21

CHAPTER III DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDING A. The Location of Research 1. Schools Profile SMP Negeri 4 Baktiya is was established on June 24th, 1992. The school is located at Jalan Seunuddon Panteu Breuh, Kec. Baktiya, Kab. Aceh Utara. Now, the school has been led by Azhari, S. Pd. It has 11 classrooms, a science and biology lab, a library, a hall, a principals room, a teachers room, an administration room, a praying room, and a prayer room. Below is the specification of SMP Negeri 4 Baktiya facilities. Table 1 The Facilities of SMA Negeri 1 Baktiya No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Facilities Classroom Principals Room Teachers Room Praying Room Library Hall Science and Biology Lab Administration Room Total 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2.

The Teacher There are 18 teachers and 6 employees in administration room in SMP

Negeri 4 Baktiya. They come from different education backgrounds. The teachers

22

who teach English subject are 3 teachers. They are graduated from university in Aceh. Here is the list of their class teaching in this school and their educational background. Table 2 The English Teacher of SMA Negeri 1 Baktiya No Name 1 Afriani, S.Pd 2 3 Nursyamsyiah, S.Pd Yuslinawati, S.Pd 3. The Students The numbrt of students in 2011/2012 academic year is 342 students. There are 11 classes in this school, three classes in 7th grade, four classes in 8th grade and four classes in 9th grade. Here is the detail based on the gender Table 3 The Students of SMP Negeri 4 Baktiya No 1 2 3 Grade The seventh year students The eighth year students The ninth year students Total Male 55 61 69 183 Female 48 66 43 157 Total 103 127 112 342 Class I, II, and III I, II, and III I and II Age 43 55 46 Sex Female Female Female Education Unsyiah Unsyiah Unimus

B. The Process of Teaching

23

In experimental class, the students had given the treatment for 4 meatings about speaking by using pair work before they practice conversation to prove the hypothesis accepted or not. a. The First Meeting The cycle was conducted on October 12th, 2011. To open the activities of the teaching and learning process, the researcher spent ten minutes to lead students to English speaking by asking who was absent on that day. Moreover, the researcher asked to practice speaking in front of the class to know how are their ability in speaking In the meeting, it was found that the students have many difficulties in learning speaking and use it in their communication. After that, he began to teach speaking by using pair work. He taughth about introducing by asked them to be in pair. By pair work, the students become interested and want to speak about the topic because they did not feel shy. Uncounsiously, they practice and use vocabulary together at the same time and become more interactive. After the teaching learning process had done, the researcher concluded the point of study and tell them that the study would be held again on october 14th, 2011. Then, the researcher gave his gratitude for the corporation during the research conducted.

b.

The Second Meeting

24

In this meeting, the teacher began the class with greeting and checking the students attendance. Then, brainstorming the students knowledge about the topic, there is introducing. But here, the study did widely about introduce your friend. The researcher introduced the speaking skill by asked them to be in pair. Then teacher gave the students a passage of speaking that was the researcher wants to tell to them. The teacher began to tell the dialogue with his own word based on the text given. And the students listened the teacher spoken. In the second step, the teacher explained and spoke in front of the class how to produced word into short dialogue. In the third step, the teacher gave a passage of dialogue to students and they worked in pair with their friends and practiced the conversation into their own word based on the explanation that teacher has given. While the students practicing the task, the teacher controlled and helped them, also gave them motivation. After they finished with the task, the students needed to practice the task for several times, and asking their teacher whatever they had problems on speaking. Next, after the teacher felt that the students have no more problems during practicing, the researcher and students agreed to present the pair work in front of the class, the researcher gave a chance for students to perform their action in turn. The students were given ten minutes for presentation. However, the researcher gave the model first. The students were actively involved in speaking although they made noise. After the first pairs were ready to perform the action in front of the class. The other students paid attention as well. They were waiting for their turn. The

