describe something based on material, they are not
confident about their ability so it makes them confuse to speak English in the
class. In this case teacher should be more attention for the English material
method that was could be taught for students.
 3

In the preliminary research at SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, the researcher

did an interview with the teacher of student eleventh grade of vocational high
school 8 Bandar Lampung on November 24th 2021. She stated that there are
three problems in speaking faced by students the first one she said that in
general for students of vocational School their lack of spirit for explore the
lessons that their non-vocational lessons of course. Therefore, in speaking
English still so far in able to speech. In general their only knowing a common
sentence such as good morning and introducing you, etc. The second one, she
said that students are having very low English ability and the last one they
have limited vocabulary therefore their often stammered (Mrs Desti, English
Teacher of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, Interview November 24th 2021).
To overcome this problem, all teachers must find suitable method to ease
the learning process, especially in speaking ability. By applying fishbowl
technique, it can increase motivation, enhance research skills and develop
communication proficiency. Besides, the group discussion exposes the class to
a focused. In depth multiple-perspective analysis. Fishbowl technique had
great contribution in speaking field. It can activate students’ speaking class
and also improve their accomplish speaking ability.
The fishbowl technique is one of the techniques that can solve this
problem. The fishbowl technique has become a learning strategy that involves
many students in a small group with varying skill levels. Any student or
member of the task group should work together to complete the task and
encourage each other in understand the topic that the teacher has assigned.
Fishbowl technique has the added dimension of requiring students to assume a
position opposite to their own, Encourage students to challenge their existing
assumptions. This can move students beyond simple dualistic thinking, deepen
their understanding of an issue and helps students to recognize the range of
perspective inherent in complex topics. In this case, fishbowl may also build
appreciation for diversity and develop for other viewpoints.
Regarding the explanation above, the researcher interested to apply
fishbowl technique. The researcher wanted to determine the influence of
 4

fishbowl strategy in increasing the ability of students to speak. In this study,

the researcher carried out research entitled “The Influence of Fishbowl
Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh Grade of
SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2022/2023”.

B. The Identification of Problem

Based on the previous background, some problems can be defined by
following:
a. The students need to improve their speaking ability.
b. The students need to improve their vocabulary.
c. The students need to improve their spirit of learning.

C. The Limitation of Problem

From the identification of the problems above, the researcher only
focused and limits the problem on applying a rubric taken from the rating
scale for five criteria of speaking ability elements and the process of the
research assessment by only the researcher itself.

D. The Formulation of Problem

The researcher formulated the problem as follows:
a. Is there any influence of fishbowl technique towards students’ speaking
ability?
b. Is the average score of students’ speaking ability who learn through
fishbowl technique is higher than who learn speaking through
conventional technique?

E. The Objectives of Research

In this research the researcher concluded about the objective of research
as follows:
1. To know and describe Influence the students’ speaking ability through
fishbowl technique.
 5

2. To know and describe whether the average score of students’ speaking

ability which is taught throughout Fishbowl Technique.

F. The Uses of The Research

The uses of this research as follows:
1. To give information for English teacher about influence students’ speaking
ability through fishbowl strategy.
2. To motivate the students in learning English
3. To give information for further research with certain interest.

G. The Place of The Research

This research was conducted at SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
It is located on Jl. Imam Bonjol No.52 Kemiling, Bandar Lampung.
 6

CHAPTER II
FRAME OF THEORIES, THINKING AND HYPOTHESIS

A. The Frame of Theories

The researcher explains about concept of speaking, teaching speaking, the
role of teacher in teaching speaking, purpose of teaching speaking, principle of
teaching speaking, Elements of teaching speaking, Problem in teaching
speaking, Concept of fishbowl, the procedure of teaching speaking by using
fishbowl, the advantages and disadvantages of fishbowl.

1. Speaking
In English the most important thing in form communication is speaking.
The single most important aspect of learning a language is mastering the art of
speaking and success as measured in terms of the skill to carry out
conversation in the language. Hussain stated, that having a good quality
pronunciation and fluency in speaking skill is the hallmark of the way of life
or culture where, pronunciation is the way in which a language or particular
word or sound is pronounced and the quality of being able to speak or write a
language, especially a foreign language, easily and well. Therefore, it is the
duty of the teacher or lecturer to achieve this aim approximately as an
Englishman does (Hussain, 2017). Speaking is an interactive interpersonal
process which does not lend itself easily to the requirements of test designers
so it means in a speaking process to create communication it needs at least two
people, as a listeners and as a speakers where one of speakers is to give
information and another one as a listener who receives information.
Burns explains that the teaching and learning of speaking are a vital part of
any language education in the classroom, not only does the spoken language
offer “affordances” for learning as the main communicative medium of the
classroom, but it is also an important component of syllabus content and
learning outcomes (Burns, 2019). It means that to develop the students’
 7

speaking ability the teachers could give the situations and opportunity for the
students to use English in the classroom as much as possible without being
ashamed or afraid of communicating with other students to tell their ideas,
experience or feelings. The teachers can create a new method, strategy, and
technique to understand them. As these factors challenged them, they tend to
be quiet when they invite the students to engage in English in the classroom.
Students are less motivated to speak English.
Speaking is an interactive interpersonal process which does not lend itself
easily to the requirements of test designers. It means that speaking is a process
to create communication it needs at least two people. One speaker is to give
information and another one as a listener who receives information and give
feedback in interaction process.
Speaking skill is a part of productive skills. Learners need to generate
language to communicate their ideas either in speech or text. In the point of
view of Sreena and some experts explains that speaking skill is apparent in
society in various styles such as formal, informal, normal, strong, etc. These
styles are situation based and for speakers to strike the rights thought (Sreena
& Ilankumaran, 2018). It means that in speaking have a various styles that
based on situation from speaker’s thought in order to create a straightforward
process in communication. Speaking is the ability to express and convey the
ideas, thought and feelings, means that through speaking be able transfer
person ideas to each other.
According to Thornbury, that speaking is very much part of daily life
communication takes it for granted. In speaking involved speech production
takes place in real time and is therefore essentially linear. Words follow
words, and phrases follow phrase likewise, at the level of utterance. Speech is
produced utterance by utterance and in response to the word by word and
utterance by utterance productions of the person we are talking to (Thornbury,
2005). Based on the previous explanations above, the researcher concludes
that speaking is part of essential the way to communicate to other person. It
means that use to share their thought, ideas, information and feelings and also
 8

speaking is person’s ability how to use language to convey meaning and to

gain information in our daily communication.

2. Purpose of Speaking
Speaking serves several purposes. This is involving a different set of skill.
Kurniasih explains that, the level production skill (speaking), the majority of
speaking activities used in the first levels should be designed to enable pupils
to participate with a minimal verbal response. However, in the last level, for
example eleventh grade, students are encouraged to begin to manipulate
language and express themselves in a much more personal way (Kurniasih,
2011).
It means that speaking must be plays and practice from fist level, for
example elementary school. Because of that speaking is very important thing
as vital form of communication in language field. Harmer stated that there are
three main reasons for encouraging students to talk in the classroom. One of
main reasons that speaking exercise enables students to practice speaking in
controlled circumstances in the classroom (Harmer, 2007).
According to Okar and some experts, that Language components have
been processed in the minds of students. The more they engage in speaking
practices, the more these elements become second nature to them (Okar &
Shahidy, 2019). It means that they will be able to speak fluently without
having to confuse about it. Speaking is one of the central elements of
communication in aim a learning language is to communicate well.
In summary, the purpose of speaking is to inform ideas, to gain
information from speaker to listener. On the other hand the purpose of
speaking is not only to providing information from people but the purpose of
speaking it means speaking activities should to convey something to others by
the objectives the speaker expected.
 9

3. Problems in Speaking Performance

Speaking within the target language is not simple for many foreign
language learners, since more than comprehension; learning to speak a foreign
language requires grammatical and semantic rules. Language learners often
encounter two kinds of difficulties in speaking (Linguistic and Non-linguistic).
a. Linguistics is the objective study of language structure grammar, words,
and phonology, among other things. Linguistics includes vocabulary,
grammar, and pronunciation. In addition linguistics concerns are those that
cause students’ speaking abilities to deteriorate. Some linguistic concerns,
such as a lack of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation that influence of
speaking (Spolsky & Hult, 2008). Those issues are lack of vocabulary
available for poor grammar to communicate and poorly in pronunciation
as well.
b. Non-linguistic problem
Non-linguistic problems originate from outside the language, but external
influences come from outside the language or language. In addition, non-
linguistic components, such as movements and body language or posture
and facial expression, can be used in combination with speech to convey
messages directly.
According to Heriansyah (2012), which cited Ibrahim many non-linguistic
problem related to issues, including not being confident to speak, not
being used to speak in class, fearful of making mistakes and being mocked
by classmates.
a) Not being confident to speak; when speaking in public, high self-
esteem is absolutely important, the high trust will help to master the
stage and the material that is going to convey.
b) Not being used to talk in classroom; often, students with a high ability
to speak can control the conversation in classroom situations rather
than students with a low ability to speak. Therefore, students with poor
speech capacity would not be used for classroom interaction.
 10

c) Since EFL students are not native English speakers, they are most
likely to make mistakes while speaking English since they are fearful
of making mistakes, in reality, afraid is a feeling when we want to say
something when talking to someone, but instead, we keep it because
we are unsure whether it is right.
Students are afraid of being mocked; they are worried about speaking
English because they fear making intonation, pronunciation, and language
structure errors as the frequent errors in speaking. Think that their fellow
students would receive an unsatisfactory answer, such as teasing if they
make mistakes when talking (Heriansyah, 2012)

4. Elements of Speaking
To full fill its needs every skills has component. Speaking also has some
components to be known by the teacher and students in teaching and learning
speaking. According to Paulus et al. (2019) there are three components in
speaking.
1. The speakers
Speakers are a people who produce the sound. They are useful as the tool
to express opinion or feelings to the hearer. So if there are no speakers, the
opinion or the feelings or the feeling won’t be stated.
2. The listeners
Listeners are people who receive or get the speaker’s opinion and feeling.
If there are no listeners, speakers will express their opinion by writing.
3. The utterances
The utterances are words or sentences, which are produced by the speakers
to state the opinion. If there are no utterances, both of the speakers and the
listeners will use sign.

