Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
B-2
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
K
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
2
Teaching Method
Description:
NY = Number of subject in the group
Y = Average score for each group
Y = Number of score in each group
Y2 = Sum of squares of each score in the group
c. Creating a summary table of two-way ANOVA
Based on the descriptive statistical data in the table above,
processed to get a summary of the ANOVA table to test the
following hypotheses:
Table 3.11
Summary of ANOVA for Hypothesis Test
Sumber varians Db JK RJK F
h
F
t
0,05 0,01
Between Column
(Ak)
Between Line (Ab)
Interaction (I)
Db
(Ak)
Db
(Ab)
Db(I)
Jk (Ak)
Jk (Ab)
Jk(I)
Rjk (Ak)
Rjk
(Ab)
Rjk(I)
F
h
(Ak)
F
h
(Ab)
F
h
(I)
F
t
(Ak)
F
t
(Ab)
F
t
(I)
F
t
(Ak)
F
t
(Ab)
F
t
(I)
Between Column
(A)
Db
(A)
Jk(A)
Rjk(A) F
h
(A) F
t
(A) F
t
(A)
In Group
(D)
Db
(D)
Jk(D) Rjk(D) - - -
Total in Reduction
(TR)
Average/Correction
(R)
Db
(TR)
Db
(R)
Jk(D)
Jk(R)
Rjk
TR
Rjk(R)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total (T) 80 Jk(T) - - - -
d. Way to determine Db, Jk, Rjk, F
h
, dan F
t
Determine the degrees of freedom (db), the sum of squares (Jk),
variance (Rjk) and F
hitung
(F
h
) and F
tabel
(F
t
) for filling the shell in
the ANOVA summary table above, is obtained as follows:
1) Determine the degrees of freedom
a. db (Ak) = k 1
b. db (Ab) = b 1
c. db (I) = (k 1) (b 1)
d. db (A) = k.b 1
e. db (D) = n
00
k.b
f. db (TR) = n
00
1
g. db (R) = 1
h. db (T) = n
00
2) Determine the sum of squares (JK)
a. JK (T) = Y
2
00
b. JK (R) =
(Y00)
2
n
00
c. JK (TR) = JK(T) JK(R)
d. JK(A) =
(Y
22
)
2
+
(Y
22
)
2
+
(Y
22
)
2
+
(Y
22
)
2
+ - JK(R)
n
22
n
22
n
22
n
22
f. JK(Ab) =
(Y
22
)
2
+ (Y
22
)
2
- JK(R)
n
22
n
22
g. JK(I) = JK(A) JK(Ak) JK(Ab)
h. JK (D) = JK (TP) JK(A)
3) Determine variance (S
2
) atau RJK:
a. Rjk (Ak) =
2
(Ak) =
Jk(Ak)
db (Ak)
b. Rjk (Ab) =
2
(Ab) =
JK(Ab)
db(Ab)
a. Rjk(I) =
2
(I) =
JK(I)
db(I)
d. Rjk(A) = S
2
(A) = JK(A)/db(A)
e. Rjk(D) = S
2
(D) = JK(D)/db(D)
2) Determine score F table (F1) = F(a, db1, db2)
db1 = db numerator = k 1
db2 = db denominator = n 1
k = number of columns / rows / treatment / group
n = number of data / sample
e. Hypothesis Testing and Drawing Conclusions
1) For the variance between the columns (Ak) or hypothesis 1
Hypothesis testing criteria:
- Reject H
0
and accept H
1
: if F
h
> F
t
- Accept H
0
and reject H
1
: jika F
h
< F
t
2) For the variance interaction column and row (I) or hypothesis 2
Hypothesis testing criteria:
- Reject H
0
and accept H
1
: if F
h
> F
1
- Accept H
0
and reject H
1
: if F
h
< F
1
3) For hypothesis 3, difference of outcome learning of the
students speaking skill on group of the high emotionsl
intelligence.
Hypothesis testing criteria:
- Reject H
0
and accept H
1
: if Q
h
> Q
t
- Accept H
0
and reject H
1
: if Q
h
< Q
t
4) For hypothesis 3, difference of outcome learning of the
students speaking skill on group of the low emotionsl
intelligence.
Hypothesis testing criteria:
- Reject H
0
and accept H
1
: if Q
h
> Q
t
- Accept H
0
and reject H
1
: if Q
h
< Q
t
G. FURTHER TEST
Uji Further testing done to determine the effect of differences in each
group using the Tukey test (same as data per group), if the hypothesis test
obtained a significant interaction.
