Monday, September 6, 2010

Peer Assessment, Achievement Motivation, writing Achievement

THE EFFECT OF PEER ASSESMENT ON STUDENTS’ WRITING ACHIEVEMENT WITH DIFFERING ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION

By I.G.A. Lokita Purnamika Utami

Abstract
The aim of this study was to prove whether the implementation of peer assessment and the students’ achievement motivation give a significant interactional effect to the students’ writing achievement. The results of the analysis are; first, there was a significant effect of peer assessment on the students’ writing achievement. Second, there was a significant interactional effect between the application of peer assessment and achievement motivation on students’ writing achievement. Afterwards the data was analyzed by using Tukey test to gain more specific result of the comparison between all means.
Keywords: achievement motivation, peer assessment, writing achievement

Abstrak
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk membuktikan apakah implementasi dari asesmen rekan sebaya dan motivasi berprestasi siswa memiliki pengaruh interaksional yang signifikan terhadap prestasi menulis mahasiswa. Hasil analisis menunjukkan: pertama, asesmen rekan sebaya memberikan pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap prestasi menulis mahasiswa. Kedua, terdapat pengaruh interaksional yang signifikan antara asesmen rekan sebaya dan motivasi berprestasi terhadap prestasi menulis mahasiswa. Kemudian analisis data dilanjutkan dengan menggunakan tes Tukey untuk melihat perbandingan dari seluruh rata-rata kelompok.secara lebih spesifik.
Kata kunci: motivasi berprestasi, asesmen rekan sebaya, prestasi menulis

1. Introduction

Writing as one of the language skills is very important to be mastered. This is because people communicate not only in spoken but also written. Considering that rationale, teaching writing need to be taken seriously in class. Writing activity is a very personal activity. However, assessing writing is not. Students need others to help them assess their writing. And this can be done by their lecturer or by their peer.
Some researches have been conducted regarding the application of peer assessment in the writing class and the comparison between peer assessment and the conventional assessment used in writing class. However, this research investigated one more variable, it was achievement motivation students.
The students may be categorized into high achievement motivated and students with low achievement motivation. The theory says that motivation is one which influences human to attain their goals (Heckhausen & Heckhaussen, 2008). Therefore, theoretically students with high achievement motivation will improve their achievement better than students with low achievement motivation. However, there is a question related to the writing achievement improvement of particular level of achievement motivated students when they are treated by using peer assessment. Do students with high achievement motivation still do better than students with low achievement motivation? If they do, what make it so? This research tried to find out whether an interaction exist between peer assessment and achievement motivation in improving writing achievement.
Specifically, there were 6 objectives which were related with the statements of problems to be resolved in this research. They were: (1) finding out whether peer assessment give a significant effect on the students’ writing achievement; (2) finding out whether a significant interactional effect exists between peer assessment and students’ achievement motivation in improving the students’ writing achievement; (3) finding out whether a significant difference on the writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation exists when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment and when their writings are assessed by conventional assessment; (4) finding out whether a significant difference on the writing achievement of the students with low achievement motivation exists when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment and when their writing are assessed by conventional assessment; (5) finding out whether a significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation exists when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment; (6) finding out whether a significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation exists when their writings are assessed by conventional assessment



2. Theoretical Review

2.1 L2 Acquisition Theories

Krashen (in Ellis, 1986) considers the notion of how affective factors relate to SLA. It is ‘affective’ because the factors which determine its stregth have to do with the learners’ motivation, self confidence and anxiety state. Learners with high motivation and self confidence and low anxiety have low filters and so obtain and let in plenty of input. Learners with low motivation, little self confidence and high anxiety have high filters and so receive little input and allow even less in. Another factors which influence the rate of SLA development is aptitude, the role of first language, routines and patterns, individual differences and age.
The theories above underpin certain strategies used by teacher to improve students L2 learning. These strategies may consist of involving students in contextual interaction or communication; enhancing students’ motivation by providing students with various activity, media and so on; introducing target language culture as it may enhance students’ favourable comparison betwen their ingroup and outgroup; and reducing students’ anxiety and heightening students’ self confidence in L2 class by involving students in the process of learning and assessment.

2.2 The Concept of Writing

Olshtain (2001) explains that writing is an act of communication, which suggests an interactive process takes place between the writer and reader via written text. In addition Orwig (1998) defines writing as a process of communicating thought of the writer through a medium of text. It is used for communicating indirectly, not face to face to others (Tarigan, 1994). The writer usually has a bound of time to think about what to say and how to say it.
Hakim (2004) states that writing is mainly an effort to express what we look, undergo, feel and think. Through writing we communicate to many people, we might otherwise never meet. Writers can explore their deepest thoughts and feelings, discover and explore their ideas, and confront their values. Writing can help us discover gaps in our understanding and flaws in our thinking. It is one of the ways of sharing or expressing thoughts, ideas, and feelings in the written form
To be a more effective writer, a writer should meet the understanding that writing is a process. As stated by Langan (2001) that writing is a process of discovery that involves a series of steps of practices. Therefore, the assumption that writing is a ‘natural gift’ should not be considered, since writing is a skill that can be trained.
Langan (2001) points out some steps in writing an effective composition. First, discovering a point and developing solid support for the point through prewriting. Second, organizing the supporting material and writing it out in a first draft. Third, revising and then editing carefully to ensure an effective, error-free paper
However, Gardner and Johnson (1997) believe that writing process is not a highly organized linear process, but rather a continual movement between the different steps of the writing model. Flower And Hayes (1981) believe that writing involves a cognitive process. They state that the model of Prewriting - Writing – Rewriting which was fundamentally believe as the three non-reversible linear stages in composing process, only model the growth of the product and do not explain how writers move from one stage to the next. It is clear that writers plan, write and revise repeatedly, in a way which cannot be divided into clearcut stages. They published “A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing” in 1981, providing the groundwork for further research into how thought processes influence the writing process.
Beside the theory of writing as a cognitive process, writing is also said as a creative process. Creativity is one of the important benchmarks for a writer. All writing flows out of some sort of creative process. Each writer is different and their creative process is also different. Works for one writer may not work for others (Brereton and Morgan, 1996).

2.3 Peer Assessment in Writing
Hanna & Dettmer (2004) states that assessment is often equated and confused with evaluation, but the two concepts are different. Assessment is used to determine what a student knows or can do, while evaluation is used to determine the worth or value of a course or program
]Assessment in writing can be done by involving students, this is know as peer assessment. Falchikov (2001) states that peer assessment is an assessment in which member of a class give feedback and grade the work or perfomance of their peers using relevant criteria. In peer assessment marks may be awarded by students or negotiated with teachers. Peer assessment has been long introduced as one of assessment in writing. This assessment involves students to review their peer’s paper and put notes or comments on grammar, ideas organization, vocabulary, structure, punctuation and so forth. This way students learn from each others in every dimension of writing, i.e. content accuracy, vocabulary knowledge, grammar and sentence structure and also ideas organization. In line with this, Falchikov (2001) points out that the objective to have students review their peer’s writing is to enable students to teach and learn from each other and also to develop writing skill. Moreover, more errors are corrected since more proof reading is carried out.
In addition, Ahmad (2001) found that peer involvement in writing class is very beneficial to be considered. He found that students are more challenged since they could give feedback on each other writings. Each students tries to write a good piece of writing, since they know that their writing will gain feedback from the others. Besides, students feel confident to write as they also learn that making mistake is something natural, something that their peer possibly do. Also, peer involvement in writing helps students to learn not only from their mistakes but from the mistakes of others and makes economical and efficient use of the students' and the teacher's time (Mcbride, 2006). In line with this, Zulharman (2007) states that assessment by peers give students chance to learn from the strength and weaknesses of other’s writing, since in peer assessment students are involved not only grading it but also in reviewing it.