In speaking several components that language should be concerned by a

speaker. It is very important because this way to assess speaking score. In
point of view Harmer is learners need to talk English fluently, they have to
properly pronounce phonemes, use spare stress and intonation, and speak in
connected speech (Harmer, 2007). It means each student has to strive for some
speaking aspects that need to be accomplished such as pronunciation,
 11

grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. These parts will get

assessing of scholars’ speaking skills.
a. Pronunciation
In language learning activities, mastering pronunciation skills, for EFL
students is one of the most common and challenging aspects of teaching
and learning speaking. It happened because each of the learners has
different backgrounds. Moreover, the things that make pronunciation more
problematic are the teachers mostly focused on the students’ vocabularies
development and grammatical structures. Even though, teachers know that
the key to learning and teaching pronunciation to the students is to
differentiate the features of the sound and focus on helping the learners
understand and overcome the difficulties of pronouncing each of the words
accurately and systematically. Pronunciation has an important part in
conveying meaning because it is used to gain the idea through the sound
used in communication (Burns, 2019). Therefore, the researcher concludes
that the pronunciation learning activities will help the learners quickly
understand the spoken ideas, thus the communication will go smoothly
and also students will get understand and know to reply.
b. Grammar
Grammar is a collection of arbitrary rules about static structures in the
language and it is significant for students in order for them to be able to
process and produce correct language usage (Zhang, 2009). However,
some do not mind their grammar in their communication as long as the
intended idea can be conveyed. Even though of grammar knowledge is
vital for learning processes. Grammar as a system of learnable rules, it
lends itself to a view of teaching and learning known as transmission. A
transmission view sees the role of education as the transfer of a body of
knowledge from those that have the knowledge to those that do not. Such a
view is typically associated with the kind of institutionalized learning
where rules, order, and discipline are highly valued (Zhang, 2009).
 12

c. Vocabulary
Vocabulary is a set of frequently used words by a large number of
people and has linguistic meaning and also critical when it comes to
teaching and learning how to speak. When someone wants to convey a
message, they should be well-versed in the necessary vocabularies.
According to Deng & Trainin (2015), Vocabulary learning is an essential
part of acquiring a second language as words are the building blocks of a
language. for example the discussion of this article is beneficial for
language learners and teachers to have a glimpse of the opportunities for
vocabulary learning that comes with the affordances of the iPad and
mobile technology in general.
d. Fluency
In speaking, the activity has a goal to speak understandably and easily.
With more practice in speaking, students can get speak easily and rapidly.
People know fluency is the fast well on speaking, but it also focuses on
correcting the placement of doing stop and pause. According to Brown
(2001) fluency is the ability to communicate plainly, run smoothly, and
maintain contact while having insufficient communicative skills to
comprehend. It means that fluency and accuracy focuses on articulation,
phonology, and syntax right for understudies, while fluency is the
fundamental objective in language education. In general, the educator will
be pointed in mastering fluency and accuracy to arrive at a reason for
curriculum on understudies talking.
e. Comprehension
In point of view Hughes (2002), stated that somebody fathoms the
language when they understand everything in both formal and informal
discourse, not out of the ordinary of an informed local speaker. It means
that in communication context, the speech should be conveyed by speaker
and should be gotten well by listener. Therefore concluded that
comprehension is one of the important things in teaching speaking to get
the meaning when somebody takes the communication/ in the classroom,
 13

the teacher can be looking for who was a misunderstanding about

comprehension in their lesson that had gotten before.
To sum up, these five elements (pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary,
fluency, comprehension) are required for measuring oral production.

5. Teaching Speaking
Teaching speaking is very necessary to be given to the students earlier. It
is capable give the effect of students’ communication skill, where the
student’s will be active to acquire the information around them by the
socialization (Andika, 2019). It means that teaching speaking as necessary tool
that must to teach early from kindergarten. The Aim capacity in speaking
makes the students more confident to speak in foreign language, in order to
share understanding with other people requires attention to precise details of
the language. The students and teachers should have good cooperation in order
to gain the ability speaking skill and also the students are encouraging to
speak up about what they want to say from their thought or ideas and feelings
even though it is out of the text. According to Harmer, stated that speaking
serves several purposes, each involving a different set of skills. There are three
main reasons for encouraging students to talk in the classroom. First, the
speaking’s exercise enable students to practice speaking in a controlled
environment such as the classroom. Second, students attempt to use some or
all of the languages they are familiar with. And third students have
opportunities to active the various elements of English they have stored in
their brains, the more automatic their use of these elements communicates
efficiency (Harmer, 2007). It means that learners should be able to make
themselves understood, using they current proficiency to the fullest. They
should try to avoid confusion in the message due to faulty pronunciation,
grammar, or vocabulary become.
Sreena and some experts explain that, Speaking skills need a wide attitude
and modern ideas and needs an expression as well. This is to make the speaker
confident to express what he/she communicates. Some speaking situations are
 14

partially interactive especially when speech is given to a live audience (Sreena

& Ilankumaran, 2018). According to Fulcher (2003), Speaking is the verbal
use of language to communicate with others. Speaking is the process of
building and sharing meaning though the use of verbal and non-verbal
symbols in variety contexts by knowing several theories about speaking.
Therefore, speaking is a tool for communication and it emphasizes the speech
and it can be learning process to mastering a foreign language. In teaching
speaking, there are many ways of teaching of lecturer and teacher can use in
the classroom. (Nunan, 2003) says, teaching speaking involved providing
students with the components of the language in hopes that they would
eventually put them all together and speak.
In learning process, speaking’s learners as one of the important part in the
schools. When the students want to speak fluently English, they should know
how to speak by using English grammatical rule correctly and know how to
speak in order to get skill of language itself. Speaking skills is recognized as a
basic skill in mastering a foreign language, the students can study a foreign
language, they are must know how to speak in order to get the skill of
language. The goal of capability in speaking makes the students are more
confident to speak English correctly, in order to share the concept with other
people requires attention to piece details of the language. The students and the
teacher should have good contribution to get the ability in speaking. From the
explanation’ expert above, the researcher assumed that teaching speaking as a
foreign language especially English, the teacher must be able to achieve their
objectives teaching speaking in learning speaking. And the teacher must give
examination to measure their knowledge and what the students understand or
not and also as the teacher should make the students more confident to speak
and practice their language. In this case, the teacher and students should have
good cooperative to get speaking well.
 15

6. Problem in Teaching Speaking

Teaching speaking needs to figure out about obstacles that may be occur in
the teaching and learning process. Several problems come from the internal of
students and others come from outside students. The factors to push the
students in English learning are to teach them from under the age of puberty.
Generally the child in under the age of puberty like an empty paper that must
you fill it with many word or language. So they can speak like a native
speaker. Sometimes, they can be extremely sensitive but motivation and
concern are high, and then the necessary effort will be expanded in pursuit of
goals.
There are some factors discussions about several matter that come from
body of the students themselves, include the way they pronounce the word.
The problems are commonly become obstacles in teaching speaking. The
native language is the most influential factor affecting a learner’s speaking. If
we are familiar with the sound system of learner’s native language, teacher
will be better able to diagnose student difficulties it means teacher must be
mastering language knowledge for many aspects especially about
pronunciation. Have a good quality pronunciation also have a good speaking.
Many first language and second language carryovers can be overcome through
a focused awareness and effort on the learner’s part. Based on statement
above, the researcher assumes that mother language as first language of
students have a problem in teaching speaking because, affected to the second
language as a foreign language for learners. If the teacher cannot realized the
fact and decided a way to solve the condition moreover if the linguistic aspect
of the students’ native language have is really different with target language.
In the condition, repetition of rhymes, look and say, oral composition,
pronunciation drills, read aloud, open ended stories, narration, description
(festivals, celebrations, occasions) are important practices to improve speaking
skills (Hussain, 2017).
As usually in speaking under the age of puberty children stand an excellent
opportunity of speaking like a native, if they have continued exposure in
 16

authentic contexts. Beyond the age of puberty, while adults will almost surely
maintain a foreign accent, there is no particular advantage attributed to age. A
fifty-year-old can be as successful as an eighteen-year-old if all other factors
are equal. Learners are often described as children, young learners,
adolescents, young adults or adults (Harmer, 2007).
Actually children are often innovative in language forms but still have a
great many inhibitions. They are extremely sensitive, especially to peers.
Moreover, their egoism is still being shaped, and therefore the slights of
communication can be negatively interpreted. Children are also focused on
what this new language can actually be used for here and now. They are less
to willing to put up with language that doesn’t hold immediate that is neither
authentic nor meaningful. Some learners are not particularly concerned about
their speaking, while others are. The extent to which learners’ intrinsic
motivation propels them toward improvement will be perhaps the strongest
influence of all six of the factors in this list. According to Brown (2001),
motivation and concern are high and then the necessary effort will be
expended in pursuit of goals. It means that the motivation of learning speaking
is very important to achieve goal.
The effectiveness of teaching speaking does not only come from internal
aspects of the students but also influenced by external factors. The teacher
should know the complete understanding of problem in teaching speaking.
The factor is an institutional context that puts English as second or foreign
language in a nation. The context in which the language is learnt is still
considerable relevance to the kind of English that a nation will want and need
to study, and the skills they will need to acquire. Language teaching in what
might broadly categorize as an EFL context is clearly a greater challenge for
students and teachers. Sometimes, intrinsic motivation is a big issue, since
students may have difficulty in seeing the relevance of learning English
(Brown, 2001). Their immediate use of language may seen far from removed
from their own circumstances, and classroom hours may be the only part of
the day when they are exposed to English. Besides, the facilities of learning
 17

activities the teacher competences may influence the success of teaching

speaking.

7. Principles of Teaching Speaking

Principle is a law; a rule or a theory that has something is based on that has
to be followed or a basic generalization that is accepted as true and that can be
used as a basis for reasoning or conduct. Nunan, in his book explains about the
principles for teaching speaking, that there are five principles for teaching
speaking (Nunan, 2003).
Here are the explanations:
1. Be aware of the differences between second language and foreign
language learning contexts.
Speaking is learned two broad contexts; foreign language and second
language situation:
a. A foreign language (FL) context is one where target language not the
language communication in the society. Learning speaking skills is
very challenging to use the target language outside the classroom.
b. A second language (SL) context is one where the target language is the
language of communication in the society. Second language learner
includes refugees, international students and immigrants.
2. Give the students practice with both fluency and accuracy.
Accuracy is the extent to which students’ speech matches what people
actually say when they use the target language whereas fluency is the
extent to which speakers use the language quickly and confidently. With
few hesitations or unnatural pauses, false stars, word searches, etc. In
language lesson especially at the beginning and intermediate levels
learners must give opportunities to develop both their fluency and their
accuracy. They cannot develop fluency if the teacher is constantly
interrupting them to correct their oral errors. Teachers must provide
students with fluency building practice and realize that making mistakes is
a natural part of learning a new language.
3. Provide opportunities for students to talk by using group work or pair
work and limiting teacher talk.
Pair work and group work activities can be used to enhance the amount of
time that learners get to speak in the target language during lessons. One
further interesting is that when the teacher is removed from the
conversation, the learners take on diverse speaking roles that are normally
filled by the teacher.
4. Plan speaking tasks that involve negotiation for meaning.
Negotiating for meaning involves checking to see if you have understood
what someone has said, clarifying your understanding and confirming that
someone has understood your meaning. By asking for clarification,
 18

repetition, of explanation during conversations, learners get the people

they are speaking with to address them with language at a level they can
learn and understand.
5. Designing classroom that involves guidance and practice in both
transactional and interactional speaking.
Speaking activities inside the classroom need to embody both interactional
and transactional purpose, since language learner will have to speak the
target language in both transactional and interactional settings.