1) Statistic Hypothesis
i. H
0
: A
1
= A
2
H
1
: A
1
A
2
ii. H
0
: B
1
= B
2
H
1
: B
1
B
2
iii. H
0
: Int. A x B = 0
H
1
: Int. A x B )
2) Determine score Q count (Qh)
With formula:
Qh =
1Xi X/l
=
1Xi X/l
RJK(D)
2
n N
n = number of data in group
RJK(D) variance in group
For n per group: RJK(D)/n
For n per treatment: RJK(D)/n
3) Determine score Q table (Qt)
For = 0,05, n = db and number of group k : Qt = Q(0,05 ; n/k)
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. DESCRIPTION OF DATA
Based on the result of data analysis are presented summary data
from the study:
Table 4.1
Description of Data Research
Emotional
Intelligence
Teaching Method (A)
Total
Emotional
I ntelligence
CLTM
(A
1
)
Conventional
(A
2
)
High Emotional
I ntelligence (B1)
n = 10 n = 10 n = 20
X
= 16.5
X
= 15.2
X
= 31.7
s = 2.83 s = 2.45 s = 5.28
Low Emotional
I ntelligence (B2)
n = 10 n = 10 n = 20
X
= 15.4
X
= 12.8
X
= 28.2
s = 2.82 s = 2.39 s = 5.21
Total
n = 20 n = 20 n = 40
X
= 31.9
X
= 28
X
= 59.5
s = 5.65 s = 4.84 s = 10.49
Description:
A1B1: Teaching method of communicative language teaching method and
high emotional intelligence.
A1B2: Teaching method of communicative language teaching method and
low emotional intelligence.
A2B1: Teaching method of conventional teaching methods and high
emotional intelligence .
A2B2: Teaching method of conventional teaching methods and low
emotional intelligence .
1. Score of students speaking skill with communicative language
teaching method
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument of
objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given score
1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of experimental group of 20
students, taught by the communicative language teaching method. The
highest score 20 and lowest 11. Score obtained from the statistical
calculation of the average 15.9 median 16 mode 14 standard deviation
2.64 and variance 6.99 the table as follows:
Table 4.2
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
communicative language teaching method
ClASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relativ
e (%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
11 12 2 10 2 10 10.5 12.5
13 14 5 25 7 35 12.5 14.5
15 16 4 20 11 55 14.5 16.5
17 18 5 25 16 80 16.5 18.5
19 20 4 20 20 100 18.5 20.5
Total 20 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 4 people or 20%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 7 people or 35% and
above the class average of 7 people 35%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
2. Score of students speaking skill taught with conventional method
Measurement of data of students speaking skill using the
instrument of test objective of multiple choice with five answer
options, a total of about 20 items. Each item if question is answered
correctly given score 1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so
that the range of respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of
experimental group of 20 students, taught by conventional method.
The highest score 19 and lowest 9. Score obtained from the statistical
calculation of the average 14, median 14, mode 13, standard deviation
2.82 and variance 8.0 the calculation as follow.
Table 4.3
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
conventional method
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolut
e
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
9 10 2 10 2
10 8.5 10.5
11 12 4 20 6
30 10.5 12.5
13 14 6 30 12
60 12.5 14.5
15 16 4 20 16
80 14.5 16.5
17 18 2 10 18
90 16.5 18.5
19 20 2 10 20
100 18.5 20.5
Total 20 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 6 people or 30%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 6 people or 30%
and above the class average of 8 people 40%. The data is quite well
and is not much variety.
3. Score of students speaking skill taught with communicative
language teaching method and high emotional intelligence
Measurement of data students speaking skill using the
instrument of test objective of multiple choice with five answer
options, a total of about 20 items. Each item if question is answered
correctly given score 1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so
that the range of respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of
experimental group of 10 students, taught by communicative language
teaching method and high emotionl intelligence. The highest score 20
and lowest 12. Score obtained from the statistical calculation of the
average 16.5, median 16.5, mode 16, standard deviation 2.83 and
variance 8.05 the calculation as follow.
Table 4.4
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
communicative language teaching method and high emotional
intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
12 13 2 20 2 20 11.5 13.5
14 15 1 10 3 30 13.5 15.5
16 17 3 30 6 60 15.5 17.5
18 19 2 20 8 80 17.5 19.5
20 21 2 20 10 100 19.5 21.5
Total 10 100
From the table above can be explained that the research
subject which had scores on the average there are 3 people or 30%.
Research subject which is below the class average there are 3 people
or 30% and above the class average of 4 people 40%. The data is quite
well and is not much variety.