2.4 Achievement Motivation

Motivation is defined by Rabideau (2005) as the driving force behind all the actions of an individual. The influence of an individual's needs and desires both have a strong impact on the direction of their behavior. Motivation is based on your emotions and achievement-related goals.
Generally motivation can be from the students’ inside factor, which is called internal motivation; and can be from outside factors, which is called external motivation. In other term, Heckhausen & Heckhausen (2008) states that motivation is a product of person and situation. An Individual’s motivation to aspire to a certain goal is influenced by person factors (internal factors) and by situation factors (external factors), including the anticipated outcomes. Those belong to the students’ external motivation (or as Heckhausen’s term the situation factors) are the students’ environment, facilities, parents support, their teacher or peer. And those belong to internal motivation or person factors are students need for achievement, students expectetion and another internal desire.
Achievement is undoubtedly the most thoroughly studied motive. Over the years behavioral scientists have observed that some people have an intense need to achieve; others, perhaps the majority, do not seem to be as concerned about achievement. It was first identified in Henry A. Murray’s list of psychogenic need as “n(eed) achievement”. It is describe in the following terms:
To accomplish something difficult. To master, manipulate or organize physical objects, human beings or ideas. To do this as rapidly and as independently as possible. To overcome obstacles and attain a high satndard. To excel one’s self. To rival and surpass others. To increase self regard by the succesful exercise of talent (Murray, 1938. P.164 in Hechausen, 2008)

Murray can also be considered a pioneer of achievement motivation research in another respect, namely, as the author of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). Later McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, and Lowell developed this instrument into one of the best known and most frequently used procedures for measuring people’s underlying motives. McClelland and associates (1953) as cited by Brunstein & Heckhausen (2008) defined Achievement Motivation as a behavior which involves competition with a standard of excellent. Similarly, Heckhausen & Heckhausen (2008) states that achievement motive can be defined as a recurrent concern to compete with standards of excellence and to exceed the previous levels of competence. People with achievement motivation will always try to increase their competence.

3 Research Methods
This research was done in the English Education Departement at Ganesha University of Education in Singaraja, Bali. The research was conducted in one semester, specifically in the odd semester of the academic year 2009/2010, which was started from September 2009 until January 2010.
The research design was a Posttest Only Control-Group Design using a 2x2 Factorial arrangement One group received the experimental treatment (peer assessment) while the other received a different treatment (conventional assessment). This study used 2 x 2 factorial arrangement. There were 3 variables to be studied, 2 independent variables and 1 dependent variable. The first independent variable was writing assessment (A) as treatment variables. In this study the treatment variables were classified into peer assessment and conventional assessment. While, the second independent variable was achievement motivation in studying English (B) as moderator variable. The moderator variable was also classified into high achievement motivation and low achievement motivation. And the last, the dependent variable was writing achievement (Y).
The study was done in English Education Department in Undiksha, in academic year 2009-2010. The population was all students who took writitng II course. The total number of the population was 4 classes, which altogether consisted of 140 students. And the sample were 60 students which were assigned by using Multi Stage Random Sampling.
The instrument to collect data were writing test, and achievement motivation scale in studying english. Both of the instruments had been tried out to ensure their validity and reliability.
Data for this study were collected by using test and non test. Data which were collected by using test is writing achievement data. To collect this data the students were assigned to write a paragraph upon a particular topic. Their writings were then analyzed and scored by two raters which were based on the analytical assessment rubric. There were three writing test i.e. narrative test, descriptive test and cause and effect test. The students’ writings were assessed by two raters. Then, to ensure the reliability of the raters’ score, the inter-rater reliability analysis was conducted for each test.
The second data was the data which were collected by using non-test instrument. This data were collected by using the scale of Achievement Motivation in Studying English. The samples were given the scale to be responded. They marked a cross on each item in the scale which fits their characteristics. Score for each item was then added up to obtain Achievement Motivation in Studying English Score of each student
The data were analyzed by using descriptive statistic and inferential statistic. The inferential statistic was done by using two ways ANOVA and continued by post hoc analysis namely Tukey test. However, since two ways ANOVA and Tukey test are parametric statistical test, before the reseracher further analyzing data, the data were tested in order to find out whether it had normal distribution and homogeneity of variance or not. From the test namely The Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic to investigate the normality, it was found that the data was normally distributed. Also, Levene’s test of Equality of Error variance which was conducted in order to know the homogeneity of variance data, found that the data was homogeneous