8. The Role of Teacher Teaching Speaking

Pakula stated that teachers might not want to use precious class time for
oral production but instead teach to the test and prioritize. grammar, written or
reading skill (Pakula, 2019). Teaching speaking is a very important part of
second language learning. The ability to communicate in a second language
clearly and efficiently contributes to the success of the students (Kayi-Aydar,
2014). It means that teaching speaking is essential part where language
teachers must be pay great attention to teaching speaking.
In the classroom activity teacher expected to teach effectively and guide
students and to keep order in the classroom. However, the most critical crucial
role teachers are expected to play is providing a high quality of encouraging
using their energy, knowledge along with motivation. In teaching and learning
process, the teacher has a rather important role in creating the sciences that are
taught to be accepted by existing students.
The roles teachers play in the class field are mostly of an educator,
facilitator, counselors, motivators, innovator, elevators, etc. As a good teacher
is the one who assesses their students speaking skill by means of both
observation and quizzes or exams designed to evaluate oral proficiency of the
learners.
Organizer is one of the most important roles of teachers during speaking
activities; this is more than just explaining or doing some oral exercise.
Teacher should know what kind of activity to use at first or to do after that,
therefore this role includes different aspects of teaching context.
 19

9. Definition of Fishbowl
Fishbowl technique is one of collaboration teaching technique. It is an
active activity, where the student’s will be guided to make a circle which
content of inner and outer group. Thoose types of group discussion that can be
utilized where there are separated into two groups inner and outer.
Every group has an opportunity to discuss the subject and the other groups
observe and listen and take notes. In the other hand the students need some
support to change their thought and place the English language as important to
practice, therefore it is still relatively easy for students to express their ideas
orally in English. One of the ways to change their thought it as it mentions
before, the teacher recommended to use another technique for example
fishbowl technique. Fishbowl is a technique that can be used for many things
such as modelling group discussions or any other classroom instructional
method. It can also be used to help the students think critically about a topic
(Khadijah, 2006).
The Fishbowl Technique is used to encourage verbal interaction among
class members to explore issues and share opinions (Harmer, 2001). One
group watches and another group in this action, the first group divided into
two groups, one of which forms a circle and discusses a topic. The inner group
is surrounded by the second group divide which forms a circle. All students
can imagine their ideas to give arguments and opinion based on the teacher’s
topic.
Yabarmase stated, that the fishbowl technique is a learning technique that
can help students conduct oral debates in small groups in classroom. Each
group chooses a group member and prepares ideas Dominicus (2013).
Meanwhile, according to Silberman which Mulki stated that the fishbowl
technique can emphasize active, cautious, agile, encourages, responsive in
learning and improved acknowledgment in their learning (Rahma, 2015).
Wulandari stated, that the fishbowl technique could be an efficacious
teaching method such as a grouping process that can impact students’
 20

speaking skill in classroom activity (Wulandari, 2021). It means that the

fishbowl technique is very useful for teaching learning process.
Based on explanation from previous study, the researcher concludes that
fishbowl is a group that separated into two groups there are the inner circle for
“fish” whereas, the outer circle for “bowl”. It means the phrase fishbowl is
derived from two words. Therefore, this is a group discussion in order to
increase student’s speaking ability where in the inner circle their have
discussion and actively to communicate their ideas, opinion or arguments and
then in the outer circle, students listening to the inner circle, pay attention to
the inner circle and take notes.

10. The Advantages and Disadvantages

In field educating and learning English speaking affluence, it is significant
for the teacher to make engaging activity just as bolstered to use many kinds
of showing media, approach, strategy, or procedures. Applying some methods
in educating and learning processes hopes to help students be more confident
and fearless in studying English. In the other hand, by using fishbowl
technique, students can offer their conclusion, thought, ideas, opinion,
argument etc. According to Effendi (2018), Fishbowl has three intended are
following:
a. It can be a useful teaching method for explaining group dynamics.
b. For involving students or another group in a cross-cultural or complicated
issue discussion.
c. Give students more freedom in class discussion.
Therefore, the researcher concluded that the fishbowl activity has many
benefits both for teacher and student for example fishbowl can give students
more freedom in class discussion. Students no more felt fear, unconfident,
shy. Etc. Through this technique it capable to solve problems faced by
students and teachers.
Fishbowl technique has some disadvantages as well from in a point of
view Kiewitt (2021) are following:
 21

a. There may be conflicts between students.

b. May provide false information.
c. Some students may have difficulty expressing themselves, and
d. The focus of the subject may change.

11. Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Fishbowl Technique

There are several steps to using fishbowl technique in the classroom
activity. According to Brozo (2018), by following:
a. Determining a focal point for classroom events. The subject is linked to
the students’ ability to keep their motivation and consideration alive.
b. Inviting students to turn to a neighbor and discuss their feelings about the
topic. Inform the students that they must take notes on their tasks.
c. Explain the arrangements and desires of the fishbowl activities. It almost
clearly indicates the rules of fishbowl activities and the goal to be
achieved.
d. Getting the activities begun by telling the students sitting in a cluster to
conversation about their thoughts, ideas, and opinion when speak with a
partner.
e. When engaging in a small group game, instructing the other students to
pay close attention to their peers and requiring notes.
f. Inquire of the other students for a response after the small group has
finished. It is an excellent opportunity to illustrate relevant feedback and
questions.
g. Making a few varieties of fishbowl activities to create it more interesting
for the students.
 22

Diagram 1 Conceptual Framework

The Students of SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung

Teaching Speaking

Interactional Speaking Skill

Pronunciation Vocabulary Grammar Fluency

FISHBOWL TECHNIQUE

TEACHER PROCESS LEARNERS

1. The teacher explained about the materials and the rules of

Fishbowl Technique.
2. The teacher give the topic to the students.
3. Then, the students begin to discuss about the topic.

Students’ Speaking Ability

B. Related Research Study

The researcher took two related previous researchers in this section. The
first research was written by Andika (2019), from English Community
Journal, Accessed from google scholar. The research was entitled The Effect of
Fishbowl technique and Students’ Interest toward the Eight Grade Students’
Speaking Ability of SMP Xaverius 1 Palembang. The research gave a
 23

contribution about the effectiveness or how fishbowl technique affected the

improvement of learning English in speaking skill. The differences in the
researcher’s research and andika’s research are the method, variable (Y),
sample and setting of the research. Andika’s research used experimental
research and the method was quantitative method. The variable (Y) was
student’s interest. The sample consisted of 60 students on the eighth grade at
SMP 1 Xaverius Palembang in 2018. The sample was 30 students taken as
sample experimental group and 30 students were as control group. The sample
was only from one class. The research had two variables; they are independent
variable and dependent variable. The independent variable was about fishbowl
technique. The dependent variable was students’ interest. It was found that
the use of fishbowl was mostly effective used in teaching speaking both high
and low interest.
Meanwhile, the researcher’s research used quasi-experimental research
and the method is quantitative method and the variable (Y) of writer’s
research is student’ speaking ability. The sample of the researcher’s research
is 60 students on the eleventh grade there are XI PPLG 1 and XI AKL 3 at
SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung in academic 2022/2023. The samples of the
researcher’s research are from two classes.. The sample was 30 students taken
as sample experimental group and 30 students were as control group. In the
researcher’s research it was found that, there was significant influence of
Fishbowl Strategy towards students’ speaking ability at the eleventh grade of
SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023. Meanwhile, the average score of
experimental class higher than control class. (69.60 > 64.53). Based on the
result of the research, it is clear that Fishbowl Strategy can be used to develop
the students’ speaking ability. The similarities in the researcher’s research and
Andika is title and research method, almost have similar. The researcher’s title
is use fishbowl strategy and Andika’s title is fishbowl technique and students’
interest in speaking ability. Meanwhile the research method is use
experimental research. The variable (X) is fishbowl technique.
 24

Second, a researcher conducted by Anakotta et al.(2020), the research was

entitled Fishbowl Technique towards the Students’ Speaking Skill. From
Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, Accessed from google scholar. The research gave a
contribution about fishbowl technique affected the improvement of students’
speaking ability. The differences in the researcher’s research and Anakotta et
al’s research are sample and setting of the research. The sample was 30
students which was 1 class as the sample and it consisted of 30 students which
one for one group pre –test and post-test. The research had two variables; they
are independent variable and dependent variable. The independent variable
was about fishbowl technique. The dependent variable was speaking ability.
The population consisted of 217 students were divided into seven class in
academic year 2019/2020. This is quasi experimental research which was
aimed to investigate whether or not fishbowl technique can improve students’
speaking skill at the tenth grade of IPS 1 SMAN 2 Sorong Regency. It was
found that the score is 2.045 with the significance level of 0.05 with df 29. P-
value is 0.005 < 0.05, it is know that t-value > (3.048 > 2.045 ). Meanwhile,
the alternative (HI) is accepted and null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected. It means
that Fishbowl technique can improve students speaking skill at the tenth of
SMAN 2 Sorong Regency.
Meanwhile, the sample of the researcher’s research is 60 students on the
eleventh grade there are XI PPLG 1 and XI AKL 3 at SMK N 8 Bandar
Lampung in academic year 2022/2023. The samples of the researcher’s
research are from two classes. In the researcher’s research it was found that,
there was significant influence of Fishbowl Strategy towards students’
speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in
2022/2023. Meanwhile, the average score of experimental class higher than
control class. (69.60 > 64.53). Based on the result of the research, it is clear
that Fishbowl Strategy can be used to develop the students’ speaking ability.
The similarities in the researcher’s research and Anakotta et al’s research are
variable x and y, research method and also title. Variable x and y is fishbowl
and speaking ability. The researcher’s title is use fishbowl strategy and
 25

Anakotta et al’s title is fishbowl technique towards students’ speaking skill.

Meanwhile the method of Anakotta et al’s research is quasi experimental
research.