4. Score of students speaking skill taught with communicative
language teaching method and low emotional intelligence
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument
of objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given
score 1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of experimental group of 10
students, taught by the communicative language teaching method. The
highest score 19 and lowest 11. Score obtained from the statistical
calculation of the average 15.4 median 15.5 mode 14 standard
deviation 2.45 and variance 6.04 the table as follows:
Table 4.5
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
communicative language teaching method and low emotional
intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
11 12 1 10 1 10 10.5 12.5
13 14 3 30 4 40 12.5 14.5
15 16 2 20 6 60 14.5 16.5
17 18 3 30 9 90 16.5 18.5
19 20 1 10 10 100 18.5 20.5
Total 10 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 2 people or 20%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 4 people or 40% and
above the class average of 4 people 40%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
5. Score of students speaking skill taught with conventional method
and high emotional intelligence
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument of
objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given score
1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of control group of 10
students, taught by the conventional method and high emotional
intelligence. The highest empirical score 19 and lowest 11. Score
obtained from the statistical calculation of the average 15.2 median 15
mode 15 standard deviation 2.82 and variance 7.95 the table as follows:
Table 4.6
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
conventional method and high emotional intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
11 12 2 20 2 20 10.5 12.5
13 14 2 20 4 40 12.5 14.5
15 16 3 30 7 70 14.5 16.5
17 18 1 10 8 80 16.5 18.5
19 20 2 20 10 100 18.5 20.5
Total 10 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 3 people or 30%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 4 people or 40% and
above the class average of 3 people 30%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
6. Score of students speaking skill taught with conventional method
and low emotional intelligence
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument of
objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given score
1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of control group of 10
students, taught by the conventional method and low emotional
intelligence. The highest empirical score 17 and lowest 9. Score
obtained of the statistical calculation of the average 12,8 median 13
mode 13 standard deviation 2.39 and variance 5,73 the table as follows:
Table 4.7
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill taught with
communicative language teaching method and low emotional
intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
9 10 2 20 2 10 8.5 10.5
11 12 2 20 4 40 10.5 12.5
13 14 4 40 8 80 12.5 14.5
15 16 1 10 9 90 14.5 16.5
17 18 1 10 10 100 16.5 18.5
Total 10 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 4 people or 20%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 4 people or 40% and
above the class average of 2 people 20%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
7. Score of students speaking skill that has high emotional
intelligence
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument of
objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given score
1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. Respondents of control group of 10
students have high emotional intelligence. The highest empirical score
20 and lowest 11. Score obtained from the statistical calculation of the
average 15.85 median 16 mode 16 standard deviation 2.83 and variance
8.02 the table as follows:
Table 4.8
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill that has high
emotional intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
11 12 3 15 3 15 10.5 12.5
13 14 4 20 7 35 12.5 14.5
15 16 5 25 12 60 14.5 16.5
17 18 3 15 15 75 16.5 18.5
19 20 5 25 20 100 18.5 20.5
Total 20 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 5 people or 25%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 7 people or 35% and
above the class average of 8 people 40%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
8. Score of students speaking skill that has low emotional intelligence
Measurement data of students speaking skill using instrument
of objective test of multiple choice with five answer options, a total of
about 20 items. Each item if question is answered correctly given score
1 and if the answer is wrong given score 0, so that the range of
respondents score is 0 to 20. The highest empirical score 19 and lowest
9. Score obtained from the statistical calculation of the average 14.1
median 14 mode 14 standard deviation 2.71 and variance 7.35 the table
as follows:
Table 4.9
Frequency distribution of students speaking skill that has low
emotional intelligence
CLASS
Frequency
Comulative
Frequency
Class Limit
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Absolute
Relative
(%)
Lower Upper
9 10 2 10 2 10 8.5 10.5
11 12 3 15 5 25 10.5 12.5
13 14 7 35 12 60 12.5 14.5
15 16 3 15 15 75 14.5 16.5
17 18 4 20 19 95 16.5 18.5
19 20 1 5 20 100 18.5 20.5
Total 20 100
From the table above can be explained that the research subject
which had scores on the average there are 5 people or 35%. Research
subject which is below the class average there are 5 people or 25% and
above the class average of 8 people 40%. The data is quite well and is
not much variety.
B. TEST OF DATA ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
1. Normality Test
To determine whether or not normal variable then tested for
normality by using the test of kolmogorof - Smirnof with SPSS 18. In this
case we tested the null hypothesis (Ho). To reject Ho performed by
comparing the P-value with significance level 0.05, or compare with the
significance score based on the following criteria:
If the score of sig. > 0.05; then the data are normally distributed
If the score of sig. < 0.05; then data are not normally distributed
Table 22
Normality Test of Data Research
No Group P-value Conclusion
1 A1 0.938 Normal distribution
2 A2 0.964 Normal distribution
3 B1 0.909 Normal distribution
4 B2 0.955 Normal distribution
5 A1B1 0.996 Normal distribution
6 A1B2 0.987 Normal distribution
7 A2B1 0.990 Normal distribution
8 A2B2 0.994 Normal distribution
From the results of calculations with spss 18 above, all the sig. > 0.05 and
thus all the data are normal distribution.
2. Homogeneity test
In the analysis of differences in addition to fulfill the assumption that
the data comes from normal distribution population, must also meet the
assumption of homogeneity of variance. Homogeneity test aims to
determine whether the variance derived from a homogeneous population.
Homogeneity test data results on students speaking skill carried out by
Levene test at significant level 0.05. For testing homogeneity, proposed the
following hypothesis:
Ho: The data comes from a homogeneous population
Hi : Data derived from populations that are not homogeneous criteria:
If the score of sig (Levene's test) > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the
Hi rejected
If the score of sig (Levene's test) <0.05; then Hi accepted and
Ho rejected
Table 23
Levene's Test of Equality of Error variances
Dependent Variable: students speaking skill
F df1 df2 Sig.
.225 3 36 .878
Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable
is equal across groups.