4 Findings and Discussion

Based on the data analysis, some findings are resulted:
First, from the first hypothesis testing, it was found that FA was 4.678. This value (FA) was then compared to Fcv (1;56;0,04) which was 4.421. Since FA was higher than Fcv, then H0 was rejected. This means there was a significant difference in the students’ writing achievement between those whose writings are assessed by using peer assessment and those by using conventional assessment. And from the descrptive statistic analysis it was found that the students’ writing achievement of those whose writings were assessed by using peer assessment ( = 75.22) was higher than those whose writing were assessed by using conventional assessment ( = 70.91). From this result, it can be said that peer assessment gives a significant effect in improving students’ writing achievement.
Second, it was found that H0 of the second hypothesis was rejected. This was because the FAB (26.886) was higher than the Fcv (1;56;0,01) which was 7.110. This means that there was an interaction between the application of peer assessment and students’ achievement motivation in improving the students’ writing achievement.
Third, the average score of the group of students with high achievement motivation which were treated by using peer assessment was = 82.77. While the average score of the students with high achievement motivation which were treated by using conventional assessment was = 68.12. Moreover, the Tukey analysis found that the Qob was 7.351 and this value was higher than the Qcv(4;60;0.05) which equals to 3.74 and the Qcv(4;60;0.01) which equals to 4.59. This means the Qob was higher than the Qcv in both 0.05 and 0.01 level of significance, so H0 was rejected. This means that the difference between the students’ writing achievement of those with high achievement motivation when their writings were assessed by using peer assessment and conventional assessment was significant.
Fourth, the average score of the group of students with low achievement motivation which were treated by using peer assessment was = 67.68 While the average score of the students with low achievement motivation which were treated by using conventional assessment was = 73.70. Moreover, the third hypothesis found that the Qob was 3.021 and this value was lower the Qcv(4;60;0.05) which equals to 3.74. Therefore, H0 was accepted. This means that the difference between the low achievement motivated students’ writing achievement, when their writings were assessed by using peer assessment and conventional assessment was not significant.
Fifth, the students with high achievement motivation ( =82.77) had a better achievement than the students with low achievement motivation ( =67.68) when they were treated by using peer assessment. These scores were significantly different since the Qob was higher than the Qcv. It was found that the Qob was 7.572. From the q table it was found that the Qcv(4;60;0.05) was 3.74 and the Qcv(4;60;0.01) was 4.59. This means that there was a significant difference in the students’ writing achievement between the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation when their writings were assessed by using peer assessment.
Sixth, the students with low achievement motivation ( = 73.70) had a slightly better achievement than the students with high achievement motivation ( = 67.68). However the average scores of the two groups were not significantly different because the Qob was lower than the Qcv. it was found that the Qob was 2.799 while the Qcv(4;60;0.05) was 3.74. This means that there was no significant difference in the students’ writing achievement between the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation when their writings were assessed by using conventional assessment.
There are some reasons why peer assessment does well in writing class. Topping (2005, p. 640) asserts that “peer assessment can enhance self-assessment, and both can yield metacognitive gains.” He also suggests various other advantages to peer assessment. Peer Assessment can increase student responsibility and autonomy, also evaluative skill development; give insight into assessment procedures and expectations for high quality work; motivate students to work harder with the knowledge that they will be assessed by their peers; potential for providing increased levels of feedback without increased demands on tutors; encourages deep rather than surface learning; give a sense of ownership of the assessment process and improving motivation. Furthermore, peer assessment can be as part of learning so that mistakes are seen as opportunities rather than failures. Also, through peer assessment students can practise the transferable skills needed for life-long learning since it can be used as external evaluation to provide a model for internal self-assessment of a student's own learning (metacognition).
There are some parallelism between most of students with high achievement motivation characteristics and peer assessment design. Those characteristics are having orientation to success, being innovative, being responsive toward feedback, and being autonomous and responsible learners.
Peer assessment which is designed with the students actively involved in the assessment will work best with students who have high need of achievement. Having the students assessing their peer’s paper is not simple. First, the lecturer should make sure that the students understand what to assess, and the criteria used to assess. The students need to study the criteria and the indicators of good writing before they are ready to assess their peer paper. Second, the lecturer needs to provide the students with paragraph sample that allow the students to see its strength and weaknesses. The students are then asked to reviewed the paragraph sample and express about their opinion. To do these two steps, the students need spend some times to train themselves in assessing others paper. And this task absolutely requires students with high orientation of success, since they are very responsive toward any opportunities or any task to attain excellent achievement. Meanwhile, for students with low achievement motivation, who anticipate failure more than success, will find these steps somewhat dismotivating. Students with low achievement motivation will not take any risk to do failure. They are not confident to assess peer’s paper; they are afraid of making mistake in assessing their peer’s paper. In fact, they are afraid of the probability to be marked unfairly by their peer. Therefore, having their paper assessed by their peer is not what students with low achievement motivation will ever think.
High achievement motivation students are very innovative, this is the most determinant characteristics why they can work with peer assessment very well. With their innovation, they can be very independent and creative. In peer assessment, students are learning from each other. They evaluate each other work, i.e. giving comments and scoring their friends paper. These kind of activities will require students to be innovative. Student find a new way of learning to write as they need to learn about the guidelines to assess their peer’s paper. Students with low achievement motivation who are not as innovative as the high achievement motivation will find it difficult, and as they anticipate the failure more, they will unwillingly to do it since they are afraid of making failure. And even if they are asked to assess their peer, since they do insencerely, it will be effective to improve students’ writing achievement.
The characteristics of being responsive toward feedback is also strong poin why high achievement motivation students react very positively toward peer assessment, which may contribute to their writing achievement improvement. Students with high achievement motivation will do action immediately after they receive feedback. As the feedback is from their peer, the students become very competitive in a positive way. They want to show their best writing by taking the feedback from their peers seriously. This way the studenst are motivated to learn from their mistake and from others’ mistake.
Furthermore, students with high achievement motivation suit very well with the autonoumous learning provides by peer assessment. They always try to do their own innovation by themselves. They tend to do things that improve their success very independently, ie. asking leacturer on what they do not understand, seeking and reading book that may help their success, developing their own writing from draft until final product, listening to their friends’ feedback, assessing their friends’ paper with the help of the guidelines given by the lecturer. Meanwhile, students with low achievement motivation will hardly do those responsibilities independently.
The average score of students with high achievement motivation was higher than the students with low achievement motivation. Again, this result shows that students with high achievement motivation can work very well with peer assessment. To understand this, it is necessary to reveal what characteristics of high achievement motivation students have which may be activated by peer assessment.
Heckhausen & Heckhausen (2008) states that motivation is a product of person and situation. Therefore for students who has high achievement motivation, their aspire to a certain goal is influenced by person factors, i.e. their high need for achievement and by situation factors (external factors), including the anticipated outcomes. One of the example of external factor is classroom atmosphere. Peer assessment which enganges students in assessment, creates a more friendly situation, in which students promote their learning by helping and sharing to each other. The friendly situation influences the students’ enthusiasm in learning. It can be seen in the group which was treated by peer assessment. The students in that group talked freely to other friends. They often approached their friends and asked for confirmation on the feedback given to their paper. Students feel less pressure in expressing their opinion and thought towards their peer. Very often students were seen chatting very seriously about their paper. They did their own analysis on the review made by their friend. They also showed a great curiousity to know why their writing was criticized in a particular aspect. Therefore, the internal factor, the need of achievement, which works on the students with high achievement motivation is generated effectively by the situation factor, ie. the frindly classroom atmosphere created by peer assessment.
Moreover, Murray (1938. P.164) in Heckhausen & Heckhausen (2008) defined the need of achievement as the need to accomplish something difficult, to master, manipulate or organize physical objects, human beings or ideas and to do this as rapidly and as independently as possible. Therefore, autonomous learning generated by peer assessment is in accordance with the characteristic of students with high achievement motivation which tend to learn independently (without teacher as the only ionformation giver).
High achievement motivation students are usually characterized by their willingness to do things related to achievement and improvement. These students are very sensitive towards ways to achieve excellent achievement. With the self autonomous learning, students with high achievement motivation autonomously do things to improve their achievement. In the group with high achievement motivation students which was treated by peer assessment, students showed willingness to do things to improve their writing achievement. The students came to the lecturer and asked for things they didn’t understand. Also, they were found reading book about writing which helped them understand how to write a certain type of paragraph well. They compared some paragraph examples provided in the book by themselves to know their stregth and weaknesses. They also used the knowledge they know to assess other peer’s paper and explained it to them. Meanwhile, in the conventional group, the learning was restricted on the material provided by the teacher. The high achievement motivation students who were treated by conventional assessment can’t be as responsive as those who were treated by peer assessment.
Another characteristic is stated by Brunstein and Hoyer (2002) in Heckhausen & Heckhausen (2008). They believe that achievement motive was highly responsive to feedback on individual change in performance. They respond favorably to information about their work. They are not interested in comments about their personal characteristics, such as how cooperative or helpful they are. As soon as their performance decreased below the level expected on the basis of their previous performance, participants high in achievement motivation redoubled their efforts, and showed an immediate improvement in performance. This characteristic, which is very responsive toward feedback, is also parallel with the design of peer assessment which involves students in giving feedback. Although conventional assessment is also designed with teacher providing feedback, but for high achievement motivation students, which prefer autonomous learning, conventional assessment can’t be as effective as peer assessment to improve their achievement.
Another result showed that students with low achievement motivation who were treated by conventional assessment had a slightly better writing achievement than the students with low achievement motivation who were treated by using peer assessment and the students with high achievement motivation who were treated by using conventional assessment. Therefore, it is still important to discuss how students with low achievement motivation can work quite well with conventional assessment.
Unlike students with high achievement motivation, students with low achievement motivation tend to be depended on teacher assistant, since they are usually not as autonomous as students with high achievement motivation (Murray, 1938 in Heckhausen & Heckhausen, 2008). Therefore, conventional assessment which involves teacher more dominantly than the students, provides a perfect classroom atmosphere for students with low achievement motivation. Meanwhile, peer assessment which requires the students to be autonomous and more responsible toward their learning, creates an uncomfortable classroom atmosphere for students with low achievement motivation.
When conventional assessment was applied, students with low achievement motivation were not involve in assessment. The students depended on the teacher feedback only. Since the students with low achievement motivation were not responsive toward autonomous learning, having feedback from lecturer (without being involved in the assessment) worked very well on them. Students wrote certain paragraph and submitted their paper to be marked. They did not need to bother to review their peer’s paper.
Moreover, as the theory says, students with low achievement motivation are not as innovative as students with high achievement motivation. They prefer to choose very easy task in order to minimize risk of failure. Therefore, given less responsibility to them works perfectly on their learning achievement (Atkinson and Feather, 1966) . In contrast, when peer assessment was applied, students with low achievement motivation were required to be responsible to assess their peer paper. These students did the peer assessment but not as effectively as students with high achievement motivation. When they assessed their peer’s writing they did not try to give further example or solution on the problem appeared in the writing. They tended to avoid criticizing their peer’s writing. Most of them tended to write positive comments i.e. the idea is already well-arranged; the grammar is good, etc; despite many mistakes were found in the paper.
The above phenomenon is in line with some theory of achievement motivation. Kurt Lewin and David McClelland theorized that motivation can be oriented toward avoiding failure or toward achieving success. In relation to that, Atkinson (in Atkinson and Feather, 1966) theorized that people with a low need for achievement anticipate failure more than they do success, in contrast to people who seem to have a high need for achievement. This means that, students with low achievement motivation tend to do things to avoid failure. This explains why the low achievement students like to be depended on teacher assessment, because they do not want to make mistake in assessing their peer or to be assessed by their friends.

5 Conclusion, Implication and Suggestion
5.2 Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis, some conclusions can be stated as follows: (1) There is a significant effect of peer assessment on the students’ writing achievement; (2) there is a significant interactional effect between the application of peer assessment and students’ achievement motivation on the students’ writing achievement; (3) there is a significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment and conventional assessment; (4) there is no significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with low achievement motivation when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment and conventional assessment; (5) there is a significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation when their writings are assessed by using peer assessment; (6) there is no significant difference between the students’ writing achievement of the students with high achievement motivation and the students with low achievement motivation when their writings are assessed by conventional assessment
5.2 Implication
The result of this research shows that students who are treated by using peer assessment have a significantly better achievement that the students who are treated by using conventional assessment. This means that some revisions on the writing syllabus need to be done, especially in terms of the type of learning assessment. Peer assessment needs to be considered as learning assessment in writing courses instead of conventional assessment.
Another result of this research is that the average score of the students with low achievement motivation is far below the average score of students with high achievement motivation when they are treated by using peer assessment. The implication for this finding is some efforts need to be done to generate students achievement motivation, since students with high achievement motivation can improve their achievement more greatly than students with low achievement motivation.
5.3 Suggestions
Writing lecturers are suggested to apply peer assessment in their classes to improve the students’ writing achievement Also, writing lecturers are suggested to consider particular condition in implementing peer assessment by having class conference and final revision phase at the end of their assessment.
For other researchers who are interested in improving writing achievement, it is suggested to investigate other approach than peer assessment approach and other achievement contributing factor than achievement motivation.