C. Frame of Thinking
From the previous theory and explanation above, the researcher assumes
that speaking is part of essential the way to communicate to other person. It
means that use to share their thought, ideas, information and feelings and also
speaking is person’s ability how to use language to convey meaning or
message and to gain information in our daily communication. In teaching and
learning process especially in speaking skill, the teacher should be pay great
attention to teaching speaking effectively. Based on the crucial role of teacher
that expected to providing a high quality of encouraging to the student’
motivation by use teacher’s energy, knowledge, motivation and includes
others role of teachers. The teacher should make the students feel comfortably
afford the lesson.
In the other hand, teacher should know the condition and atmosphere in
classroom. Therefore teacher should know about teaching strategy or
technique precisely. Fishbowl technique of course, one of teaching technique
that can helps students to encouraging their speaking ability, Because fishbowl
can make students are more comfortably than others speaking in a public
forum, ask for volunteers, etc. Fishbowl technique is a group discussion that
separated into two groups, there are the inner circle and the outer circle and
each circle have important role, where student that sit at the inner circle
students have debates and actively whereas the outer circle students pay
attention, listen and take notes. So students are more confident and fearless to
straightforward their arguments.
As a conclusion, the fishbowl technique can improve student’s speaking
ability and useful for teacher as well, when teacher want to make sure all
students participate in a discussion class, fishbowl is effective way to make
group discussion even kinds of discussion controversial or difficult topics.
 26

from previous explanation above by some experts the researcher assumes that
fishbowl technique is very useful especially in teaching speaking, however
fishbowl have many disadvantages but fishbowl can enhance the students’
interest in learning speaking which can give effects on their speaking in some
aspects (fluency, pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary and comprehension).

D. The Hypothesis
Based on the theories and explanation above, the researcher made the
hypothesis as follows:
1. There is a significant influence of Fishbowl strategy towards students’ in
speaking ability.
2. The mean scores of students who were taught using Fishbowl technique is
higher than conventional technique.
 27

CHAPTER III
THE METHOD OF RESEARCH

A. Method of the Research

In conduct the research, the researcher used quasi experimental design. A
quantitative method was implemented with an experimental research design.
The quantitative method is only concerned with determining how the situation
in the field is and reporting what occurred experimental research is
comfortable and unpretentious, attempt anything occurs (Fraenkel & Wallen,
2012). The quasi- experimental design is commonly used by teachers and
lectures in education field. It involves selecting groups, upon which a variable
is tested without any random pre-selection processes. Quasi-experimental
research design attempt to determine causal relationship by applying a
treatment or condition to one group and comparing the outcome with a control
group. It uses a broader array of data collection techniques and statistical
analysis. In this case, the researcher used two classes in this research which
were choose randomly, First, the experimental class in which researcher used
fishbowl technique in teaching speaking. Second, the control class in which
the researcher used conventional technique in teaching speaking. The fishbowl
technique was used as an independent variable in this research and the
dependent variable was students’ speaking skills. For the explanation above
the researcher assumed that through this method the researcher made
compared between the experimental class and control class. The researcher
goal was to see whether the fishbowl technique substantially impacted
students’ speaking ability.

B. Population, Sample and Sampling Technique

1. Population
Population is group of elements (persons or objects) that possess some
common characteristic defined by the sampling criteria established by the
 28

researcher; the data can be gathered and analyzed. The population of the
research eleventh grade students of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung is
shown in the table below:
Table 1
The Population of the Eleventh Grade at SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in
Academic Year 2022/2023
No SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung Male Female Total
1 Kimia Analisis 12 22 34
2 Teknik Kimia Industri 18 10 28
3 Pengembangan Perangkat Lunak & GIM 1 23 7 30
4 Pengembangan Perangkat Lunak & GIM 2 31 7 38
5 Desain Komunikasi Visual 1 28 7 35
6 Desain Komunikasi Visual 2 27 10 37
7 Desain Komunikasi Visual 3 27 9 36
8 Akutansi & Keuangan Lembaga 1 8 29 37
9 Akutansi & Keuangan Lembaga 2 5 31 36
10 Akutansi & Keuangan Lembaga 3 6 24 30
11 Manajemen Perkantoran & Layanan Bisnis 1 1 36 37
12 Manajemen Perkantoran & Layanan Bisnis 2 1 37 38
13 Busana 0 36 36
14 Kecantikan & SPA 0 38 38
TOTAL 187 303 490

2. Sample of Research
According to Mackey & Gass (2004), sample is the respondents
selected from population for study. In this research, the researcher took
two classes as the sample of the research. The first is used as an
experimental class in which the researcher applied fishbowl in teaching
speaking and the second is control class in which the researcher used
conventional technique in teaching speaking. In this case, the
researcher took two classes randomly as the sample from the
population of eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung,
namely XI AKL 3 and XI PPLG 1.

3. Sampling Technique
There are four types of probability sampling namely: simple
random sampling, systematic sampling, stratified sampling, and cluster
 29

sampling. In this research the researcher used random sampling as a

technique to take the research sample. Margono (2004) states, that
simple random technique is a subset has an equal probability of being
chosen. A random sampling us meant to be an unbiased representation
of a group. Meanwhile McMillan & Chavis, (2001) states, that in
random sampling the researcher identifies this technique is used when
subjects are selected from the population so that all members of the
population have the same probability of being chosen. The regional
random sampling technique is used when the population is small.

C. Variable of the Research

In this research there were two variables:
1. The Independent variable was Fishbowl (X)
2. The Dependent variable was speaking ability (Y)

D. Operational Definition of Variable

The operational variable is to describe the characteristic of the variable
that investigated in order the researcher can collect some data of it. The
operational definitions of variables in this research are:
a. The fishbowl was a technique to make students more actively in thinking,
formulating and sharing their ideas. In fishbowl, have students can think
deeper and share their ideas, thought and feelings in speaking class in
forum discussion. Facilitation is focused on the core group discussion.
Fishbowl is a technique that can be used for many things such as
modelling group discussions or any other classroom instructional method.
It can also be used to help the students think critically about a topic. The
Fishbowl technique is a technique that can be used when discussing topics
within large groups (Khadijah, 2006).
b. Speaking is produced utterance by utterance and in response to the word
by word and utterance by utterance productions of the person people are
talking to (Thornbury, 2005). The students’ speaking ability was the
students’ be able to express their ideas, experience, thought and feeling
 30

orally and capability of students to speak fluently, grammatically and have

excellent pronunciation. It is indicated by the scores and assessment that
achieved from the test.

E. Technique and Data Collection Instrument

1. Data Collecting Technique
To know students’ speaking ability, there were some techniques that
can be used as a speaking test such as speaking comprehension,
conversational exchange, using picture to assessing oral production, the
oral interview and some other techniques for oral examining like the short
talk, group discussion and role playing. In this study, the researcher used
picture to assess students’ speaking ability.
2. Data Collection Instrument
Data collection instrument is the same as about evaluating. Evaluating
is obtaining data about the status of something compared to a
predetermined standard or size, because evaluating is also holding a
measure. In his book Arikunto, the researcher find out theories about data
collection instrument, here are some explanation (Arikunto S, 2013).
1) Test
A series of questions or exercises and other tools used to measure
skills, knowledge, intelligence, abilities or talents possessed by
individuals or groups. In terms of the target or object to be evaluated,
the test that was carried out in this study was speaking test.
2) Questionnaire
A number of written questions that are used to obtain information from
the respondent in the sense of a report about his personality or things
he knows.
3) Interview
A dialogue is conducted by the interviewer to obtain information from
the interviewer. In this study the researcher conducted interviews with
 31

English teacher in order to data about variables, student’s background

and others find.
4) Observation
The researcher used the observation to get information about the real
condition in teaching learning activities. the researcher made
observation note about situation in the class while the teaching
learning process occur teaching speaking, and students’ speaking skills
there are pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, fluency, and
comprehension in speaking lesson.
5) Documentation
In carrying out this research method, the researcher investigates
written objects such as books, documents, meeting minutes and others.
Based on the explanation above the researcher took a test as the
instrument of speaking, the pre-test and post-test instrument were used
in this research study to perform experiments, in the first meeting,
students from the experimental and control classes were given an
series of questions there are five questions essay. The researcher asked
about their daily activity in speaking skills without any treatment. The
speech was so paused and fragmented that it was almost impossible to
have a conversation. The next four meetings concentrated on teaching
and learning activities to enhace speaking and give students asking for
and giving an opinion as subject learning. Only the experimental class
was taught in a fishbowl, while the other class were not. Both classes
were given a post-test at the end of the session to evaluate their
progress in expressing their opinions.
1. Pre-Test
The researcher gave the pre-test to the students at the beginning of the
research to realize the student’s knowledge of the taught, X1 AKL 3 and
XI PPLG 1.
 32

2. Post-Test
The researcher gave the post-test to the students to realize the increase
in student’s speaking skills after the lesson and treatments were complete.

F. Research Instrument and Research Measuring Instrument

1. Research Instrument
In this part of research instrument, the researcher discussed about
research measuring instrument, validity of the test and readability of the
test.
2. Research Measuring Instrument
As has been explained in the previous section, the researcher used
picture to assess the students’ speaking ability. In order to collect data of
this study, the researcher should observe the primer information before the
study to understand the characteristics of the students to choose the
experimental class and the control class. Furthermore, the researcher gave
an interview as secondary data. At the end of the learning activity, this
interview offers to the experimental class and control class, who were also
treatment with the fishbowl technique and conventional technique. The
research was performed using an oral test as the instrument. There were
two aspects of the test: a pre-test and a post test. The test was the same for
both classes, experimental and controlled.
In the pre-test, the researcher gave some questions to the students as
the pre-test to know the student’s speaking skill. Every student got the
questions and answers it then the researcher recorded the students’
answers. After giving the pre-test to the students, the researcher found out
the result of the students’ speaking skill based on the five criteria of
speaking skill which are: Pronunciation, Grammar, Vocabulary, Fluency
and Comprehension. Moreover, in the post test. The students are given a
picture to study for a few minutes in which they are have maximum three
minutes time. They are then inquired to describe the picture in a given
time. The number of word each student speaks is counted by one examiner
 33

in the room in scoring the speaking test. During the test, the researcher
recorded students’ speaking ability. The researcher inputted the students’
oral presentation score based on the students’ performance and based on
the researcher’s rubric. Harris states, that in order to measure the level of
progress of students, the researchers used five oral proficiency standards
derived from the scoring scale (Harris, 1996).
Table 2
Oral Presentation Assessment Criteria
No Criteria Description
1 Pronunciation 5 Has few traces of foreign language.
4 Through there is a distinct accent, it is still
understandable.
3 The need for pronunciation problems is focused
on listening and occasionally causes
misunderstanding.
2 Because pronunciation problems are difficult to
understand, most often asked to repeat.
1 Speech is practically unintelligible due to a
pronunciation problem.
2 Grammar 5 Making few (if any) grammatical and word-
order mistakes.
4 Makes grammatical and/or word order mistakes
from time to time that do not obscure context.
3 Make regular grammatical and word-order
mistakes, which can also confuse context.
2 Incorrect grammar and word order make
comprehension difficult, and sentences must be
rewritten frequently.
1 Grammar and word order mistakes that are so
serious that speech is practically unintelligible.
3 Vocabulary 5 The vocabulary and idioms are almost similar
to those of a native speaker.
4 Because of lexical and equities questions,
he/she often uses the wrong word and must
rephrase his thoughts.
3 Due to the lack of vocabulary, some wrong
words are often used, which limits the
conversation to a certain extent.
2 Comprehension is difficult due to poor word
use and a restricted vocabulary.
1 The lack of vocabulary was so severe that
conversing was nearly impossible.
 34

4 Fluency 5 Spoken fluently, not as laborious as native

speakers.
4 Language problems appear to have a minor
impact on speech speed.
3 Language issues have a significant impact on
speed and fluency.
2 Usually hesitant, and frequently silenced due to
a lack of language.
1 The speech was so paused and fragmented that
it was almost impossible to have a
conversation.
5 Comprehension 5 Seems to understand everything effortlessly.
4 Understand almost everything at an average
speed, although sometimes it may need to be
repeated.
3 Understand most of the content at a slower than
normal speed without repeating it.
2 Has a lot of trouble following conversation that
are spoken slowly and with a lot of repetition.
1 Not even a simple conversation can be said to
be understood.