From the above data with the calculated values obtained spss 16 sig. 0.600
> 0.05 so Ho rejected and accepted and Hi data come from a homogeneous
population
C. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES TESTING
Test ANAVA 2 Direction
Table 4.10
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Students speaking skill
Source
Type III
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
F Sig.
Corrected Model
Intercept
Teaching Method
EmotionalIntelligence
Teaching Method *
EmotionalIntelligence
Error
Total
Corrected Total
72.875
a
8970.025
38.025
30.625
34.225
250.100
9293.000
322.975
3
1
1
1
1
36
40
39
24.292
8970.025
38.025
30.625
34.225
6.947
3.497
1.291E3
5.473
4.408
5.608
.025
.000
.025
.043
.044
R Squared = .226 (Adjusted R Squared = .161)
Based on the data above can be concluded:
1) Testing Hypothesis 1:
Ho: There is no effect teaching method upon students speaking skill
Hi : There is effect teaching method upon students speaking skill
The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient.
If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected
If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected
Of the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method 0.025 <
0.05 can thus be concluded there is an effect teaching method upon
student's speaking skills.
2) Testing Hypothesis 2:
Ho : Thre is no effect the emotional intelligence upon students
speaking skill
Hi : Thre is effect emotional intelligence upon students speaking skill
The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient.
If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected
If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected
Of the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method 0.043
< 0.05 can thus be concluded there is an effect emotional intelligence
upon student's speaking skills.
3) Testing Hypothesis 3:
Ho : There is no effect interaction between teaching method and
emotional intelligence upon students speaking skill.
Hi : There is effect interaction between teaching method and emotional
intelligence upon students speaking skill.
The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient.
If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected
If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected
From the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method and
emotional intelligence 0.044 < 0.05 can be concluded that there are
effects between teaching method and emotional intelligence upon
students speaking skill. Based on the result, the further test is needed.
Further test
Multiple Comparisons
Students speaking skill
Tukey HSD
(I)
Class
(J)
Class
Mean
Difference
(I J)
Std.
Error Sig.
95% Confidence Interval
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
1 2
3
4
1.100
1.305*
5.111*
.657
.642
.675
.004
.000
.000
-.07
1.73
3.29
3.47
5.18
6.93
2 1
3
4
-1.100
1.755*
2.601
.657
.642
.675
.004
.046
.000
-3.47
.03
1.59
.07
3.48
5.23
3 1
2
4
-1.305*
-1.755*
2.400
.642
.642
.660
.000
.046
.006
-5.18
-3.48
-.12
-1.73
-.03
3.44
4 1
2
3
-5.111*
-2.601*
-2.400
.675
.675
.660
.000
.000
.006
-6.93
-5.23
-3.44
-3.29
-1.59
.12
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level
Based on the further test above can be concluded that:
a) Class 1 with class 2: seen that the mean difference of (1.1), it
means the difference between the average grades 1 and 2 of (1.1).
This value can be proven with a significance score, was sig = 0.04
< 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between class 1
and class 2.
b) Grade 1 to Grade 3: seen that the mean difference of (3.455),
meaning that the average difference between grade 1 and 3 of (1.3).
This score can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.00
< 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 1
and grade 3.
c) Class 2 to grade 4: shows that the mean difference of (2.6),
meaning that the average difference between grade 2 and 4 of (2.6).
This value can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.00
< 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 2
and grade 4
d) Grade 3 to Grade 4: shows that the mean difference of (2.4),
meaning that the average difference between grade 3 and 4 of (2.4).
This value can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.06
< 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 3
and grade 4
D. INTERPRETATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS
From the analysis of data above can be interpreted as follows:
1) There is the effect of teaching method upon student's speaking skills.
It is characterized by a significant score to the teaching method
0.025 < 0.05 can thus be concluded there is effect teaching method
upon the student's speaking skills. This is supported by the acquisition
of a mean score of the learning of result with communicative language
teaching method is 15.9 higher than the score of the conventional
method with 14.0. This phenomenon shows the learning result of
students speaki ng skill increases when students are taught with
communicative language teaching method. The use of communicative
language teaching method can improve learning result for the use of
teaching method to be more challenged for students to explore the
material, more creative, fun and not boring
2) There is the effect of emotional intelligence on learning result in
speaking skill.
It is characterized by significant values for emotional
intelligence 0043 < 0.05 can thus be concluded there is the effect of
emotional intelligence on learning result in speaking skill. This is
supported by the acquisition of a mean score of the learning of
speaking skill with high emotional intelligence 15.85 higher than low
emotional intelligence of 14.1. This phenomenon indicates that the
student has a strong interest in making students more confident in
answering questions, learning more fun because there is no element of
coercion, a high awareness of bigger and feel responsible.
3) There are effects of interaction between teaching method and
emotional intelligence upon students speaking skill.
It is characterized by the sig to the teaching method and
emotional intelligence 0.044 < 0.05 can thus be concluded there is an
interaction between teaching method and emotional intelligence upon
students speaking skill. Based on these results, then further testing is
needed. From further testing can be seen that each class/group has a
significant effect upon the learning of speaking skill
D. LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH
Researcher recognize several limitations in this study as follows:
1. The factors that have the effects on speaking skills are restricted to two
variables, namely the teaching method and emotional intelligence.