References
Ahmad, Norlida. 2001. Using Peer-Review As Motivation Tool In A Writing Class. The Journal of Educators and Education is published annually by the School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang. Vol. 17 pp.13-20
Atkinson, J. & Feather, N. 1966. A Theory of Achievement Motivation. New York: Wiley and Sons.
Brereton, B and Morgan D.H. 1996. Thinking and Writing, A Course in English Communications. Hongkong: Rigby Limited Book Company
Bruenstain, J.C and Hechausen, H. 2008. Achievement Motivation. New York: Cambridge University Press
Ellis, R. 1986. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Falchikov, Nancy. 2001. Learning Together: Peer Tutoring in Higher Education. New York: Taylor and Francis
Flower, Linda and John R. Hayes. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication 32.4 : 365-87.
Gardner, A., & Johnson, D. 1997. Teaching Personal Experience Narrative In The Elementary And Beyond. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona Writing Project Press.
Hakim, M.Arief. 2004. Kiat Menulis Artikel di Media: Dari Pemula sampai Mahir. Bandung: Penerbit: Angkasa
Hanna, Gerald S. And Dettmer, Peggy A. 2004. Assessment For Effective Teaching: Using Context-Adaptive Learning. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc
Heckhausan, Jutta and Heckhausen, Heinz. 2008. Motivation and Action. New York: Cambridge University Press
Mackbride, Ross. 2006. How to Correct English Writing Errors. Available on line at http://www.eslincanada.com/articles.html
Olshtain, Elite. 2001. Functional Tasks of Mastering Mechanics of Writing and Going just Beyond. Boston: Heinle&Heinle
Orwig, Carol J. 1998. Writing Skill. Available on line at http://www.lingualink.edu
Rabideau, Scott.T. 2005. Effects of Achievement Motivation on Behavior. Available online at : http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/rabideau.html
Tarigan, Hendry Guntur. 1994. Menulis Sebagai Suatu Ketrampilan Berbahasa. Bandung: Penerbit:Angkasa
Topping, K. 1998. Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities,
Review of Educational Research, 68, 3, 249-276
Zulharman. 2007. Self and Peer Assesment Sebagai Penilaian Normatif dan Sumatif. Available online at: http://zulharman79.wordpress.com/2007/05/29/self-dan-peer-assessment-sebagai-penilaian-formatif-dan-sumatif/

Pengembangan Kompetensi Pragmatik


Pengembangan Kompetensi Pragmatik Bahasa Inggris pada
Siswa SMA Negeri 1 Singaraja

Oleh:
I.G.A. Lokita Purnamika Utami, S.Pd, M.Pd


Abstrak:



1. Pendahuluan

Salah satu ketrampilan bahasa yang bisa memfasilitasi kegiatan mengakses pengatahuan adalah kompetensi pragmatik, yaitu kompetensi yang terpusat pada penggunaan bahasa baik secara lisan maupun tulisan. Kompetensi pragmatik yang dimiliki siswa memudahkannya dalam memahami sebuah wacana atau pengetahuan yang disampaikan secara lisan.
Kurikum berbasis kompetansi SMA untuk kelas X menyatakan bahwa siswa diharapkan untuk mampu memahami makna dalam percakapan transaksional dan interpersonal resmi dan tak resmi yang menggunakan ragam bahasa lisan sederhana secara akurat. Berdasarkan hal tersbut kompetensi penggunaan bahasa atau kompetensi pragmatik secara oral diharapkan bisa dikuasai oleh para siswa kelas X.
Bagaimana mengajarkan kompetensi pragmatik kepada para siswa? Pertanyaan ini telah berusaha dijawab oleh berbagai penelitian. Penelitian-penelitian tentang kemampuan berbicara mengungkapkan bahwa siswa banyak mengalami kendala dalam menemukan ide, mengawali ide dalam berbicara, dan mengorganisasikan ide dalam berbicara (Agustini, 2001; Martha, 2004; Tresnawati, 2008; Sarmini, 2008; dan Meirawati, 2008)
Para akademisi juga banyak berpendapat dan menjadi sebuah debat tanpa akhir tentang penggunaan teknik yang bersifat kerja group atau teknik yang lebih bersifat kerja individual yang mampu meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara siswa. Berbagai alasann dikemukakan untuk mendukung pendapat tersebut. Bagi yang menyatakan kerja kelompok lebih menguntungkan (Tresnawati, 2008; Sarmini, 2008; Meirawati, 2008) menyampaikan bahwa kehadiran teman sebaya dalam sebuah diskusi menyebabkan meningkatnya percaya diri dan keberanian untuk berbicara dalam bahasa inggris. Sementara, bagi kelompok akademisi (Agustini, 2001; Meirastuti 2008) yang menyatakan kerja individual lebih menguntungkan meyakini bahwa kegiatan berbicara adalah kegiatan yang bersifat sangat personal atau pribadi yang melibatkan waktu berlatih, motivasi personal, bakat dan lain-lain.
Sehubungan dengan penelitian ini, 4 penelitian eksperimen telah dilaksanakan untuk mencari perbedaan hasil belajar siswa dengan membandingkan masing-masing teknik-teknik berikut- teknik Role Play, teknik Group story telling and Fun Game, teknik panauricon dan teknik guided dialog- dengan teknik pengajaran konvensional. Empat penelitian eksperimen inilah yang melandasi penelitian ini. Hanya saja pada penelitian ini, yang dibandingkan adalah keempat teknik tersebut diatas, bukan dibandingkan dengan teknik konvensional.
Berdasarkan pemaparan diatas penelitian kali ini akan bertujuan umum untuk mengembangkan kompetensi pragmatik siswa kelas X secara efektif melalui suatu intervensi dengan berbagai teknik pembelajaran wicara (speaking) dalam bahasa Inggris, yaitu: Role Play, Group Story Telling and Fun Game, Panauricon, dan Guided Dialogue. Untuk itu keempat teknik ini akan dibandingkan untuk melihat apakah ada perbedaan yang signifikan pada hasil belajar siswa, dan untuk mencari tahu teknik mana yang paling efektif untuk dapat meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa.

2. Kajian Teori dan Kajian Empirik

2.1. Konsep tentang Kajian Pragmatik
Crystal dalam Kasper (1997) menyatakan bahwa pragmatic adalah sebuah pembelajaran tentang bahasa yang dilihat dari sudut pandang pengguna bahasa itu sendiri, khususnya tentang pilihan kata yang mereka pakai. Disisi lain, ditemukan juga bahwa pragmatics itu menekankan pada bagaimana susunan dari kata atau frasa itu dapat merubah makna dari sebuah kalimat atau ucapan. Ucapan yang diujarkan oleh pengguna bahasa ketika dia berbicara cenderung ambigu. Itu berarti bahwa ucapan mereka mungkin saja mengandung arti/ makna lain disamping dari makna yang sebenarnya. Oleh karena itu, mengerti dan mengetahui maksud dari orang yang berbicara itu, siapa yang berbicara, dan konteks dari pembicaraan tersebut sangatlah penting guna memudahkan lawan bicaranya memahami makna dari ucapan yang disampaikan sehingga tidak dak ada kesalahpahaman dan respon yang diberikan nantinya juga akan sesuai. Jadi, dengan mengerti dan memahami maksud dari pembicara, pengguna bahasa akan mudah berbagi pengetahuan dan informasi. Mereka juga akan dapat mencapai tujuan utama dalam komunikasi yaitu saling menyampaikan dan menerima informasi.
Dari penjelasan diatas, salah satu kemampuan bahasa yang dapat memfasilitasi siswa dalam mentrasfer pengetahuan dan informasi adalah pragmatic competence. Menurut Brown (2007), pragmatic competence itu adalah kemampuan untuk menghasilkan dan memahami aspek sosiolingistic dan juga functional dari bahasa. Sebenarnya, pragmatic competence itu sendiri menekankan pada penggunaan bahasa lisan dan juga tulisan. Akan tetapi dalam penelitian ini hanya difokuskan pada penggunaan bahasa secara lisan yang mana menekankan pada berbicara. Ada beberapa hal yang harus diperhatikan dalam berbicara seperti, konteks, maksud dari pembicara, budaya dan juga segi grammar/ strukturnya. Berbicara merupakan alat yang pending dalam komunikasi, berpikir, dan juga belajar. Chaney dalam Kayi (2006) mendefinisikan bahwa berbicara adalah suatu proses didalam membangun dan berbagi informasi melalui penggunaan symbols baik secara verbal ataupun non-verbal dalam bermacam-macam konteks. Melalui berbicara, siswa tidak hany dapat mengekspresikan ide, perasaan, dan diri mereka secara verbal tetapi juga dapat belajar bagaimana mengikuti dan memahami aturan social dan buday dengan tepat dalam setiap situasi.
Berkaitan dengan hal tersebut, pembelajaran berbicara yang effective sangatlahn dibutuhkan oleh siswa. Secara otomatis, hal tersebut juga akan berpengaruh pada pragmatic competence mereka. Menurut Kasper (1997), pragmatic competence tersebut harus dikembangkan oleh siswa supaya bisa berkomunikasi dengan baik. Dalam mengembangkan pragmatic competence siswa, tentu saja siswa harus diberikan banyak waktu untuk melatih kemampuan berbiacara mereka. Coulman dalam Kasper (1997) juga berpendapat bahwasiswa harus bergiliran dalam berbicara dalam bermacam-macam situasi. Dengan kata lain, sangat dibutuhkan latihan yang efektif yang mana melibatkan interacksi yang berpusat pada siswa. Porter in Lee and VanPatten (2003) menemukan bahwa interaksi antara siswa didalam kelas menghasilkan peningkatan kesempatan siswa dalam mengekspresikan diri mereka. Oleh karena itu, pembelajaran berbicara di sekolah harus melibatkan siswa dalam interaksi yang efektif sehingga mereka tidak hanya mampu berbicara tetapi juga mampu memahami apa yang menjadi maksud dari pembicara dan juga mampu menggunakan ucapan yang tepat. Dengan kata lain siswa harus memiliki pragmatic competence, khususnya yang berkaitan dengan pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency dan juga comprehension.