G. Validity of the Test

Validity is the extent to which a test, accurately measures what it is
supposed to measure. Validity refers to the degree to which evidence and
theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of
tests. Validity is a measure that shows the levels of validity of an instrument
(Arikunto S, 2013). The five validity criteria are democratic validity, outcome
validity, process validity, catalytic validity and dialogic validity. In this
research, to measure whether the test had good validity or not, the researcher
was content and construct validity.

Content Validity
Content validity is a test actually samples the objects matter about which
conclusion are to able draw, and if it requires the test-taker o perform the
behavior that is being measure (Brown, 2004). This research used a speaking
test that will be supposed to be comprehended by the first year of vocational
high school students. The test was being considered as valid in content validity
 35

since the test of speaking, an instrument must be valid as the test. It means that
the test was designed based on the current curriculum.
In this research the researcher will apply the material about identifying in
the text of oral and written explanations by giving and asking for information
related to natural or social symptoms.

Construct Validity
Construct validity is the degree to which the research adequately captures
the construct of interest (Mackey & Gass, 2004). In this research, the
researcher measured the students’ ability in Fishbowl by using speaking tests.
In those tests, the students are asked to create some theme for them discussion.
The scoring criterion is also based on speaking theory.

H. Data Analyzing Technique

To find out wheter there was influence of fishbowl strategy towards students
speaking ability, the researcher used some process namely: finding normality of
the test, finding homogeneity of the test and hypothesis test.
1. Normality of the test
Before analyzing the data for futher analysis (t-test), normality test was
done to measure whether the results of the students’ pretest and posttest in
control and experimental class were normal or not. The test was considered
normal whenever it is higher than 0.05. Then, in analyzing the normality,
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in SPSS 25.0 was used. The data were obtained
from the students’ pretest and posttest in control and experimental class.
Procedures of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in SPSS 25.0 by following:
a. Input the data pretest and posttest in the Data View.
b. In menu SPSS, choose menu Analyze  Descriptive Statistics 
Explore.
c. Input the data in the box Dependent list by clicking the arrow, then click
plot and cheklist normality plots with test in explore plots, then click
continue.
d. Click OK, then the normality data output will appear.
 36

2. Homogeneity Test of Variance

Before analyzing the data for further analysis (t-test), homogeneity test
was done to know whether the results of the students’ pretest and posttest in
control and experimental class are homogenous or not. In analyzing the
homogeneity, Levene Statistic in SPSS 25.0 was used. The result was obtained
from the students’ pretest and posttest in control and experimental class.
Homogeneity test steps with the help of SPSS 25.0 by following:
a. Enter data in the Data View. The first column is a data concatenation
second sample. In the next column, code the number 1 and 2 for scores
pretest and posttest class experiment and code 3 and 4 for scores pretest
and posttest the control class. Number selected for code
may be any number, the purpose is only to distinguish the two data
the combined.
b. In the variable View, in the Value column, input data value = 1, Label =
Pretest Experiment then, Add value = 2, Label = Posttest Experiment
Then, Add value = 3, Label Pretest Control and then, Add value = 4, Label
Posttest Control.
c. On the SPSS main menu, select the Analyze  Compare Means  One
way Anova  Options  Homogenity of variance test
d. Enter x1 and x2 data in the Dependent List box and group data in the box
Factor, by clicking the arrow, then click option and checklist Test the
homogeneity of variance test on One Way Anova : Options, then click
Continue.
e. Click OK, the homogeneity test output data will appear.

3. Hypothesis Test
a. Paired Samples T-Test
Paired sample t-test is used to prove whether there is significant difference
between the results of the pretest and post-test results. Hypothesis accepted
if the value of Sig. (2-tailed ) ≤ 5% 0.05 and the hypothesis will be
rejected if Sig. (2-tailed ) > 5% or 0.05. Tests in this study using SPSS
 37

25.0 program. Paired sample t-test steps with the help of SPSS 25.0 by
following:
Compare means  Paired sample T-test  Ok
b. Test Independent Samples T-Test
Independent samples t-test is used to prove it exists whether there is a
significant difference between the increase in ability understanding of
students who use the role playing learning model by using props with
direct learning models. The hypothesis is accepted if the Sig. (2-tailed ) ≤
5% or 0.05 and hypothesis will be rejected if Sig. (2-tailed ) > 5% or 0.05.
H0 test criteria can be rejected if: p - value (Sig) ≤ 0.05. Tests in this study
using SPSS 25.0 program.

4. Equality Test of Two Average

Ho1:µ1=µ2 (There is no influence of fishbowl strategy towards students
speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in academic year 2022/2023).
Ha1:µ1≠µ2 (There is an influence of fishbowl strategy towards students
speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in academic year 2022/2023).
The testing criterion:
H0 is accepted if t < t (1-α) with dk = n1 + n2-2 beside H0 that is rejected, with
the mistake level 5% (α=0 01) (Sudjana, 2005).

5. Different Test of Two Average

Ho2:µ1<µ2 The average score of students’ speaking ability which is taught
through fishbowl is lower than the average score of students’
speaking ability which was taught through conventional at the
eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in academic
year 2022/2023.
Ho2:µ1>µ2 The average score of students’ speaking ability which is taught
through fishbowl is higher than the average score of students’
 38

speaking ability which was taught through conventional at the

eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in academic
year 2022/2023.

The testing criterion:

H0 is accepted if t < t (1-α) with dk = (n1+n2-2) beside H0 that is rejected, with
the mistake level 5% (α=0.05) (Sudjana, 2005).
 39

CHAPTER IV
REPORT AND DISCUSSION

A. Report of the Research

The report students’ speaking ability test in experimental class which was
taught by Fishbowl Strategy higher than with the result students’ speaking ability
test of control class which was taught by using Conventional Technique. The data
in the experimental and control class were counted by using SPSS (Statistical
Product and Service Solution) version 25.0 and the description of the students’
scores as follows:

1. The Data Pre-Test of Experimental and Control Class

The researcher conducted pretest both in experimental and control class.
Based on the data computation of descriptive analysis by using SPSS. In pre-test
data of experimental class, the score was 32 up to 68 while in control class the
score was 40 up to 72. The mean score of pre-test in experimental class was 46.67
while in control class obtained 53.73. The result of SPSS output for pretest
experimental the mean was 46.67, std error mean was 1.465, median was 48.00,
mode was 40, standard deviation was 8.023, variance was 64.368, range was 36,
minimum 32, maximum 68 and sum 1400. Meanwhile in control class the mean
was 53.73, std error mean was 1.457, median was 52.00, mode was 52, standard
deviation 7.978, variance was 63.651, range was 32, minimum was 40, maximum
was 72 and sum was 1612. Those data can be seen on the table below:
 40

Tabel 3
Pre Test Experimental Class and Control Class

(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 12 and 13)

2. The Data Post-Test of Experimental and Control Class

The researcher conducted posttest both in experimental and control class.
Based on the data computation of descriptive analysis by using SPSS. In post-test
data of experimental class, the score was 48 up to 88 while in control class the
score was 52 up to 80. The mean score of post-test in experimental class was
69.60 while in control class obtained 64.53. The result of post-test in experimental
class showed that N was 30, mean was 69.60, std. error mean was 1.517, median
was 70.00, mode was 72, standard deviation was 8.311, variance was 69.076,
range was 40, minimum score was 48, maximum score was 88 and sum was 2088.
Meanwhile, the result for post-test control class was obtained N 30, mean was
64.53, std.error mean was 1.896, median was 64.00, mode was 52, standard
deviation was 10.385, variance was 107.844, range was 28, minimum score was
52, maximum score was 80 and sum was 1936.
 41

The result of SPSS output for posttest experimental and control class were
as follows:

Table 4
Post Test Experimental Class and Control Class

(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 14 and 15)

3. The Data of Normality Test

The data normality of this research was tested by using SPSS with the
result as follows:
Table 5
Tests of Normality
a
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Shapiro-Wilk
Class Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Students' Pre Test Experimental .197 30 .004 .936 30 .073
Score Class
Post Test .157 30 .057 .942 30 .102
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control .153 30 .072 .951 30 .181
Class
Post Test Control .135 30 .168 .884 30 .003
Class
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 16)
 42

The criteria of acceptance or rejection of hypotheses for normality test as follows:

H0 is accepted if sig < α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if sig > α = 0.05

Based on the result of normality test, it can be seen that Pvalue (Sig.) for
pre-test experimental class was 0.073, post-test experimental class was 0.102, pre-
test control class was 0.181 and Pvalue (Sig.) for post-test control class was 0.003.
Because Sig. (Pvalue) of pre-test and post-test experimental and control class > α
0.05. So, Ho is accepted. It concludes that the data in the experimental and control
class had normal distribution.

4. The Homogenity Test of Variance

After population data that had been proven that have normal distribution.
Therefore, the researcher also conducted the examination the test of homogenity
variance from both samples. Below the result of homogeneity test by using SPSS:
Table 6
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Students' Score Based on Mean 2.094 3 116 .105
Based on Median 1.919 3 116 .130
Based on Median and with 1.919 3 115.800 .130
adjusted df
Based on trimmed mean 2.029 3 116 .114
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 17)

The hypotheses as follows:

Ho = the variances of the data are homogenous
Ha = the variances of the data are not homogenous.
The criteria of the test as follows:
Ho is accepted if Sig. > α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if Sig. < α = 0.05
 43

Based on the results obtained in the test of homogeneity of variances in the

column, it could be seen that Sig. (Pvalue) = 0.105 > α = 0.05. It demonstrated
that Ho was accepted because Sig. (Pvalue) > α = 0.05. It means that Ho was
accepted and the variance of the data in experimental class and control class are
homogeneous.