There are many other variables that affect the speaking skill.
2. The research was conducted within the scope of the SMK PGRI 1
Jakarta in the Ministry of education and culture, so in the future still
research is needed in a wider scope in order to obtain better results.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION
A. CONCLUSION
From the data analysis, the research findings of the research are
as follows:
1. Learning result of students speaking skill with communicative
language teaching method is higher than students taught by
conventional method, or in other word there is a significant difference
in effect between the communicative language teaching method with
conventional learning method on students speaking skill. This is
supported by obtaining an average score of the learning of students
speaking skill with communicative language teaching method 15.9
higher than the conventional learning method on students speaking
skill with 14.00.
2. The result of the students speaking skill of the high emotional
intelligence is higher than students low emotional intelligence. Or in
other word there is a significant difference in effect emotional
intelligence upon students speaking skill. This is supported by
obtaining an average score of the students speaking skill with high
emotional intelligence 15.85 higher from 14.10 low emotional
intelligence.
3. There are effects of interaction between teaching method and
emotional intelligence upon students speaking skill. It is
characterized by a significant score to the method of learning and
emotional intelligence 0.044 < 0.05 can be concluded there is an
interaction effect between teaching method and emotional intelligence
upon students speaking skill. Based on these results, then further
testing is needed. From further testing can be seen that each
class/group has a significant effect on the students speaking skill.
From the data above average grade students speaking skill of
experiment with communicative language teaching with high
emotional intelligence was 16.5. While the average of students
speaking skill by communicative language teaching method with low
emotional intelligence was 15.4. The result of students speaking skill
in the classroom control with conventional learning method of and
high emotional intelligence is obtained the following results: an
average of 15.20 while the students speaking skill with conventional
teaching method and low emotional intelligence obtained a lower
average of 12.80.
B. IMPLICATIONS
The implications of the research findings contribute to the
learning process of English at private vocational school of second
grade at SMK PGRI 1 Jakarta. There are some aspects which could be
analyzed related to the implications of these research findings, and
they will be elaborated as follows:
Implications of Research Findings
1. Teaching Method
The research findings show that the students speaking skill of
English from communicative language teaching method is significant.
The research is limited on students speaking skill. In experiment class,
the researcher used communicative language teaching method in which
the researcher implemented transactional model. This model demands
students involve directly to the learning process. In supporting this
model, the researcher attempted to create a conductive situation in
class where students might be encouraged to be responsible for the
learning process. Students are led to be braver in expressing their
thought and feeling during the learning process. By encouraging the
students to be brave, it is easy for the researcher to persuade them to
collaborate with each other. The activities in class are emphasized on
the process on learning English so as those making errors or mistakes
are considered to be normal and the teacher is expected to just give
feedback.
Communicative language teaching method is designed to
engage learners in an authentic, functional use of language for
meaningful purposes. Students in a communicative class ultimately
have to use the language productively and receptively, unrehearsed
contexts outside the classroom. Students are given opportunities to
focus on their own learning process through an understanding of their
own styles of learning. Students are, therefore, encouraged to construct
meaning through interaction with each others. In communicative
language teaching method, students learn the target language by trial
and error, in which they try to use all varieties of English without
having fear of making error or mistake. Error or mistakes is not
considered as a sin, so, they would not be punished for making mistake
or error. In dealing with those who make mistake or error by
discussing it with students. Language skills are improved effectively
through giving the students some authentic experiences of learning
English. As teacher attempts to give some genuine or authentic
materials, students therefore learn the target language as naturally as
possible.
2. Emotional Intelligence upon students speaking skill
The research findings show that the score of high emotional
intelligence students learning achievement of English is higher than
that of low emotional intelligence students learning achievement of
English. Basically, students emotional intelligence can be increased
and emotional intelligence is counted in all methods since during all
learning process students should motivate themselves if they went to
succeed. Students who are able to cope with their own emotion tend to
be more productive and effective in doing their tasks. Learning
English, especially, needs students patience since English is
considered as one of difficult subjects. This fact demands teacher of
English to which makes students interact and collaborate each other. In
collaborative learning process, low emotional intelligence students are,
therefore, expected to be able to cope their emotion since they are
trained to make contact with others. By making contact gradually, they
can motivate themselves to learn English. They can encourage
themselves to express their feeling and thought. Beside that, teacher of
English can cooperate with students parents by giving them some
information about their childrens emotional intelligence so as they
also can treat their children in appropriate ways. There should be
regularly meetings in which teachers and parents can share and solve
any problem appealing to the learning process.