2.2. Teknik Role Paly

Role Play adalah sebuah metodologi yang berasal dari istilah Sociodrama yang bisa digunakan untuk membantu siswa memahami aspek-aspek kebahasaan, aspek social, ataupun aspek science atau matematika (Blatner: 1995). Role Play telah diketahui sebagai salah satu metode pengajaran sejar akhir 1940an. Bell (2001) menyatakan bahwa Role Play sudah sangat lama diketahui oleh guru dan para trainer sebagai sebuah teknik yang diguanakan untuk pengajaran keterampilan dan pengemabangan sikap dalam situasi tatap muka. Role Play sudah sangat banyak digunakan dan sudah sikenal sebagai suatu teknik yang efektif dalam pengajaran ESL/EFL.
Dangerfield (1986) dalam Martha (2004) menyatakan bahwa Role Play adalah salah satu metode yang digunakan untuk memaksimalkan waktu berbicara siswa, memastikan bahwa siswa mendapat tingkat latihan yang optimal selama waktu belajar di kelas yang cukup terbatas. Ladousse (1987) dalam Sugihartnini (2005) kemudian juga menjelaskan bahwa Role Play adalah sebuah kegiatan di dalam kelas yang memberikan kesempatan kepada siswa untuk menggunakan bahasa, aspek aturan tingkah laku, dan peran-peran yang memang dibutuhkan dalam kehidupan di luar kelas. Siswa tidak akan merasa canggung untuk menciptakan situasi nyata tersebut dan dengan melakukan hal itu mereka bisa bereksperimen dengan pengetahuan yang mereka dapat di kehidupan nyata dan mengembangkan kemampuan mereka untuk berinteraksi dengan orang lain. Kemampuan siswa untuk menggunakan bahasa inggris secara tidak disadari meningkat dengan melakukan Role Play.
Role Play adalah metode yang sangat bermanfaat dalam proses pembelajaran bahasa asing. Teknik ini sangat menarik dan berguna bagi siswa karena menekankan pada pengetahuan tentang kehidupan nyata. Teknik ini juga memberikan kesempatan berharga pada siswa untuk tidak hanya belajar tentang suatu teori tetapi juga sudut pandang-sudut pandang tertentu tentang hal itu. Tompkins (1998) menyatakan bahwa keberadaan Role Play bisa memacu siswa untuk berpikir kreatif, membantu siswa mengembangkan dan berlatih bahasa baru dan keterampilan bertingkah laku dalam situasi yang relatif nyaman dan aman, dan bisa memotivasi siswa untuk belajar. Larsen-Freeman (1986) menjelaskan bahwa Role Play baik terstruktur atau tidak sangat penting dalam pendekatan komunikaif karena teknik ini memberikan kesempatan kepada siswa untuk berlatih berkomunikasi dalam konteks sosial yang berbeda-beda dan peran yang beragam juga.


2.3. Teknik Group Storytelling and Fun Game
Dasar dari Group Storytelling adalah mencerikan sebuah cerita (storytelling). Larkin (1997) mendefinisikan bahwa storytelling adalah seni penyampaian sebuah cerita atau pengalaman kepada pendengar secara lisan. Dengan menceritakan sebuah cerita atau pengalaman secara lisan/ oral dapat melatih siswa dalam menggunakan bahasa secara natural. Selain itu, menceritakan sebuah cerita adalah kegiatan yang menyenangkan baik bagi pencerita ataupun pendengar dan juga dapat disesuaikan dalam setiap level siswa. Ketika penyampaian cerita secar berkelompok, siswa akan diberikan lebih banyak kesempatan dalam mengekspresikan ide-ide mereka, mengembangkan ide dan juga memilih kata-kata yang sesuai dengan konteks dalam cerita (Sarmini, 2008). Kegiatan seperti itu mengajak siswa untuk berbagi pengetahuan dan informasi dengan teman mereka dan juga dapat melatih siswa dalam berpikir kritis.
Berkenaan dengan hal tersebut, Forest (2000) juga berpendapat Group Storytelling memberikan kesempatan kepada siswa untuk mngekspresikan perasaan, pikiran dan ide mereka secara lisan. Kegiatan tersebut juga mampu menekankan pada keunikan setiap siswa dalam mengimajinasikan sebuah cerita. Siswa dapat mengembangkan imajinasi mereka sehingga nantinya mereka akan menjadi lebih kreatif dan inovatif. Kegiatan ini juga melatih pemahaman siswa terhadap suatu cerita. Kemampuan untuk memahami cerita dapat dilihat dari kemampuan siswa dalam membuat map dari setiap peristiwa dalam cerita tersebut. kosakata baru juga akan banyak dipelajari melalui kegiatan tersebut.
Selain yang disebutkan diatas, Sarmini (2008) juga menyatakan bahwa Group Storytelling merupakan sebuah technique yang meminta siswa untuk menceritakan sebuah cerita secara berkelompok. Kegiatan ini diyakini dapat meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara siswa karena mereka diijinkan untuk berkolaborasi dengan teman-temannya dalam group dan juga bebas mengekspresikan ide dan pikiran mereka. Killen (1996) dalam bukunya yang berjudul “Effective Teaching Strategis” juga menyatakan bahwa dengan belajar dalam kelompok, siswa diberikan lebih banyak kesempatan dalam salingh berbagi dan belajar dari temannya. Mereka bisa berinteraksi dan berbagi informasi dalam situasi yang menenangkan. Hal tersebut juga merupakan salah satu cara untuk mengaktifkan pengetahuan dasar mereka tentang materi yang diberikan dan membantu siswa dalam memahami materi yang diajarkan.