5. The Hypothesis Test

a. The Influence of Fisbowl Technique towards Student’s Speaking Ability
The formula for testing hypothesis, the researcher used Paired Sample t-
test formula from SPSS.
The hypothesis formulas are:
Ho : There was no influence of using fishbowl strategy towards students’
speaking ability at the Eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in 2022/2023.
Ha : There was an influence of using fishbowl strategy towards students’
speaking ability at the Eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in 2022/2023.
The criteria of acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis for hypothetical test
were:
Ho is accepted if Sig. (Pvalue) > α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if Sig. (Pvalue) < α = 0.05
Table 7
Paired Samples Test (Post-Test)
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Posttest 5.067 11.552 2.109 .753 9.380 2.402 29 .023
1 Experimental
Class - Posttest
Control Class
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 18)
 44

Based on the results obtained in the Paired Sample t-test, that the value of
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.023 < α = 0.05. So, Ha was accepted and
Ho was rejected. Based on the computation, it can be concluded that there was
significant influence of using Fishbowl strategy towards students’ speaking ability
at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
There was significance difference between the result of Paired Sample Test of
experimental and control class. It can be seen that from sig (2-tailed) in
experimental class obtained 0.000 with the mean 22.933 while sig (2-tailed) in
control class obtained 0.000 with the mean 10.800. Therefore, there was
significant difference between two classes. The result can be seen as follows:
Paired Sample Test for Experimental Class.
Table 8
Paired Samples Test (Pre-Test)
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Pretest - 10.127 1.849 -26.715 -19.152 - 29 .000
1 Experimental 22.933 12.404
Class - Posttest
Experimental
Class
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 19)

Based on the results obtained in the Paired Sample t-test, that the value of
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.000 < α = 0.05. Therefore, Ha was
accepted and Ho was rejected.
 45

Paired Sample Test for Control Class

Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Pretest Control - 11.891 2.171 -15.240 -6.360 - 29 .000
1 Class - Posttest 10.800 4.974
Control Class
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 20)

Based on the results obtained in the Paired Sample t-test, that the value of
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.000 < α = 0.05. So, Ha was accepted and
Ho was rejected.

b. The Mean Scores of Students Who Were Taught Using Fishbowl Strategy
Were Higher than Students in Conventional Strategy
The second hypothesis was about whether the students who were taught by
using Fishbowl strategy better than the students who learned reading by using
Conventional Strategy. The result as follows:
2: (The mean score of students’ speaking ability who learn
through Fishbowl strategy lower than who learn through
Conventional Strategy at eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023).
2: (The mean score of students’ speaking ability who learn
through Fishbowl strategy higher than who learn through
Conventional Strategy at eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023).
 46

Table 9
The Mean Score
Mean Score
Experimental Class Control Class Experimental Class Control Class
Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test
46.67 64.53 53.73 69.60
The result showed that the Mean score of students’ speaking ability who
learn through Fishbowl strategy higher than who learn through Conventional
Strategy at eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
The average score in experimental class higher than control class. It was
obtained after teaching by using Fishbowl strategy. The result of posttest in
experimental class was 69.60 while in control class after teaching by using
conventional strategy obtained 64.53 (69.60 > 64.53).

B. Discussion
1. The Influence of Fishbowl Technique towards Students’ Speaking Ability
Speaking is an important skill needs to be taught in language class, even
though, it does not mean the other skill such as listening, reading, and writing
are less important rather than speaking skill. Those skill are sustaining each
other, for instance, speaking skill proceeded by listening. Through listening
people know vocabulary they do not know before. Nevertheless, in fact some
English language classes only emphasize on the importantof mastering writing
and reading rather than speaking, that it bring adequate time to practice to
speak about students. teaching and learning of speaking are a vital part of any
language education in the classroom, not only does the spoken language offer
“affordances” for learning as the main communicative medium of the
classroom, but it is also an important component of syllabus content and
learning outcomes (Burns, 2019).
The use of Fishbowl strategy was effective for teaching speaking. One
group watches and another group in this action, the first group divided into
two groups, one of which forms a circle and discusses a topic. The inner group
 47

is surrounded by the second group divide which forms a circle. All students
can imagine their ideas to give arguments or opinion based on the teacher’s
topic. It supported by Dominicus (2013) stated, the fishbowl technique is a
learning technique that can help students conduct oral debates in small groups
in classroom. It means that the fishbowl technique is very useful for teaching
learning process, especially teaching learning speaking.
Based on the data analysis by using t-test and testing of hypothesis. The
researcher got the result that Ha was accepted. It showed that the independent
sample t-test, that the value of significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.023 < α
= 0.05. On the other hand, the result showed that the average score of
students’ speaking ability who learn through Fishbowl strategy higher than
who learn through Conventional Strategy at eleventh grade of PPLG 1 and
AKL 3. It means that there was an influence of Fishbowl strategy towards
students’ speaking ability.
The research finding is relevant with the theory stated by Brown (2001) a
group work discussion is a general term covering a variety of techniques in
which students are assigned a task that involves collaboration and self-
initiated language. It means that a group discussion is a way for can help
students to conduct oral debates in small groups in the classroom activity.
Each group chooses a group member and prepares ideas. When teacher want
to make sure all students participate in a discussion class, fishbowl is effective
way to make group discussion even kinds of discussion controversial or
difficult topics.
From the theory above, it is clear that by creating Fishbowl technique
students will combine their ideas, feelings, thought among others. And, they
can discuss it in the end of lesson with the teacher. Therefore, this technique is
very useful to improve students’ skill in English, especially in speaking,
people need to be able to speak up for their life and to deliver their minds.
That is why speaking is important and must be taught by suitable technique.
Therefore, that students will know how to improve their speaking ability.
 48

2. The Mean Scores of Students who were Taught Using Fishbowl Strategy
were higher than Students in Conventional Strategy
The researcher conducted the research at 2 classes namely experimental
and controlled class. In experimental class, the researcher conducted the
research by using Fishbowl Strategy. Fishbowl strategy is one of collaboration
teaching technique. It is an active activity, where the student’s will be guided
to make a circle which content of inner and outer group. Thoose types of
group discussion that can be utilized where there are separated into two groups
inner and outer. Fishbowl is a technique that can be used for many things such
as modelling group discussions or any other classroom instructional method. It
can also be used to help the students think critically about a topic (Khadijah,
2006).
The successful of Fishbowl strategy is in line with a theory stated by
Wulandari (2021) that the fishbowl technique could be an efficacious teaching
method such as a grouping process that can impact students’ speaking skill in
classroom activity. The Fishbowl Technique is used to encourage verbal
interaction among class members to explore issues and share opinions
(Harmer, 2001). The use of Fishbowl strategy better than conventional
strategy. It was proved by the average score in experimental class which was
taught by using Fishbowl strategy obtained 69.60 while in control class which
was taught by using conventional strategy obtained 64.53. For the pre-test in
experimental class obtained 46.67 while in control class obtained 53.73.
In control class, the researcher conducted the research by using
Conventional Strategy. It was an old strategy that usually applied by the
teacher at the school. The researcher wanted to compare between the strategy
that she brought and the strategy that usually taught by the teacher. The result
in control class showed that students’ speaking ability was lower than
experimental class. In the end of dicussion, the researcher would say that the
use of Fishbowl strategy could be effective for teaching learning speaking
because it enables students to be brave enough to start speaking and training
 49

their mind to be able in doing debate. It is good for the students to practice
their speaking because English is international language and speaking might
enable them to communicate with whoever they want.
 50

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

A. Conclusion
The result can be seen from sig. (2-tailed) of the equal variance assumed in
the independent sample test table where the sig. (2-tailed) was 0.023. It was
lower than α = 0.05 and it means that Ha was accepted. Then, the mean score
of post-tests in experimental class higher than control class (69.60 > 64.53).
Therefore, the conclusions were as follows:
1. There was significant influence of using Fishbowl strategy towards
students’ speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in 2022/2023.
2. The mean scores of students’ speaking ability who learn through Fishbowl
strategy was higher than who learn through Conventional Strategy.

B. Recommendation
Based on the result of the research, the researcher would like to give some
suggestions, as follow
1. For the Teacher
a) The teacher is suggested to use media in teaching speaking, so that the
classroom would be interested. For example, teaching speaking by using
audio.
b) The teacher is suggested to be able to make the students want to practice
speaking, because speaking is very important in this modern era.
2. For the Students
a) The students should not be lazy to practice speaking in daily life. They
could find partner for practicing speaking.
b) The students should clarify to the teacher if there is a confusedness during
the lesson, so that the material would be clearer.
 51

3. For the School

a) The school is suggested to provide many reference at library to enhance
the students’ learning activity.
b) The school is suggested to facilitate the classroom with some media, for
example a Projector to make the learning process delivered clearly.
4. For Further Research
a) The further research can use the findings and theory as reference.
b) The further research is suggested to use Fishbowl strategy in other skill
such as writing, reading or listening as long as there is a theory to support
the research.
 52

REFERENCES

Anakotta, R., Nursalim, N., & Latuheru, R. J. (2020). Fishbowl Technique

towards the Students’ Speaking Skill. interaction: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa,
7(1). https://doi.org/10.36232/jurnalpendidikanbahasa.v7i1.445, Accesed on
January 13rd, 2022 at 11 Am.

Andika, A. (2019). the effect of fishbowl technique and students’ interest toward
the eight grade students’ speaking ability of smp xaverius 1 palembang.
English Community Journal, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.32502/ecj.v2i2.1316,
Accesed on December 30th, 2021 at 3 Pm

Arikunto S. (2013). Prosedur Penelitian : Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. In Jakarta:

Rineka Cipta.

Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by Principles An Interactive Approach to Language

Pedagogy. In New York: Pearson Education.

..................(2004). What is construct validity? What is construct validity? Shiken:

Jalt Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 4(2), Accesed on September 5th,
2022 at 3 Pm.

Brozo, W. G. (2018). Literacy Achievement and Motivation Reconsidered:

Linking Home and School Literate Practices for Struggling Adolescent
Males. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75948-7_10, Accesed on
th
September 5 , 2022 at 3 Pm.

Burns, A. (2019). Concepts for Teaching Speaking in the English Language

Classroom1. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition
Research Network, 12(1), 1–11, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Deng, Q., & Trainin, G. (2015). The Nebraska Educator: A Student-Led Journal
Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education 2015 Learning
Vocabulary with Apps: From Theory to Practice.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebeducator/29, Accesed on September 5th,
2022 at 3 Pm.

Dominicus.Yabarmas. (2013). The Fishbowl Strategy: An Effective Way to

Improve Students’ Speaking Ability. Indonesian Journal of English Language
Teaching, Vol.9 No.2(2), 137–145, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Effendi, A. (2018). the Effectiveness of Fishbowl Technique Towards Students’

Self Efficacy in Speaking. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching,
5(2), 46. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v5i2.345, Accesed on September 5th,
 53

2022 at 3 Pm.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2012). The Basic of Educational Research. In

How to design and evaluate resaerch in education with PowerWeb.

Fulcher, G. (2003). Scoring performance tests. In The Routledge Handbook of

Language Testing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203181287-39, Accesed on
September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of nglish Languag Teaching. 269.

................ (2007). The practice of english language teaching. In England: Pearson

Longman.