25

researcher asked the other students to keep on paying attention toward their friends performance. It would become their additional input. Due to five minutes left and it is impossible to finish the students presentation all. So, the teacher stopped. The rest of them would be presented at the third meeting. Finally, the researcher asked them to practice at home and after the bell rang; the teacher ended the class by saying good-bye and good-luck. c. The Third Meeting In third meeting (October 19th, 2011), the researcher prepared the class for the English subject, checking the students attendance, and asking them whether they practiced the dialogue at home. After that the researcher asked the rest of students to present their turn as the previous conversation. After the students finishing their action, the researcher began the study with new topic. It is about hobbies. The researcher divided the students into pair work again. The researcher asked each pair work to arrange conversations that entitled hobbies. During the pair working the task, the teacher rounded the class and helped them while they had problems with grammar, fluency, comprehension and pronunciation. They finished the task and the researcher gave them ten minutes to practice it. Next, without wasting any time, the teacher asked them to present their dialogue in front of class. Some students seem satisfied with their work because they are happy to perform the dialogue. However, many of them still speak very slowly when presentation by using pair work in front of class so that the teacher has to come closer to listen what they were talking about.

26

Finally, all pairs had finished the presentation and bell was ringing, the teacher ended the class by saying good luck. d. The Fouth Meeting In this meeting (October 21th, 2011), the researcher began the class with greeting and checking the students' attendance. Then brainstorming did to the students to know students' knowledge about the topic "My Hobby" by asking some questions. The first question was "What are your hobbies?" most of students answered "playing football, sing, swimming, and so on." The second question was "Why do you like that?" there were various answering form them i.e. make me fun, make me healthy, and so on. Furthermore, the fourth step done by the researcher introduced kind of hobbies that seen around us. And then the researcher told the students many of them. The researcher began telling the hobbies and some reason why people like that . After that, the researcher asked a volunteer to make a
conversation. Next, the researcher asked them makes a conversation based on their hobby by pair work. Then they did it and showed it in front of the class. Finally, the time is left few minutes more. The researcher asked them to practice at home and the class will be continued with the final test. After the bell rang; the teacher ended the class by saying good-bye and good-luck.

C. The Implementation of the Test

27

The score giving follow the rating scale accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility. It is the rating scale which described the score 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 by Heaton. Here are the criteria of scoring for speaking.1 Score Accuracy Pronunciation is influenced by the mother tongue but only a few serious phonological errors. Several grammatical and lexical errors, some of which cause confusion Pronunciation is sometime influenced by the mother tongue. But only a few serious phonological errors. Some grammatical and lexical errors, some of which cause confusion Pronunciation seriously influenced by the mother tongue with error causing a break down in communication. Many basic grammatical and lexical errors Pronunciation seriously influenced by the mother tongue with some errors causing a breakdown in communication. Many basic grammatical and lexical errors Fluency Has to make an effort for much of the time. Often has to search for the desired meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary. Range of expression often limited Has to make an effort for some of the time. Sometime has to search for desired meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary. Range of expression often limited Long pauses while he searches for the desired meaning. Frequently fragmentary and halting delivery. Almost gives up making the effort at times Comprehensibility The listener can understand a lot of what is said, but he must constantly seek clarification. Cannot understand many of the speakers more complex or longer sentences The listener can understand a lot of what is said, but he must constantly seek clarification. Cannot understand several of the speakers more complex or longer sentences Only small bits (usually short sentences and phrases) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker. Small bits (usually short sentence and phrases) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker Hardly anything of what is said can be understood. Even when the listener

Long pauses while he searches for the desired meaning. Frequently fragmentary and halting delivery. Almost gives up making the effort at times. Limited range of expression Serious pronunciation Full of long and errors as well as many unnatural pauses. Very basic grammatical and halting and fragmentary

J. B. Heaton. Writing English Language Tests. (Longman Group. UK Limited: 1988)

P. 98

28

lexical errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skills and areas practiced in the course Serious pronunciation errors and many basic grammatical and lexical errors. A little evidence of having mastered any of the language skills and areas practiced in the course

delivery. At times gives up making the effort. Very limited range of expression. Some of long and unnatural pauses. Sometime very halting and fragmentary delivery. At times gives up making the effort. Very limited range of expression.

makes a great effort or interrupts. The speaker is unable to clarify anything he seems to have said Sometime anything of what is said can be understood. Even when the listener makes a great effort or interrupts. The speaker is unable to clarify anything he seems to have said

1.