2.4. Teknik Panauricon
Kelen (2006) menyatakan bahwa Teknik Panauricon (PT) adalah sebuah metode belajar yang mengatur siswa di kelas berbicara dalam lingkaran, memberikan mereka kesempatan untuk melatih drill atau percakapan dengan sebanyak mungkin partner yang berbeda. Yang ditekankan dalam teknik ini adalah dalam memposisikan guru dalam kelas berbicara pada posisi sentral dimana dia dapat mengubah alur percakapan setiap saat hanya dengan memalingkan kepalanya. Jadi, guru tidak perlu lagi berjalan-jalan dalam kelas tp siswalah yang bergerak. Dengan cara ini mereka akan merasa bahwa guru akan selalu ada untuk mereka. Berbeda dengan kelas tradisional dimana guru berdiri di depan kelas, dalam PT guru berada di tengah-tengah kelas. Walaupun begitu, PT tetap dinyatakan sebagai student-centered classroom karena, setelah diberikan instruksi atau dengan pendahuluan drill, siswalah yang diberikan kesempatan berbicara. Peran guru adalah membatasi waktu di kelas dan mengatur jumlah maksimum dari latihan oral siswa.
Teknik Panauricon dapat membantu siswa untuk bicara sebanyak mungkin serta untuk memonitor kegiatan speaking sehingga siswa dapat memperbaiki kemampuan speaking mereka. Tujuan dari teknik ini adalah untuk memberanikan siswa untuk bergerak di kelas, memastikan bahwa seluruh anggota kelas berbicara dengan anggota kelas lainnya, untuk mengontrol dan mengatur pergerakan yang dilakukan siswa melalui cara-cara tertentu bahwa siswa diyakinkan jika guru akan tetap bersama mereka dan siap menyediakan keperluan individual mereka (Kelen, 2006).
Langkah Teknik Panauricon
Ada beberapa langkah yang harus ditempuh dalam pengaturan teknik Panauricon, yaitu:
1. Pre-Panauricon.
Sesuai dengan pernyataan Kelen (2006), pergerakan atau kegiatan memotivasi diri merupakan bagian yang penting dalam pembelajaran bahasa. Total Physical Response (TPR) dapat digunakan sebagai salah satu cara dalam mengatur teknik ini daripada siswa hanya diam secara pasif ditempat duduk mereka masing-masing. Kegiatan pemanasan yang dilakukan lewat beberapa instruksi TPR terbukti efektif dapat memudahkan menyuruh siswa bergerak sebagai bagian dari proses pembelajaran bahasa (Kelen, 2006). Pada TPR, guru berada di tengah-tengah kelas sehingga guru dapat mengubah alur percakapan di kelas tanpa harus bergerak.
2. Bekerja berpasangan.
Kelen menyatakan bahwa sangatlah baik memberikan siswa intruksi yang baru dalam menvariasikan drill atau dialog. Membuat perputaran intruksi kelas merupakan bagian yang penting dalam Teknik Panauricon. Kapan dan bagaimanapun (dalam kondisi apapun), melakukan perputaran instruksi di kelas benar-benar merupakan kunci sukses teknik ini. Ketika tidak ada variasi dari putaran pertama ke putaran berikutnya, tepukan tangan atau suara musik dapat menjadi sinyal.
3. Bekerja bersama-sama dalam kelompok yang lebih besar.
Dalam Teknik Panauricon, tahap bekerja berpasangan dapat diubah menjadi bekerja sama dalam kelompok yang lebih besar dimana siswa berlatih dialog sesuai dengan topik yang diberikan. Disini, latihan secara jigsaw dapat digunakan dimana siswa perlu bergerak di dalam kelas untuk mendapatkan informasi dari topik tertentu. Di bagian akhir teknik, setiap kelompok harus membacakan laporan yang sudah mereka buat di tengah kelas.
Teknik Panauricon memberikan kesempatan sebanyak mungkin kepada siswa untuk berbicara menggunakan bahasa target. Guru dapat mengubah alur percakapan sesukanya hanya dengan menggelengkan kepalanya. Di dalam kelas, guru tidak perlu mendatangi siswa jika mereka mengalami masalah tetapi siswalah yang mendatangi guru jika mereka mengalami permasalahan. Dalam teknik ini, penggunaan bahasa diaplikasikan secara nyata dimana siswa dapat mengekspresikan ide-ide mereka dengan bebas bersama teman-temannya. Disini, guru dapat mengatur kelompok yang ada dengan mudah karena mengganti kerja berpasangan menjadi kerja berkelompok menjadi sangat mudah karena dalam teknik ini dari awal siswa sudah berpasangan dalam formasi yang sesuai.
Teknik Panauricon memberikan kesempatan kepada setiap siswa untuk berbicara dengan orang lain, memaksimalkan kesempatan bagi siswa untuk mengembangkan diri secara personal dalam menggunakan bahasa target. Proses pengembangan diri ini dapat memperbaiki bahasa siswa karena hal tersebut dapat memudahkan siswa mengutarakan sesuatu yang dapat dengan mudah diartikan (Kelen, 2006). Pada teknik ini, siswa benar-benar berkomunikasi satu sama lain dan guru ada untuk membantu mereka. Teknik Panauricon merupakan cara yang baik untuk mendorong siswa dalam melihat aspek-aspek yang berbeda dari sebuah topik, untuk memperkaya perbendaharaan kata dan struktur kalimat yang berhubungan atau berguna untuk tema-tema tertentu. Mengulang diskusi-diskusi yang masih ada hubungannya di dalam kelompok dapat membantu siswa untuk berpikir lebih luas dan lebih dalam tentang permasalahan yang ada dan hubungan-hubungan yang terdapat didalamnya.
Teknik Guided Dialog
Guided Dialogue diadaptasi dari teknik Role Play. Dalam Role Play, sebelum mempresentasikan dialogue siswa akan diberikan peran dan diberikan situasi dalam bentuk kartu peran (role card). Akan tetapi, dalam Guided Dialogues siswa diberikan suatu kerangka dialog yang berisi petunjuk, suruhan dan situasi sebagai petunjuk bagi siswa untuk menyusun dialog dengan bahasa mereka sendiri. Sebagai tambahan, beberapa frase (ekpresi) yang berhubungan dengan topik yang sedang dibicarakan juga dimasukkan di dalamnya.
Pada paragraf sebelumnya disebutkan bahwa dialog berkembang pada era Audiolingual Method dan menekankan pengulangan struktur kalimat. Sebaliknya, pada Guided Dialogues siswa tidak dibiasakan untuk memengulangi ucapan yang sama maupun mengisi dialog rumpang seperti yang terjadi dalam masa Audiolingual Methods. Dalam Guided Dialogues, siswa hanya diberikan kerangka tentang apa yang mereka dapat katakana sehingga percakapan mereka menjadi lancar. Di sini siswa bebas membuat kalimat dengan pengetahuan yang telah mereka miliki. Tidak ada batasan bagi siswa seperti pada Audiolingual Methods. Drill/pengulangan kadang dilakukan, tetapi bukan menjadi sifat Guided Dialogues. Hal ini hanya dilakukan apabila siswa membuat kesalahan yang fatal sehingga harus segera diluruskan oleh guru.
Berdasarkan penjelasan di atas, sangatlah jelas bahwa penerapan Guided Dialogues dalam kelas berbicara akan dapat menjawab permasalahan yang biasa terjadi dalam kelas berbicara karena siswa diberikan petunjuk dan diberi kesempatan untuk berinteraksi. Hal ini sejalan dengan Bailey (2005: 36) yang menyebutkan tiga prinsip dalam pengajaran berbicara kepada pemula:
1) Menyiapkan topik untuk dibicarakan.
2) Memberi kesempatan bagi siswa untuk berinteraksi dalam group maupun berpasangan.
3) Mengatur situasi kelas sehingga mendukung praktek berbicara.
Dalam kelas berbicara, dialog meliputi interaksi dan expresi secara lisan untuk menyampaikan ide, peristiwa, situasi, maksud antar pembicara sebagai suatu kebutuhan berbicara. Scott dan Ytreberg (1990:41) menyebutkan beberapa aspek tentang pentingnya penggunaan dialog dalam kegiatan berbicara:
1) Siswa berbicara sebagai orang pertama dan kedua, sedangkan teks biasanya dalam bentuk orang ketiga.
2) Siswa belajar bertanya serta menjawab.
3) Siswa belajar menggunakan kalimat yang singkat serta merespon secara tepat.
4) Siswa tidak hanya menggunakan kata-kata, tetapi juga menggunakan semua aspek berbicara seperti penekanan, intonasi, nada bicara, mimik dan lain-lain.
Dialog berguna dalam membangun suasana “chatting” di dalam kelas. Siswa dapat membuat dialog tentang hal-hal kecil yang terjadi yang melibatkan siswa-siswa yang lain di kelas tersebut.