Harris, D. (1996). Cognitive Linguistics - Foundations of Language. In Cognitive

Linguistics - Foundations of Language. https://doi.org/10.1515/
9783110626476, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Heriansyah, H. (2012). speaking problems faced by the english department

students of syiah kuala university. Lingua Didaktika: Jurnal Bahasa Dan
Pembelajaran Bahasa, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.24036/ld.v6i1.7398, Accesed
on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Hughes, A. (2002). Testing for language teachers. In English.

Hussain, S. (2017). Teaching Speaking Skills in Communication Classroom.

International Journal of Media, Journalism and Mass Communications, 3(3),
14–21. https://doi.org/10.20431/2454-9479.0303003, Accesed on December
3th, 2021 at 9 Am.

Kayi-Aydar, H. (2014). ‘He’s the star!’: Positioning as a tool of analysis to

investigate agency and access to learning opportunities in a classroom
environment. In https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092901-010, Accesed on
September 5th, 2022 at 4 Pm.

Khadijah. (2006). teaching speaking Theorizing and Analyzing Agency in Second

Language Learning: interdisciplinary approaches. using the fishbowl
technique, 1999(December), 1–6, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 4 Pm.

Kiewitt, S. (2021). Taylor, Charles. In Kindlers Literatur Lexikon (KLL).

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05728-0_20317-1, Accesed on September
5th, 2022 at 4 Pm.
Kurniasih, E. (2011). Teaching the four language skills in primary EFL
classroom: some considerations. Journal of English Teaching, 1(1), Accesed
on January 19th, 2022 at 9 Pm.
 54

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2004). Second language research: Methodology and
design, second edition. In Second Language Research: Methodology and
Design, Second Edition. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750606, Accesed on
September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Margono, S. (2004). Metodologi Penelitian. In Metodologi Penelitian.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (2001). Sense of community: A definition and

theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1).
https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(198601)14:1<6::AID-
JCOP2290140103>3.0.CO;2-I, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. In United state: Mc

Graw Hill.

Okar, N., & Shahidy, S. H. (2019). Using pictures of movie conversations with
input enhancement in subtitles for developing speaking of Iranian EFL
intermediate learners. International Journal of English Language and
Translation Studies, 07(03), Accesed on January 19th, 2022 at 10 Pm.

Pakula, H.-M. (2019). Teaching speaking. Apples - Journal of Applied Language

Studies, 13(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.201903011691,
Accesed on February 3rd , 2022 at 5 Pm.

Paulus, M., Hazan, V., Wagner, A., & Adank, P. (2019). Talker intelligibility and
listening effort: The role of speaking rate. Proceedings of the International
Congress on Acoustics, 2019-September. https://doi.org/10.18154/RWTH-
CONV-239169, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 5 Pm.

Rahma, D. M. (2015). The Fishbowl Method to Improve the Students’ Speaking

Skills. Register Journal, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v8i2.705, Accesed
on September 5th, 2022 at 5 Pm.

Spolsky, B., & Hult, F. M. (2008). The Handbook of Educational Linguistics. In

The Handbook of Educational Linguistics.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470694138, Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at
5 Pm.

Sreena, S., & Ilankumaran, M. (2018). Developing Productive Skills Through

Receptive Skills – A Cognitive Approach. International Journal of
Engineering & Technology, 7(4.36), 669. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7
i4.36.24220, Accesed on December 3th, 2021 at 9 Am.

Sudjana. (2005). sudjana. In Metoda statistika.

Thornbury, S. (2005). How To Teach Speaking By Scott Thornbury. In England:

 55

Pearson Longman.

Wulandari, A. (2021). The Students’ Perception of Speech Method toward The

University Students’ Speaking Skill. QALAMUNA: Jurnal Pendidikan,
Sosial, Dan Agama, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.37680/qalamuna.v13i1.577,
Accesed on September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.

Zhang, J. (2009). Necessity of Grammar Teaching. International Education

Studies, 2(2), 184–187. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v2n2p184, Accesed on
September 5th, 2022 at 3 Pm.
 56

APPENDIX
 57

Appendix 1
 58

Appendix 2
 59

Appendix 3
 60

Appendix 4
 61

Appendix 5
 62

Appendix 6
 63

Appendix 7
 64

Appendix 8
65
 66

Appendix 9

HALAMAN REKOMENDASI BIMBINGAN SKRIPSI

Nama : IIN OKTAVIANI

NPM : 181220033
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni
Program Studi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Telah melakukan proses bimbingan skripsi oleh pembimbing II, selanjutnya

mohon kesediaan pembimbing I untuk memberikan pembimbingan lebih lanjut
dalam proses penyusunan skripsi.

Bandar Lampung, 2022

Menyetujui, Pembimbing II
Kaprodi Pendidikan
Bahasa dan Seni

Dr. Akhmad Sutiyono, M.Pd. Tommy Hastomo, M.Pd.

Mengetahui,
Kepala LPPM

Dr. Andri Wicaksono, M.Pd.

 67

Appendix 10
 68

Appendix 11

Instrument of the pre-test

Name :………………………………..

Class :………………………………..

Instruction: The researcher will ask the students a few question about their daily
activities and the research will record it to measure their ability in speaking skill.
The research will instruct the students to answer the question about their daily
activities by using their own words.

a. Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in the morning?
b. Please explain what did you usually do in the school with your friends?
c. Can you explain what did you usually after school?
d. Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the night?
e. What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?

Instrument of the post-test

Name :………………………………

Class :……………………………...

Instruction: The researcher will instruct the students to explain about the picture
that will give by the researcher by using their own words and the research will
record to measure their ability in speaking skill.
69
 70

Appendix 12

STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SCORE

Experimental Class [Fishbowl] Control Class [Conventional]

No
Pre-Test Post-Test Pre-Test Post-Test
1 56 64 48 52
2 52 72 60 56
3 68 80 72 80
4 56 68 48 72
5 32 48 40 52
6 40 72 40 80
7 40 88 68 52
8 48 88 52 52
9 48 60 44 52
10 48 72 48 76
11 48 68 56 60
12 40 68 52 52
13 48 72 56 56
14 48 72 60 76
15 40 72 56 60
16 40 72 60 64
17 40 60 40 52
18 52 76 60 80
19 48 68 56 60
20 36 60 52 56
21 40 68 60 68
22 48 76 48 76
23 52 60 52 64
24 40 60 52 60
25 48 64 52 64
26 36 76 60 64
27 40 76 48 68
28 60 68 52 80
29 52 68 52 80
30 56 72 68 72
Average 46.67 69.60 53.73 64.53
 71

Appendix 13

Statistics
Pre Test Experimental Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 46.67
Std. Error of Mean 1.465
Median 48.00
a
Mode 40
Std. Deviation 8.023
Variance 64.368
Range 36
Minimum 32
Maximum 68
Sum 1400
a. Multiple modes exist. The
smallest value is shown

Pre Test Experimental Class

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 32 1 3.3 3.3 3.3
36 2 6.7 6.7 10.0
40 9 30.0 30.0 40.0
48 9 30.0 30.0 70.0
52 4 13.3 13.3 83.3
56 3 10.0 10.0 93.3
60 1 3.3 3.3 96.7
68 1 3.3 3.3 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
 72

Appendix 14

Statistics
Pre Test Control Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 53.73
Std. Error of Mean 1.457
Median 52.00
Mode 52
Std. Deviation 7.978
Variance 63.651
Range 32
Minimum 40
Maximum 72
Sum 1612

Pre Test Control Class

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 40 3 10.0 10.0 10.0
44 1 3.3 3.3 13.3
48 5 16.7 16.7 30.0
52 8 26.7 26.7 56.7
56 4 13.3 13.3 70.0
60 6 20.0 20.0 90.0
68 2 6.7 6.7 96.7
72 1 3.3 3.3 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
 73

Appendix 15

Statistics
Post Test Experimental Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 69.60
Std. Error of Mean 1.517
Median 70.00
Mode 72
Std. Deviation 8.311
Variance 69.076
Range 40
Minimum 48
Maximum 88
Sum 2088

Post Test Experimental Class

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 48 1 3.3 3.3 3.3
60 5 16.7 16.7 20.0
64 2 6.7 6.7 26.7
68 7 23.3 23.3 50.0
72 8 26.7 26.7 76.7
76 4 13.3 13.3 90.0
80 1 3.3 3.3 93.3
88 2 6.7 6.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
 74

Appendix 16

Statistics
Post Test Control
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 64.53
Std. Error of Mean 1.896
Median 64.00
Mode 52
Std. Deviation 10.385
Variance 107.844
Range 28
Minimum 52
Maximum 80
Sum 1936

Post Test Control

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 52 7 23.3 23.3 23.3
56 3 10.0 10.0 33.3
60 4 13.3 13.3 46.7
64 4 13.3 13.3 60.0
68 2 6.7 6.7 66.7
72 2 6.7 6.7 73.3
76 3 10.0 10.0 83.3
80 5 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
 75

Appendix 17

NORMALITY TEST

Case Processing Summary

Cases
Valid Missing Total
Class N Percent N Percent N Percent
Students' Pre Test Experimental 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Score Class
Post Test 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Class
Post Test Control 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Class

Descriptives
Std.
Class Statistic Error
Students' Pre Test Experimental Mean 46.67 1.465
Score Class 95% Confidence Lower 43.67
Interval for Mean Bound
Upper 49.66
Bound
5% Trimmed Mean 46.37
Median 48.00
Variance 64.368
Std. Deviation 8.023
Minimum 32
Maximum 68
Range 36
Interquartile Range 12
Skewness .493 .427
Kurtosis .294 .833
Post Test Mean 69.60 1.517
Experimental Class 95% Confidence Lower 66.50
Interval for Mean Bound
Upper 72.70
Bound
5% Trimmed Mean 69.56
 76

Median 70.00
Variance 69.076
Std. Deviation 8.311
Minimum 48
Maximum 88
Range 40
Interquartile Range 9
Skewness -.009 .427
Kurtosis 1.197 .833
Pre Test Control Class Mean 53.73 1.457
95% Confidence Lower 50.75
Interval for Mean Bound
Upper 56.71
Bound
5% Trimmed Mean 53.56
Median 52.00
Variance 63.651
Std. Deviation 7.978
Minimum 40
Maximum 72
Range 32
Interquartile Range 12
Skewness .273 .427
Kurtosis .063 .833
Post Test Control Mean 64.53 1.896
Class 95% Confidence Lower 60.66
Interval for Mean Bound
Upper 68.41
Bound
5% Trimmed Mean 64.37
Median 64.00
Variance 107.844
Std. Deviation 10.385
Minimum 52
Maximum 80
Range 28
Interquartile Range 21
Skewness .261 .427
Kurtosis -1.387 .833
 77

