CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion.

Based on the finding in conducting the 3-P Technique to improve the students’

speaking competence in delivering presentation, I present some conclusions viewed from overall dimensions. The major conclusion of the implementation of 3-P Technique is successful in some ways. Having conducted the research in optimizing 3-P Technique to improve students’ speaking competence it can be drawn three conclusions as follows:

1. 3-P Technique can improve students’ speaking competence in delivering presentation

The students’ presentation for professional development as individuals or as a member of a group is improved most intensively and significantly. It can be developed through some activities such as: (1) The use of the cue cards. Speaker can use cue cards as references if he loses his point; (2) Eye contact in public speaking a speaker is trained to use eye contact as effectively as possible. If a speaker looks at the audience he will hold their attention. In most circumstances, most of the quickest ways to establish a communicative bond with audiences is to look at them personally and pleasantly; (3) Voice. There are many things a speaker can do with his voice to make it effective. It is suggested that a speaker use volume, pitch, and speed emphasize important points in his presentation; (4) Body language to make good presentation a speaker is recommended to make hand gestures deliberately and with

confidence, to make his head and upper body to maintain eye contact with all members of the audience; and (5) Avoiding nervous habits. In doing this, the speaker should use his whole person to effect, not letting anyone thing detract from his ability to persuade the audience.

Next, when speaking students’ mastery of grammar is also improved.

Grammar is very essential to improve to students’ competence in speaking. In presentation students’ learn certain grammar more intensively since those grammars are constantly used during the students’ performance in doing presentation. By so doing, the student can use them automatically without thinking first. Good speakers know how to use language correctly, clearly, vividly and appropriately.

2. 3-P Technique can improve classroom situation.

It shows that the classroom situation becomes more alive with various interesting activities, and there is a rising students’ participation. Besides, 3-P Technique increased teachers’ innovation in presenting the material in the classroom by creating and using media in speaking class. The strength of the implementation of 3-P Technique is that it can raise students’ participation in speaking class and it can enhance students’ speaking ability.

B. Implication

I find of this study implies that 3-P Technique is very important for the student and they should do the 3-P Technique as one technique to improve the students competence in speaking due to the fact that 3-P Technique can effectively improve: (1) the establishment of students’ speaking competence in delivering

presentation; and (2) the improvement of classroom situation. This study can be used as a reference for the teacher in improving the teaching quality by applying the suitable technique toward improving the students’ speaking ability. Besides, teacher can apply 3-P Technique in the class of listening, speaking, reading and writing.

Considering the potential of 3-P Technique in enhancing students’ skills in English, it is necessary for the teacher to learn about 3-P Technique.

C. Suggestion

Realizing that 3-P Technique is very essential in developing student competence in speaking, some suggestions are put forward to the English teacher, students, the institution, other researcher and the students’ parents. I would like to give some suggestions as follows:

1. For teachers

a. The teacher should facilitate that the competence of Listening - Speaking is not disturbed with the task to guide the competence of Reading – Writing. That’s why the English teacher should work hand in hand to divide the tasks among them. The division is absolutely needed so that the teachers can focus in the language competence they teach.

b. The teacher of English should have high commitment to be creative and innovative in the strategy or preparation and presentation materials which are contextual in accordance with the current issues happening in the society

c. The teacher should facilitate the media for student to practice speaking. One of them is through oral presentation competition which can be held at school regularly special for the student at the school.

2. For students

a. Students should not feel shy in speaking. Besides, they do not have to be afraid of making mistakes because making mistakes is a part of learning.

b. Students should realize that speaking is not as difficult as they think. There are many ways to be able to speak, as long as they want to work hard.

c. Students should realize that they have potentials to be a good speaker. They should open themselves to any chances of self-development in speaking.

3. For the government

Besides the teacher, the recommendation is addressed to the government. The government is also responsible for the improvement of students’ competence in speaking. There are last two things the government can do: (1) Giving support to school to develop the presentation activity in each school, A multimedia whom which is completed with LCD, internet access, and international television channel is absolutely needed, (2) Funding the special training and certification for the teacher of English of Senior high school either as the facilitator of presentation.

4. For other researcher

This research is just one effort to improve students’ speaking ability and the use of 3-P Technique activity is speaking. The findings of this research are expected to use as a starting points to conducts further research in the same field.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arikunto, Suharsimi dkk. 2006. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.

Bailay, Brian. 1982. Effective Language (A Foundation Course in Communication).

Cambridge: Campus Publishing and J. M. & M. T. O’Reilly Pty Ltd.

Brown, Douglas H. 1994. Teaching by Principles. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

Brown, Douglas H. 2003. Language Assessment (Principles and Classroom Practices). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Bukart, Grace Stoval. Teaching Speaking. Available at:

http://www.colostate.edu.com

Byrne, Donn. 1986. Teaching Oral English. England: Longman Group Limited.

Comfort, J. (1995). Effective presentations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Elliot, John. 1991. Action Research for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Ellis, M. & O'Driscoll, N. (1992). Giving presentations. London: Longman.

Engleberg, Isa N. 1994. The Principles of Public Presentation. New York: Harper Collins.

Goering, Laura. 2003. Planning Students Presentation. New York: Carleton College.

Harmer, J. & Arnold, J. (1978). Advanced speaking skills. Harlow: Longman.

Hughes, Arthur. 1989. Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Joko Nurkamto. 2006. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Surakarta: Program Pasca Sarjana Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Joko Nurkamto. 2007. An Introduction to Classroom Action Research ( Penelitian Tindakan Kelas: Konsep Dasar dan Prosedur Pelaksanaannya). Buku Pegangan Kuliah.

Kayfetz, J.L & Smith, M.E.F. (1992). Speaking Effectively: Strategies for Academic Interaction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle

Kayfetz, J & Stice, R. (1987). Academically Speaking. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Kenny, Peter. 1983. A Handbook of Public Speaking. Bristol: Adam Hilger, Ltd.

Lynch, T. & Anderson, K. (1992). Study speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mills, E Geoffrey.____. Action Research (A Guide For The Teacher I). Columbus, Ohio: Merril, an imprint of Prentice Hall.

Ngadiso. (2006). Statistics. Surakarta: English Education Department Teacher Training and Education Faculty.

Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. England: Prentice Hall International Ltd.

Osborn, M. and S. Osborn. 1988. Public Speaking. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Reinhart, S. M. (2002). Giving Academic Presentations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Richards, C Jack. 2001. Approach and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Rignall, M. & Furneaux, C. (1997). Speaking. London: Longman.

Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan SMAN 1 Bojonegoro. (2006). Bojonegoro:

SMAN 1 Bojonegoro.

The Mcgraw Center.2007. Teaching Oral Presentation Skills to Undergraduates.

Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ur, Penny. 1996. A Course in Language Teaching ( Practice and Theory ).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weir, Cyril J. 1998. Communicative Language Testing. London: Prentice Hall Europe.

Zulaika, Siti. 2008. Improving Students’ English Speaking Skill Through Communicative Game. Surakarta: Unpublished Magister Thesis Of Sebelas Maret University

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Blue Print of Pre Test

A. Type of Test : Presentation B. Material

The instructions in pre test are as follows:

1. The students are divided into ten groups. Each group consists of three students.

2. The students choose one of the title of presentation given by the teacher. The titles are:

- Solar energy

- All things you should know about cigarette

- National final examination, is it effective education system?

3. The students perform their presentation in front of the class.

C. Scoring

No Aspect of scoring Maximum score

1 Fluency 25

2 Vocabulary 25

3 Grammar 25

4 pronunciation 25

Total 100

APPENDIX 2

QUESTIONNAIRES