2.6.Landasan Empiris.
Ada banyak peneliti yang telah melakukan penelitian tentang Role Play (RP) maupun Storytelling Technique Assisted with Series of Pictures (STSP) yang tidak bisa disebutkan satu per satu dalam penelitian ini. Akan tetapi peneliti menyebutkan beberapa penelitian dalam beberapa tahu belakangan ini tentang RP dan STSP yang cukup bisa membuktikan bahwa kedua teknik ini memang efektif untuk mengembangkan kompetensi pragmatik siswa.
RP sudah pernah digunakan di Malaysia oleh Krish (2001) pada pelajar jarak jauh dari Kuching, Sarawak Center yang hanya memiliki waktu yang sangat terbatas untuk bertemu dengan instruktur mereka. RP dalam kelas ini memungkinkan tujuan dari materi yang disampaikan bisa tercapai dalam waktu yang singkat. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa pelajar jarak jauh ini menikmati diri mereka selama berperan sebagai orang lain. Mereka merasa lebih dekat dengan anggota kelompok mereka dan menyadari bahwa dengan bekerja dalam kelompok mereka bisa belajar dengan lebih baik. Dengan aktivitas ini mereka juga merasa lebih percaya diri. Dan akhirnya mereka bisa berlatih secara optimal baik tentang bahasa itu sendiri maupun tentang keterampilan berinteraksi meskipun dalam waktu yang sangat singkat.
Penelitian tentang Role Play juga pernah dilakukan pada siswa di Singaraja oleh Martha (2004). Martha mengaplikasikan Role Play untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara siswa SMU Laboratorium IKIP Negeri Singarja. Dia menyatakan bahwa implementasi Role Play mampu meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara siswa terutama dalam hal Pelafalan, Struktur Bahasa, Kosakata, Kelancaran, dan Pemahaman.
Berkaitan dengan teknik storytelling, Ratminingsih dan Namiasih (2004) telah melakukan penelitian dengan mengaplikasikan Storytelling terhadap peningkatan kemampuan berbicara siswa. Penelitian ini dilakukan di SMU Negeri 4 Singaraja tahun ajaran 2004/2005. dari penelitian tersebut dihasilkan peningkatan pada kemampuan berbicara siswa dari pre-test 2.56, 2.99 pada posttest I, 3.71 pada posttest II, dan akhirnya mencapai 4.01. Menurut Ling (2005) beberapa sekolah juga secara intensif mengaplikasikan Storytelling untuk siswa yang baru belajar (pemula) untuk menaruh mereka pada konteks dan melatih kemampuan listening mereka.
Penelitian tentang Fun Game dilakukan oleh Muliani (2002) dalam Sarmini (2008). Hasil penelitiannya menunjukkan bahwa partisipasi siswa dalam kelas berbicara meningkat pada setiap tes. Peningkatan partisipasi siswa dapat dilihat dalam skor pada pre-test, post-test 1, dan post-test 2. Skor pada pre-test adalah 24,1%, kemudian meningkat menjadi 72,4 % pada post-test 1, dan 86,6% pada post-test 2.
Berdasarkan penjelasan di atas, dapat disimpulkan bahwa Storytelling dan Fun Game dapat meningkatkan nilai yang diperoleh siswa. Teknik Storytelling dapat diaplikasikan pada kelas berbicara dan menulis karena berdasarkan hasil di atas nilai siswa meningkat secara signifikan dalam setiap tahapan penelitian yang dilakukan. Selain itu, games juga dapat memperbaiki nilai siswa pada kelas berbicara. Oleh karena itu, kombinasi dari teknik Storytelling dan Fun Game dapat digunakan untuk memperbaiki kemampuan berbicara siswa.
Sehubungan dengan penggunaan teknik Panauricon dalam proses belajar mengajar bahasa Inggris, beberapa hasil penelitian dapat dillihat sebagai berikut. Penelitian terhadap penggunaan Teknik Panauricon dilakukan oleh Kelen (2006). Kelen menemukan bahwa PT sangat efektif untuk diterapkan pada sekolah yang siswanya memiliki latar belakang budaya yang majemuk seperti siswa-siswa di Asia Tenggara, SKH Lam Woo Memorial Secondary School, dan Chinese University of Hongkong karena siswa-siswa disini tidak mengasosiasikan kegiatan yang melibatkan gerakan dengan kelas sebagai konteks belajar. PT merupakan teknik yang sangat berguna untuk mengatasi masalah speaking yang sering dihadapi oleh para siswa dan juga untuk mengatur kelas yang besar.

3 Metodologi Penelitian
Populasi siswa kelas X di SMA Negeri 1 Singaraja tersebar ke dalam 6 (enam) kelas dan setiap kelas terdiri atas 30-45 siswa. Setelah melalui uji homogenitas kemudian ditentukan bahwa 4 (empat) kelas akan direkrut, yaitu: masing-masing diajarkan dengan 4 teknik yang berbeda yaitu teknik guided dialog, teknik role play, teknik panauricon, dan teknik group story telling and fun game.
Penelitian ini dirancang menggunakan rancangan eksperimen. Jenis rancangan eksperimen yang digunakan adalah Post-test only Control Group Design (Campbell and Stanley, 1984).
Pengumpulan data akan dilakukan sebanyak 6 x 90 menit, dengan urut-urutan sebagai berikut: 2 x 45 menit tatap muka pembelajaran dengan teknik masing-masing dan 2 x 45 menit dilakukan pengukuran hasil penerapan perlakukan. Dengan cara tersebut hasil pengukuran segera dengan post test dilakukan sebanyak 3 kali, yaitu post test 1, post test 2, dan post test 3. Hal ini dilakukan untuk menjamin reliabilitas hasil perlakuan yang dilakukan.
Instrumen yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data adalah tes berbicara. Tes ini berupa instruksi yang secara umum meminta siswa menunjukkan kemampuannya berbicara.
Data yang diperoleh sebelum dianalisis lebih lanjut menggunakan Analisis Varian, maka data tersebut diuji terlebih dahulu agar memenuhi ketentuan dan persyaratan kesahihan menggunakan Analisis Varians, yaitu: 1) uji normalitas data dengan menggunakan uji Chi-square, dan 2) Uji Homogenitas varians dengan menggunakan statistic levene test
Sesudah analisis dilakukan secara simultan dengan teknik Analisis Varians, dan untuk menemukan perbedaan masing-masing teknik satu dengan lainnya, maka dilanjutkan analisisnya dengan menggunakan teknik Analisis Pasca Penemuan Fakta (post hoc comparison). Pengujian post hoc tests menggunakan uji LSD (least significant different) (Glass dan Hopkins,2008).


4 Temuan Penelitian
Berdasarkan hasil analisis varians satu jalur diketahui bahwa nilai Fhitung dari anova sebesar 4.576 dengan signifikansi sebesar 0.004. Dengan menggunakan dfB = 3, dfW = 155, dan taraf signifikansi 0.05 diperoleh nilai Ftabel sebesar 2.663 sehingga Fhitung lebih besar dari Ftabel sehingga H0 ditolak atau H1 diterima. Ini berarti bahwa terdapat perbedaan pragmatic competence yang signifikan antara kelompok siswa yang belajar menggunakan teknik guided dialogues, role play, panauricon technique, dan group storytelling and fun game.
Untuk mengetahui kelompok perlakuan yang paling efektif digunakan dalam pembelajaran dalam pencapaian pragmatic competence dapat dilihat dari nilai rata-rata yang diperoleh masing-masing kelompok perlakuan. Berdasarkan Tabel 4.1 diketahui rata-rata pragmatic competence sebesar 82.48 untuk kelompok perlakuan guided dialogues, sebesar 81.56 untuk kelompok perlakuan role play, sebesar 80.74 untuk kelompok perlakuan panauricon technique, dan sebesar 83.22 untuk kelompok perlakuan group storytelling and fun game. Jadi, dapat dikatakan bahwa kelompok perlakuan group storytelling and fun game paling efektif dalam pencapaian pragmatic competence siswa.
Sebagai tindak lanjut dari anava satu jalur dengan 4 kelompok perlakuan dilakukan post hoc tests. Pengujian post hoc tests menggunakan uji LSD (least significant different), yaitu :

Dengan,
α = taraf signifikansi = 0.05
N = jumlah sampel total = 158
a = jumlah kelompok perlakuan = 4
nA = 36, nB = 35, nC = 45, dan nA = 43
Jika > LSD maka terdapat perbedaan kompetensi pragmatic yang signifikan dan sebaliknya. Ringkasan hasil pengujian post hoc test dengan LSD ditampilkan pada Tabel 1

Tabel 1. Ringkasan hasil pengujian post hoc test dengan LSD
Mean difference
LSD Keterangan
A-B 0,921 1,555 Tidak signifikan
A-C 1,740 1,464 Signifikan
A-D 0,744 1,479 Tidak signifikan
B-C 0,819 1,476 Tidak signifikan
B-D 1,665 1,491 Signifikan
C-D 2,484 1,396 Signifikan
Keterangan :
A : guided dialogues
B : role play
C : panauricon technique
D : group storytelling and fun game
Berdasarkan Tabel diatas dapat dijelaskan sebagai berikut. Pertama, pasangan kelompok yang tidak berbeda secara signifikan dalam pencapaian kompetensi pragmatik siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan role play, pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan group storytelling and fun game, dan pasangan perlakuan role play dengan panauricon technique. Kedua, pasangan yang berbeda secara signifikan dalam pencapaian pragmatic competence siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan panauricon technique, pasangan perlakuan role play dengan group storytelling and fun game, dan pasangan perlakuan panauricon technique dengan group storytelling and fun game. Ketiga, pasangan yang paling berbeda dalam pencapaian kompetensi pragmatik siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan panauricon technique dengan group storytelling and fun game dengan perbedaan nilai rata-rata sebesar 2.484.