Tests of Normality
a
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Shapiro-Wilk
Class Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Students' Pre Test Experimental .197 30 .004 .936 30 .073
Score Class
Post Test .157 30 .057 .942 30 .102
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control .153 30 .072 .951 30 .181
Class
Post Test Control .135 30 .168 .884 30 .003
Class
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Students' Score

Stem-and-Leaf Plots

Students' Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot for

Class= Pre Test Experimental Class

Frequency Stem & Leaf

1.00 3 . 2
2.00 3 . 66
9.00 4 . 000000000
9.00 4 . 888888888
4.00 5 . 2222
3.00 5 . 666
1.00 6 . 0
1.00 6 . 8

Stem width: 10
Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Students' Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot for

Class= Post Test Experimental Class

Frequency Stem & Leaf

1.00 Extremes (=<48)

7.00 6 . 0000044
7.00 6 . 8888888
8.00 7 . 22222222
4.00 7 . 6666
1.00 8 . 0
2.00 Extremes (>=88)
 78

Stem width: 10
Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Students' Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot for

Class= Post Test Control Class

Frequency Stem & Leaf

7.00 5 . 2222222
3.00 5 . 666
8.00 6 . 00004444
2.00 6 . 88
2.00 7 . 22
3.00 7 . 666
5.00 8 . 00000

Stem width: 10
Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Normal Q-Q Plots

79
 80

Detrended Normal Q-Q Plots

81
82
 83

Appendix 18
HOMOGENEITY TEST

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Students' Score Based on Mean 2.094 3 116 .105
Based on Median 1.919 3 116 .130
Based on Median and with 1.919 3 115.800 .130
adjusted df
Based on trimmed mean 2.029 3 116 .114

ANOVA
Students' Score
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 9668.667 3 3222.889 42.276 .000
Within Groups 8843.200 116 76.234
Total 18511.867 119
 84

Appendix 19
T-TEST

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Posttest Experimental Class 69.60 30 8.311 1.517
Posttest Control Class 64.53 30 10.385 1.896

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Posttest Experimental Class 30 .252 .179
& Posttest Control Class

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Posttest 5.067 11.552 2.109 .753 9.380 2.402 29 .023
1 Experimental
Class - Posttest
Control Class
 85

Appendix 20
PAIRED SAMPLE T-TEST EXPERIMENTAL CLASS

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Pretest Experimental Class 46.67 30 8.023 1.465
Posttest Experimental Class 69.60 30 8.311 1.517

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Pretest Experimental Class 30 .232 .218
& Posttest Experimental
Class

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Pretest - 10.127 1.849 -26.715 -19.152 - 29 .000
1 Experimental 22.933 12.404
Class - Posttest
Experimental
Class
 86

Appendix 21
PAIRED SAMPLE T-TEST CONTROL CLASS

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Pretest Control Class 53.73 30 7.978 1.457
Posttest Control Class 64.53 30 10.385 1.896

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Pretest Control Class & 30 .182 .337
Posttest Control Class

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Pretest Control - 11.891 2.171 -15.240 -6.360 - 29 .000
1 Class - Posttest 10.800 4.974
Control Class
 87

Appendix 22

PRE-TEST EXPERIMENTAL CLASS

Aspect of Assessment Values

No Students
Pron Gram Vocab Flue Comp Total
1. S1 4 2 2 3 3 14 56
2. S2 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
3. S3 4 3 4 3 3 17 68
4. S4 3 3 3 2 3 14 56
5. S5 1 1 2 2 2 8 32
6. S6 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
7. S7 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
8. S8 2 2 3 3 2 12 48
9. S9 2 3 3 2 2 12 48
10. S10 2 2 2 3 3 12 48
11. S11 2 2 2 3 3 12 48
12. S12 1 2 2 3 2 10 40
13. S13 2 2 3 2 3 12 48
14. S14 2 3 3 2 2 12 48
15. S15 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
16. S16 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
17. S17 1 2 3 2 2 10 40
18. S18 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
19. S19 3 2 3 2 2 12 48
20. S20 2 1 2 2 2 9 36
21. S21 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
22. S22 2 2 3 3 2 12 48
23. S23 2 3 3 2 3 13 52
24. S24 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
25. S25 3 2 3 2 2 12 48
26. S26 2 1 2 2 2 9 36
27. S27 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
28. S28 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
29. S29 2 3 3 2 3 13 52
30. S30 3 3 3 3 2 14 56
Mean 46.67
Min. Score 32
Max. Score 68
 88

Appendix 23
PRE-TEST CONTROL CLASS

Aspect of Assessment Values

No Students
Pron Gram Vocab Flue Comp Total
1. S1 3 2 3 2 2 12 48
2. S2 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
3. S3 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
4. S4 2 2 3 2 3 12 48
5. S5 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
6. S6 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
7. S7 4 3 3 3 4 17 68
8. S8 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
9. S9 2 2 3 2 2 11 44
10. S10 2 2 2 3 3 12 48
11. S11 3 3 3 2 3 14 56
12. S12 2 3 3 2 3 13 52
13. S13 2 3 3 3 3 14 56
14. S14 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
15. S15 2 3 3 3 3 14 56
16. S16 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
17. S17 2 2 2 2 2 10 40
18. S18 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
19. S19 2 3 3 3 3 14 56
20. S20 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
21. S21 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
22. S22 2 3 3 2 2 12 48
23. S23 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
24. S24 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
25. S25 2 3 3 2 3 13 52
26. S26 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
27. S27 2 2 3 2 3 12 48
28. S28 3 2 3 3 2 13 52
29. S29 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
30. S30 4 3 3 3 4 17 68
Mean 53.73
Min. Score 40
Max. Score 72
 89

Appendix 24

POST-TEST EXPERIMENTAL CLASS

Aspect of Assessment Values

No Students
Pron Gram Vocab Flue Comp Total
1. S1 3 3 4 3 3 16 64
2. S2 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
3. S3 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
4. S4 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
5. S5 2 2 3 3 2 12 48
6. S6 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
7. S7 4 5 5 4 4 22 88
8. S8 4 5 5 4 4 22 88
9. S9 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
10. S10 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
11. S11 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
12. S12 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
13. S13 3 5 4 3 3 18 72
14. S14 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
15. S15 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
16. S16 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
17. S17 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
18. S18 4 5 4 3 3 19 76
19. S19 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
20. S20 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
21. S21 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
22. S22 4 5 4 3 3 19 76
23. S23 3 2 4 3 3 15 60
24. S24 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
25. S25 3 3 4 3 3 16 64
26. S26 4 5 4 3 3 19 76
27. S27 4 5 4 3 3 19 76
28. S28 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
29. S29 4 4 4 3 3 17 68
30. S30 4 4 4 3 3 18 72
Mean 69.60
Min. Score 48
Max. Score 88
 90

Appendix 25

POST-TEST CONTROL CLASS

Aspect of Assessment Values

No Students
Pron Gram Vocab Flue Comp Total
1. S1 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
2. S2 3 2 3 3 3 14 56
3. S3 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
4. S4 3 3 4 4 4 18 72
5. S5 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
6. S6 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
7. S7 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
8. S8 3 3 3 2 2 13 52
9. S9 2 3 3 3 2 13 52
10. S10 3 4 4 4 4 19 76
11. S11 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
12. S12 2 2 3 3 3 13 52
13. S13 3 2 3 3 3 14 56
14. S14 4 4 4 3 4 19 76
15. S15 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
16. S16 3 3 3 3 4 16 64
17. S17 2 3 3 3 2 13 52
18. S18 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
19. S19 2 3 4 3 3 15 60
20. S20 3 2 3 3 3 14 56
21. S21 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
22. S22 4 4 4 3 4 19 76
23. S23 3 3 4 3 3 16 64
24. S24 3 3 3 3 3 15 60
25. S25 3 3 4 3 3 16 64
26. S26 3 3 4 3 3 16 64
27. S27 3 4 4 3 3 17 68
28. S28 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
29. S29 4 4 4 4 4 20 80
30. S30 3 4 4 3 4 18 72
Mean 64.53
Min. Score 52
Max. Score 80
 91

Appendix 26

TRANSCRIPT STUDENTS OF EXPERIMENTAL CLASS

Pre-Test of Experimental Class

 Student 01
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : I wake up, take a shower, and then get ready to school.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : Play and learn.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Students : I eat, take a shower, and sleep.
Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Students : I called my family in the village.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Students : at 10 o’clock.

 Student 02
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : I usually get ready for school.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : Study.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Student : Sleep.
Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Student : Play cell phone.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Student : Eleventh o’clock.
 92

 Student 03
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : read a prayer after waking up.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : Learn and play.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Student : Usually when I come home from school, I always play then
Go home and rest.
Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Student : Usually my family always asks me about my daily life at
School.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Student : ten post thirty minutes.
 93

Post-Test of Experimental Class

 Student 01
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Derta wastu ardira.
Researcher : Ok, please explain about the picture?
Students : In a green field there is a father and his child are
playing football together and looking the child are
very happy playing football together with his
father.
Researcher : Ok, thank you.
 Student 02
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Desta tri lestari.
Researcher : Ya, please explain about this picture?
Student : In my opinion, there are two people a father with
his son playing football in the park.
Researcher : Ok, thank you.
 Student 03
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Arshella.
Researcher : Ok, please explain about this picture?
Student : In my opinion about this picture, about a father
and his son is playing football in the park.
 94

Appendix 27

TRANSCRIPT STUDENTS OF CONTROLLED CLASS

Pre-Test of Controlled Class

 Student 01
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : After I wake up in the morning I usually direct take a bath
And have a breakfast.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : Me and my friend usually sleep if not teacher.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Students : I usually direct go to home
Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Students : Nothing, I usually just playing game with my friend.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Students : Nine p.m

 Student 02
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : Take a bath and breakfast.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : Random chat, eat, study.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Student : Bath and Sleep.
 95

Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Student : Watching tv.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Student : 10.00 pm.

 Student 03
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do after you wake up in
The morning?
Student : after wake up I usually take a bath.
Researcher : Please explain what did you usually do in the school with
Your friends?
Student : When at school I usually talk with my friends.
Researcher : Can you explain what did you usually after school?
Student : Usually after school I eat.
Researcher : Can you explain your daily activity with your family in the
Night?
Student : At night I usually watch television with my family.
Researcher : What time do you usually take a sleep in the night?
Student : I sleep at nine p.m
 96

Post-Test of Controlled Class

 Student 01
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Ali Akbar Z.
Researcher : Ok, please explain about the picture?
Students : In the picture below we can see a father playing
ball with his son happily.
Researcher : Ok, thank you.
 Student 02
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Shultony swis
Researcher : Ya, please explain about this picture?
Student : A father and his son are playing football in the
yard.
Researcher : Ok, thank you.
 Student 03
Researcher : Hello, what is your name?
Student : My name is Yuma arya.
Researcher : Ok, please explain about this picture?
Student : A father teaches his son to play soccer.
researcher : Ok, thank you.
 97

Appendix 28

RESEARCH DOCUMENTATION
98