3. Interaction between teaching method and emotional intelligence
The research findings show that there is an effect of interaction
between teaching method and emotional intelligence. Communicative
language method demands interaction and collaboration among
students. In interactive and collaborative situations, students always
discuss, share information, and report the result. Interaction and
collaboration give students meaningful learning process and establish
students intellectual capacity as well as prepare them to live in
society. Students who have high emotional intelligence can motivate
themselves, cope with their emotional in every situation, and
understand someones emotion. These factors support the learning
process using communicative language teaching method in which this
method demands students to be always in interactive and collaborative
situations. By doing interaction and collaboration, it is also expected
that low emotional students can be trained to be more active and
responsible for their own learning. Emotional intelligence, however,
can be trained and improved by making social contacts. Teachers are
demanded to conduct the learning process all students in class.
Teachers are to monitor each of their students including their emotion.
To make the learning process betterment, teacher can administer the EI
Questionnaire to know their emotion. Teachers can vary the methods
will be used in class in accordance with students emotion.
C. SUGGESTIONS
Regarding to the research findings, some suggestions emerge
as follows:
1. In implementing the teaching method in class, some factors must
be considered, especially those which are closely related to
students personality. Since there is an effect of intersection
between teaching method and students emotion, teachers should
use some methods in one learning process. It is advisable for
teachers to know their students emotion in advance as to make
teachers easy combine some methods-eclectic method-in one
learning process. In implementing the combined method, the
aspects of students physical, mental and intellectual characters
should be deeply taken into consideration to group orientation,
from teacher-centered to student-centered.
2. In implementing an eclectic method, however, teachers should not
forget to lead and guide their students to be brave in expressing
their feeling and though during the learning process. It is expected
that emotional students can follow the learning process with
enjoyment.
3. Teacher should do not some kinds of evaluation such as process
evaluation and product evaluation. In doing the evaluations, teacher
should involve students to judge their own progress.
4. Teacher should be sensitive in responding students reactions in
every activity and lead them towards the activities which have been
previously planned. Teacher should find out some strategies to
encourage students courage in facing and solving the problems.
5. Teacher should be aware of students emotional intelligence. It
must be concerned due to the fact that emotional intelligence is
very crucial in any business done by human beings in real life.
Beside expecting tem to master English, teacher should expect that
students can increase their emotional intelligence. Increasing
students emotional intelligence can be done by selecting teaching
method or combining some teaching method which make students
interact and collaborate each other.
REFERECES
Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching,
NY: Addison Wesley Ltd. 2000
Harmer, Jeremy. How to Teach English, Longman: Addison Wesley Ltd.
1998
Harris, Duncan and Chris Bell. Evaluating and Assessing for Learning,
New Jersey: Nichols Publishing Company, 1996
Jack C. Richards and Theodore S. Rodgers, Approches and Methods in
Language Teaching, Cambridge University press, 2003
Jeremy Harmer, How to teach English (Longman: Addison Wesley
Longman Limited, 1998
Lightbown, Patsy M. and Nina Spada, How Languages are Learnt,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993
Littlewood, William. Communicative Language Teaching, Cambridge
University Press, 1981
Mayer, J. D., DiPaolo, M. T., & Salovey, P.. Perceiving affective content
in ambiguous visual stimuli: A component of emotional intelligence.
J ournal of Personality Assessment,1990
Mayer, John D.; Salovey, Peter; Caruso, David R.. Emotional
intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist,
2008
Mayer, J. D., Barsade, S. G., & Roberts, R. D. Human abilities: Emotional
intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 2008
Morgan, Clifford T. et.all., Introduction to Psychology, Singapore: Mc
Graw Hill Book c., 1986
Patsy M. Lightbown and Nina Spada, How Languages are Learned
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993
Richard C Yorkey,"Study skill for students of English as a second
language"(Newyork :MC.Grow Hill, Inc,1990
Salovey, P. & Mayer, J.D.. Emotional intelligence. I magination,
Cognition, and Personality, 1990
The article, "UNH Prof..." was: Rose, D.. Exploring the emotional
landscape. Fosters Daily Democrat, 1995
ATTACHMENT
ACTION PLAN
Name of School : SMK PGRI 1 Jakarta
Subject : English
Class/semester : X1/3
Meeting : 1-2
Time : 4 x 45 minutes
Standard of Competence : Communicate using English equivalents
Elementary
Basic Competencies : Revealing a wide range of mean heart.
Indicators:
Using speech act stating the phrase to express the right certainty.
Using speech act states expression for the right bargaining.
Using the expression for the speech acts express their opinions/opinions
correctly.
Using speech act stating the phrase to express consent (agreeing, disagreeing).
Instructional Goals
Student can understand the expression of various heart meaning.
Materials
Giving invitations
Expressing certainty
Expressing opinions
Expressing agreement and disagreement
Expressing argument
Teaching Method
Communicative Langauge Teaching Method
Assigment
Questions and Answers
Demonstration
Learning Steps
A. Activities Introduction
A.1. Apperception:
praying and greetings
Discussion
Attendance of students
A.2. Motivation:
Introduction of the material and its benefits to motivate students.
Ask the students the material that has not been understood and will
Asked or discussed again
B. Core Activities
B. 1. Students are given an explanation of the subject matter and purpose.
B.2. Students are guided to say the giving invitations, expressing certainty,
expressing opinions, expressing agreement and disagreement and
expressing argument in English as well.