5 Simpulan dan Saran-saran
5.1. Simpulan
Berdasarkan analisis data disimpulkan bahwa:
1. Secara simultan terdapat perbedaan kompetensi pragmatik yang signifikan antara kelompok siswa yang belajar menggunakan teknik guided dialogues, role play, panauricon technique, dan group storytelling and fun game
2. Secara sendiri-sendiri pasangan kelompok yang tidak berbeda secara signifikan dalam pencapaian pragmatic competence siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan role play, pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan group storytelling and fun game, dan pasangan perlakuan role play dengan panauricon technique. Sementara, pasangan yang berbeda secara signifikan dalam pencapaian pragmatic competence siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan guided dialogues dengan panauricon technique, pasangan perlakuan role play dengan group storytelling and fun game, dan pasangan perlakuan panauricon technique dengan group storytelling and fun game. Dari pasangan tersebut diatas, pasangan yang paling berbeda dalam pencapaian kompetensi pragmatic siswa adalah pasangan perlakuan panauricon technique dengan group storytelling and fun game. Dari keempat teknik ini yang paling efektif meningkatkan kompetensi pragmatik siswa adalah teknik group story telling and fun game
5.2 Saran-saran
Melalui penelitian ini, pertama, peneliti menyarankan agar para pendidik lebih memperhatikan teknik pengajaran yang digunakan dalam kelas berbicara mereka. Melalui penelitian ini, peneliti ingin merekomendasikan teknik group story telling and fun game dalam pembelajaran berbicara. Akan tetapi, kombinasi dengan teknik lain juga diyakini akan memberikan hasil yang lebih efektif mengingat salah satu pendorong entusiasme siswa adalah adanya variasi kegiatan siswa di dalam kelas.
Kedua, saran juga ditujukan bagi peneliti-peneliti berikutnya untuk melanjutkan, menyempurnakan dan mengujicoba hasil penelitian ini. Semakin banyak penelitian tentang teknik yang paling efektif dalam meningkatkan kompetensi pragmatik mahasiswa, maka hasil penelitian akan semakin dapat dipercaya.











Daftar Pustaka
Agustini, Ida Syu Wayan Sri. 2001. Improving students’ informative speaking skill through guided exercises of the first year students of SMKN 2 Singaraja The academic year 1999/2000. Unpublished thesis
Arista Dewi, Ema. 2008. Using Guided Dialogues to Improve the Speaking Ability of the First Grade Students of SMAN 4 Singaraja in the Academic Year of 2008/2009. Unpublished Thesis. Undiksha Singaraja
Bailey, Kathleen M. 2005. Practical English Language Teaching: Speaking. Singapore: McGraw-Hill ESL/ELT.
Best. J.W. 1981. Research onn Education. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs. Prentice Hall
Blatner, Adam, M.D. (1995). Role Playing in Education. Retrieved from: adam@blatner.com
Brown, Douglas. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. San Francisco State University: Longman
Cross, D. 1991. A Practical Handbook of Language Teaching. London: Cassel
Dewi, Ema Arista. 2009. Using Guided Dialogues to Improve the Speaking Ability of the First Grade Students of SMAN 4 Singaraja in the Academic Year 0f 2008/2009. Unpublished Thesis. UNDIKSHA
Chen, I-Jung. 2005. Using Games to Promote Communicative Skills in Language Learning.The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XI. http://iteslj.org/
Eggers. Paul. 1987. Guided Oral Discourse Beginners: What For and How To. English Teacvhing Forum Volume XXV Number 3, July 1987.
Ellinor, L.1996. What is Dialogue?. Http://www.thedilaoguegrouponline.-com/whats-
dialogue.html. Accessed on Desember 5, 2007
Fraenkel, Jack R. & Wallen Norman E. 1993. How to design and Evaluate Research in Education. Singapore:McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Forest, Heather. 2000. http://www.storyart.org/articles/storytelling.html:Storytelling
Gilfert, S. and R. Croker.1999.Dialog Performances: Developing Effective Communication Strategies for Non-English Majors in Japanese Universities. Available at http://iteslj.org/. Accessed on May 9, 2007.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman
Herrel, A. 2005. Fifty Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners
Huang, Irene Y. (2008). Role Play for ESL/EFL Children in the English Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XIV, No. 2, February 2008. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Huang-RolePlay.html
Jianing, Xu. 2007. Storytelling in the EFL Speaking Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XIII, No. 11, November 2007. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/
Kayi, Hayriye. 2006. Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11, November 2006. Retrieved from : http://iteslj.org/. http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kayi-Teaching Speaking.html
Kasper, Gabriele. 1997. Can Pragmatic Competence Be Taught?
Available on : http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/NW6citation.html
Kelen, C.2006.Perpetual Motion: Keeping the Language Moving. Available at http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Kelen-PerpetualMotion.html. Accessed on December 9, 2006.
Killen, Roy. 1996. Effective Teaching Strategies. Wentworth Falls: Social Science Press.
Kitao, S. Kathleen. 1996. Testing Communicative Competence. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kitao-Testing.html. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. II, No. 5, May 1996.
Krish, Pamela. 2001. A Role Play Activity with Distance Learners in an English language Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol.VII, No.7, Jully 2001. Retrieved from:http://iteslj.org/Article/Krish-RolePlay.html
Larkin, Chuck. 1997. What is Storytelling? Retrieved from: http://www.eldrbarry.net/roos/st_is.htm
Lings, M. 2005. Storytelling, Listening, Speaking and Literacy. Ancient Beliefs and Modern Superstitions. Retrieved from: http://www.Crickcrackclub.com/CRICKCRACK/EDUCSPLF.HTM.
Martha, Juliana. 2004. Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Using Role Play (Action Based Research Conducted at The Second Grade of SMU Laboratorium IKIP Negeri Singaraja) In the Academic Year of 2003/2004. Unpublished Thesis
Meriastuti, Ni Made. 2008. The application of ”Modelled talk” to improve speaking ability of the students Grade Eight at SMP Negeri 6 Singaraja. Unpublished Thesis.
Mila, Putu Ayu Indra.2008.Improving The Students’ Speaking Ability through the Use of Panauricon Technique to the Second Grade Students of SMP N 1 Gerokgak in the Academic Year of 2007/2008. Unpublished Thesis: IKIP Negeri Singaraja.
Paul, D.2003. Teaching to Children in Asia. Hong Kong: Longman Asia ELT
Prihatin, Dwi.2008. Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Using Role-Play at The Second Year Of SMA 1 Karangnongko Klaten In 2007/2008
Quistgaard, N. (2006). 1.g-elever på et science center. Engageres de? – Påvirkes de? Doctoral Dissertation. University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Retrieved from http://www.humaniora.sdu.dk/phd/dokumenter/filer/Afhandlinger-80.pdf
Ratna dewi, Sri Ayu. 2008. The Application of Storytelling technique assisted with series of pictures to improve the second year students’ oral competence. Unpublished Thesis.
Ratminingsih, Ni Made.2004. Peningkatan Kualitas Pembelajaran Keterampilan Siswa SMU Negeri 4 Singaraja Melalui Pemanfaatan Teknik Storytelling: Suatu Pembelajaran Berpendekatan Konstektual. Research Report of IKIP Negeri Singaraja.
Ratminingsih, Ni Made and Namiasih, Kt. 2004. Peningkatan Kualitas Pembelajaran Keterampilan Berbicara Siswa Siswa SMU Negeri 4 Singaraja Melalui Pemanfaatan Teknik “Storytelling” Suatu Pembelajaran Berpendekatan Konstektual. Research Report of IKIP Negeri Singaraja.
Richards, J. C. (1985). The Context of Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sarmini, Ni Wayan. 2008 The Implementation of Group Storytelling and Fun Game Technique to Improve Speaking Ability of Grade Eight Students Of SMP Negeri 2 Singaraja
Scott, W and Ytreberg, L. 1990. Teaching English to Children. New York:Longman Inc
Subiana, P.2007. Improving the Speaking Ability of the Second Year Students of SMPN4
Nusa Penida, Especially Class II. C by Using Guided Dialogues. Unpublished
Thesis. IKIP N Singaraja.
Sugihartini, Kadek Eny. 2005. A Comparative Study between the Two Speaking Technique (Role Play and Pair Taping) in Conversation of the Third Year Students of SMA Negeri 2 Singaraja in the Academic Year 2004/2005. Unpublished thesis
Tarigan. H.G. 1981. Berbicara Sebagai Salah Satu Ketrampilan. Berbahasa. Bandung: Angkasa
Tompkins, Patricia K. 1998. Role Playing/Simulation. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 8, August 1998. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/.
Watt, Jean et.al. (1999). Cultivating Collective Consciousness with Transcendent Self-Presence: A Guided Dialogue Method
Zahn,Brian.1996-2002. Storytelling, Listening, Speaking, and Literacy
http://www.crickcrackclub.com/CRICRACK/EDUCSPLF.HTM