Pre Test During the pre-test, the students ware asked to practice the speaking by

pair work. The pre-test was held in 60 minutes on October, 7th, 2011. The results of the pre-test which ware obtained by the students in the first meeting that described clearly in the following table. Table 4: Pre-Test Scores of Experimental Class No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Students Name Asmawati Al Khalidi Ami Mastura Erna Jefrizal Jumaida Roza Jamaluddin Kamariah Lisdayani Marlina Mutia Aina Musliana Mursyidah Miswardi Muhammad faisal Accuracy 2 2 2 3 1 3 2 1 1 4 3 4 2 3 3 Fluency 3 2 2 3 2 4 1 1 1 3 2 3 3 3 3 Comprehensibility Pre-Test 3 44 3 39 3 39 4 56 2 28 5 67 3 33 1 17 1 17 5 67 3 44 4 61 3 44 3 50 4 56

29

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Muslem Muhammad Zubir Nurhayati Rita Santi Rasyidah Rahmad Hidayat Samsul Bahri Safrianum Yulia Desiyana Zainab Zulfahmi Niswatul Khaira Zinatul Hayati Fitri Muliana Syahrul Faizin

3 2 2 3 1 3 2 4 5 3 1 2 2 3 1 Total

2 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 4 2 2 1 2 3 1

3 3 3 4 3 4 2 4 5 2 1 2 2 3 2

44 44 39 50 33 50 28 56 78 39 22 28 33 50 22 1278

Then we can see the results of the pre-test which have been achieved by the students of the control class as shown in the following table Table 5: Pre-Test Scores of Control Class No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Students Name Abdul Hadi Ade Novriza Asrarul Aini Alfarizi Billahsyah Fera Juliana Husnul Mawaddah Julianti Lizawati Maulana Maulina Maulinda Sari Mirnawati Mutmainnah M. Reza M. Wali Munawar Nanda Wahyudi Nuzul Azmi Rajul Fitrah Sarjani Accuracy 3 1 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 Fluency 3 1 3 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 Comprehensibility Pre-Test 4 56 2 22 4 56 3 50 3 39 4 56 3 33 3 39 3 39 3 39 4 50 4 61 4 50 4 56 4 56 4 50 2 22 3 44 4 56 3 39

30

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Sri Ananda Riska Suryadi Wahyuni Zulfahmi Rahmawati Rahmiyati Khairul Razi Jufriadi M. Ari Dinar M. Rizal

3 2 4 5 3 4 2 2 2 3 Total

3 2 3 3 1 3 1 1 2 2

4 3 4 5 3 3 2 3 3 3

56 39 61 72 39 56 28 33 39 44 1380

2.

Post Test After the teaching and learning process done, the researcher asked the

students to practice the speaking by pair work for 60 minuutes. The following table is result of the test. Table 6: Post-Test Scores of Experimental Class No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Students Name Asmawati Al Khalidi Ami Mastura Erna Jefrizal Jumaida Roza Jamaluddin Kamariah Lisdayani Marlina Mutia Aina Musliana Mursyidah Miswardi Muhammad faisal Muslem Accuracy 4 3 4 5 3 3 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 5 5 3 Fluency 5 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 Comprehensibility Pre-Test 4 72 4 56 5 72 4 67 4 56 5 67 4 50 4 61 5 72 5 67 5 67 5 72 4 72 4 78 4 78 5 67

31

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Muhammad Zubir Nurhayati Rita Santi Rasyidah Rahmad Hidayat Samsul Bahri Safrianum Yulia Desiyana Zainab Zulfahmi Niswatul Khaira Zinatul Hayati Fitri Muliana Syahrul Faizin

4 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 4 4 3 2 5 Total

5 4 4 5 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 2 3 4

5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 4

78 72 72 78 83 72 72 78 72 72 78 50 50 72 2073

Then we can see the results of the post-test which have been achieved by the students of the control class as shown in the following table. Table 7: Post-Test Scores of Control Class No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Students Name Abdul Hadi Ade Novriza Asrarul Aini Alfarizi Billahsyah Fera Juliana Husnul Mawaddah Julianti Lizawati Maulana Maulina Maulinda Sari Mirnawati Mutmainnah M. Reza M. Wali Munawar Nanda Wahyudi Nuzul Azmi Rajul Fitrah Sarjani Sri Ananda Riska Accuracy 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 Fluency 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 Comprehensibility Pre-Test 4 61 2 33 4 56 3 56 3 44 4 56 3 44 3 44 3 44 3 44 4 56 4 56 5 67 4 56 4 56 4 50 3 39 3 44 4 61 3 44 5 61