B.3. With the guidance of a teacher:
B.3.1 Students discuss the results obtained.
B.3.2 Students make inferences from the activities carried out.
B.3.3 Students working on a book about the practice of the source.
B.3.4 Discuss the matter is considered difficult by students.
C. The final activity
C.1. Make a summary of what has been learned.
C.2. Asked students to write down what they felt
during the learning activities.
C.3. Give homework to work on a book about the practice of the source.
Tools and Learning Resources
A. Facilities:
Class/language lab and its equipment
Tools that support
B. Learning Resources:
LKS for English
Global Access to the world of work
English Grammar in Use
Person to person
English-Indonesian dictionary
Evaluation
A. Procedure : Test early, test observations / process, the final test
B. Types of tests : Oral and written
C. Form tests : Multiple choice and essay
Jakarta, February ,2012
Reseacher
Supadi
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Choose the correct alternative a, b, c, d or e!
2. Put a cross (x) on the alternative that have been provided!
3. All the questions have to be answered so there are no questions left.
4. I thank the students for their participation for the success of this research.
RESPONDENT:
Name :___________________________
Class : ___________________________
1. Donny : We would like to invite you to come to our charity concert.
Karina : come. Where is the concert?
Donny : It's in our school hall on Sunday morning, could you invite your
colleagues to come with you?
Karina : Oh, I'll try. I'm proud of you, Boy. You really do a good deed.
Donny : Thank you, sir
a. I think so
b. Yes, youre right
c. I agree with you
d. I suppose so
e. I'd really love to
2. Dimas : I'm having a party on Saturday night, Anton. Could you and
Keisha come to my party?
Anton : but I'm afraid we can't. We're going out with our parents for
dinner.
Dimas : Oh, that is okay.
Anton : Thanks for the invitation.
a. I dont think so
b. I have a lot of work to do
c. We'd love to
d. Im not sure
e. I am very certain
3. Custamer : How much should I pay for my bill?
Cashier : It is Rp.250.000.
Custamer : Should I pay it...?
Cashier : Oh no, you can pay by your credit card.
a. on my account
b. by installment
c. for my bill
d. by cash
e. in advance 20
4. Dewi : Hello, would you like to come to my house tonight? We will have a
birthday party for my youngest sister.
Donny : Yes sure, .
a. Id love too
b. I dont think so
c. I have a lot of work to do
d. Would you like to have dinner with me
e. Im sorry I cant
5. Anita : Excuse me, do you think the bus will leave on time?
Cinta : Yes, I am sure it will.
The underlined utterance expresses.
a. certainty
b. doubtful
c. disappoinment
d. d. interest
e. agreement
6. Erni : How can you do the test?
Yani: I have a prepared it well, though.
a. Im not sure
b. I am very certain
c. I believe I can do it
d. I am happy to get good mark
e. I dont worry about it
7. Brian has just come through the customs at Jakarta
Airport. Jack meets him.
Jack : I expect you're glad to be on land again.
Brian : I was a good traveller, but I don't want to go through a trip like
that anymore.
Jack : No, I don't suppose you do. I imagine you're feeling tried now.
Brian : Yes, of course. Let's go to the hotel.
Jack : Ok.
a. Im not sure
b. Certainly. I thought
c. I believe I can do it
d. I am happy to get good mark
e. I dont worry about it
8. Retno : I think it is going to rain.
Sinta : its hot here and the sky is vey clear.
a. I think so
b. Yes, youre right
c. I agree with you
d. I suppose so
e. I dont think so
9. Budi : Its cloudy. Do you think its going to rain.
Aji : we are going to watch a football match, arent we?
a. I hope that
b. I dont believe
c. I couldnt help it
d. Im not sure
e. I agree with you
10. Reza : I think this soup is delicious.
Fahmi : its too hot for me.
a. I dont think so
b. I agree with you
c. I think so
d. Of course
e. Its all right
11. Laila : Look! Fathiya is beautiful with pink dress.
Sandra : she looks very young too.
a. Not at all
b. I dont know
c. I think so
d. I dont think so
e. Why do you think like that?
12. Farrel : What about going to the stadium?
Jessica : .
Farrel : I think it is necessary to bring an umbrella.
Jessica : I don't agree with you.
a. I don't think so
b. Not at all
c. It's all right
d. I disagree with you
e. I agree with you
13. Najla and Afiya are in the cinema. They are Sam watching film "Sang
Pencerah". Both of them enjoy it so much.
Najla : I think this film is so great. What do you think?
Afiya : ...
a. I don't think so
b. Not at all
c. It's all right.
d. I disagree with you
e. I agree with you
14. Beni and Fauzan are watching football match on television.
Beni : I think the match is interesting.
Fauzan : ... It makes me bored.
a. certainly
b. I am sure it is
c. I don't think so
d. I think so
e. I don't know
15. Dani : Would you go to the movie on Saturday night?
Eni : ... Do you want to pick me up?
Dani : Yeah, be ready before seven,
a. Great, I'd love to
b. Are you serious?
c. Are you kidding?
d. I'm so sorry
e. Nice invitation, but I can't.
16. Your brother has just got the first prize on swimming competition.
You : ... my brother. You've got the first prize.
Your brother: Thank you.
a. Oh, dear
b. Congratulation
c. How cheerful
d. Nice to see you
e. I'm sorry
17. Siska : Well done! You've passed the final examination.
Mela : ....
a. Nonsense.
b. I'm delighted to hear that.
c. I'm sorry to hear that.
d. No problem.
e. That's all right.
18. You come to a place for the first time. You are impressed with the view.
You say: "...!"
a. How is the beautiful place
b. What a beautiful place it is
c. What is a beautiful the place
d. How beautiful is the place
e. What place is beautiful
19. Sam : "Do you think the mechanic will come soon?
Toni : ... He is always punctual.
a. I doubt it.
b. Certainly not.
c. I'm absolutely sure.
d. It depends you know.
e. I don't think he will.
20. Fenti : Are you sure it will rain today?
Azis : the run is very bright.
a. Certainly
b. I'm sure
c. Of course not
d. I think so
e. You're right
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
Directions:
1. Answer all the provided statements
2. Cross (X) the answer alternative based on the real situation
3. There is no wrong answer, please answer all
1. When I feel happy I dont know what or who upsetting me.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
2. Even when I do my test I feel guilty about the things that did not get
done.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
3. Everybody has problems but there are so many things wrong with me
that I am simply myself.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
4. When I am upset I can pinpoint exactly what aspect of the problem bugs
me.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
5. Some people make me feel bad about myself, no matter what I doing
things.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
6. I buy things that I cant really afford.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
7. When I mess up, I say self-depreciating things, such as I am such a
loser,
stupid, student, I cant do anything right,.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
8. I am ashamed about how I look or behave.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
9. I feel uneasy in situations where I am expected to display affection.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
10. I feel weird when I hug someone other than my close family.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
11. When I see something that I like or want I cant get it out of my head
until I get it.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
12. Although there might be things to improve, I like myself the way I am
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
13. I say things that I later regret.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
14. I get into a mode where I feel strong, capable and competent.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
15. I panic when I have to face someone who is angry.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
16. I am under the impression that peoples reactions come out of the blue.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
17. I have a need to make a difference.
a. very true b. mostly true c. somewhat true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
18. I can not get over the guilt that I feel because of trivial mistakes and
faux pas that I made.
a. very true b. mostly true c. somewhat true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
19. When I achieve something, I run into obstacles that keep me from
reaching result.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
20. I can not stop thinking about my problems.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
21. I will do whatever I can keep myself from crying.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
22. I have difficulty saying things like I love you even when I feel them.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
23. I enjoy spending time with my friends.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
24. I do my best even if there is nobody to see it.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
25. I am bored.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
26. I pay people compliments when they deserve them.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
27. I am wrong about things that other people dont even think about.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
28. I need someones push in order to get going.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
29. People who are emotional make me uncomfortable.
a. very true b. mostly true c. somewhat true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
30. When someone does me a favor without being asked, I wonder what
his/her real agenda.
a. very true b. mostly true c. somewhat true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
31. My life is full of dead ends.
a. very true b. mostly true c. somewhat true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
32. I am not satisfied with k work unless someone else praises it.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
33. When I hear about someone elses problems, several possible solutions
immediately pop.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
34. I do what people expect me to, even when I disagree with them.
a. most b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
35. When someone does me a favor without being asked, I wonder
what his/her real agenda.
a. very true b. mostly true c. some what true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
36. My life is full of dead ends.
a. very true b. mostly true c. some what true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
37. I am not satisfied with my work unless someone else praises it.
a. very true b. mostly true c. some what true d. mostly not true
e. not true at all
38. I do what people expect me to, even when I disagree with them.
a. most of them b. often c. sometimes d. rarely e. almost never
BIOGRAPHY
Supadi was born in Pati, on May 5, 1965. After graduate from elementary
school (SD) Tanggel in 1980 continue to yunior high school (SMP) PGRI 5
Winong and graduate in 1983. In 1993 continue to senior high school (SMA) 2
Rembang and graduate in 1996.
In 1997 continue at the University of Muhammadiyah Surakarta (UMS),
Program of Diploma III of Department of English Education and graduate in
1990. In 1996, continue at the University of Jambi (Unja), S1 program of
Department of English Education and graduate in 1997.
In 2003 continue at the State Islamic Institute (IAIN) STS Jambi, Post
Graduate Program (S2) the concentration of the Islamic Educational Management.
In 2010 continue at the Indraprasta University PGRI Jakarta Master Program (S2)
the concentration of English Education. Profession as a lecturer in Unindra PGRI
Jakarta.
Married to Sudarti, S.PdI, born in Pati, on January 9, 1966
Gifted children:
1. Nur Hamidah, born in Jambi on January 4, 1994
2. Muhammad Najib, born in Jambi on July 12, 1997
3. Nur Hasanah, born in Jakarta on June 22, 2008