32

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Suryadi Wahyuni Zulfahmi Rahmawati Rahmiyati Khairul Razi Jufriadi M. Ari Dinar M. Rizal

2 4 5 4 4 2 2 3 3 Total

3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3

3 4 5 3 4 2 3 4 3

44 72 72 56 61 33 39 56 50 1555

D. Data Analysis The data of this thesis ware collected through experimental teaching. It was conducted to the first year students of SMA Negeri 1 Baktiya, Kab. Aceh Utara. The research was held on September 6th, 2011. In the activities of the research the writer tried to find the data about the students capability of the first year students in learning speaking. In addition, the researcher wanted to know the difficulties faced by the students in learning speaking. The data about the students capability in learning speaking ware collected through post-test. The data about the difficulties faced by the students ware collected by giving questionnaires. Futhermore, the writer also did the interview with Headmaster and English teachers to collect additional data about the school and teaching learning process. The writer was going to analyze the the data which were colleted by giving test. In line with this, the writer would like to use the statistical procedures,

33

such as range, interval, mean, standart deviation, and t-score. To avoid misunderstanding of terms, the writer would like to explain them briefly as in the followings: 1. Range is the difference of the highest score with the lowest score.

The formula is: R = Hs-Ls

Where: R = Range score Hs = Highest score Ls = Lowest score 2. Interval is amount of class.

The formula is: I = I + 3,3 log N Where: I +3,3 log N Logn N 3. = Available score = Logarithm = Number of students Class interval is the number of score that has been grouped based

on the expected interval. The formula is:

34

P= Where:

R I

P = Length of the interval R = Range of the score I = The amount of interval class2

1.

Analyzing the Pre-Test of Experimental Class Furthermore, the writer analyzes the data by using the formula above. To

make it easy to analyze. The writerfirstly arranges the data from the highest score to the lowest score. 17 28 39 44 50 56 17 28 39 44 50 61 22 33 39 44 50 67 22 33 39 44 56 67 28 33 44 50 56 78

After arranging the test score, the writer then analyzes the available data by following the procedures: 1) For the first step, the writer measure the ranger score, where the highest score was 78 and the lowest score was 17. And the results was:
Anas Sudijono. Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan. (PT. Raja Grafindo Persada: Jakarta. 2005) p. 144
2

35

R = Hs Ls = 78-17 = 61 2) The second step was to find out amount of interval. The results was: I = 1 + 3,3 Log N = 1 + 3,3 Log 30 = 1 + 3,3 (1,477) = 1 + 4,8741 = 5,8741 =6 3) The next step was to find out the class interval score. The results was: R I

P=

61 = 6 = 10,16 = 10 After getting score of range, interval and class interval, the writer nade the frequency distribution of the post-test score in order to out the mean. So, it could be seen in the following table Table 8: Frequency Distribution of Students Pre-Test of Experimental Class Class interval 17 26 fi 4 xi 21,5 xi2 462,25 fixi 86 fixi2 1849

36

27 36 37 46 47 56 57 66 67 76 77 86 Total

6 9 7 1 2 1 30

31,5 41,5 51,5 61,5 71,5 81,5

992,25 1722,25 2652,25 3782,25 5112,25 6642,25

189 373,5 360,5 61,5 143 81,5 1295

5955 15500,25 18565,75 3782,25 10224,5 6642,25 62519

Based on the frequency distribution above, the mean could be calculated by using the following formula: X =

fixi fi
1295 30

= 43,16 So, the result of mean is 43,16 After calculation the mean, the standard deviation could be found. The standard deviation is measure of validity calculated from the mean. The results of standard deviation is obtained by using the following formula: SD SD1
2

=n =

fixi

n fixi 2 ( fixi ) 2 n(n 1)

30(62519) (1295) 2 30(30 1)

37

1875570 (1677025) 30(29) 198545 870 228

= SD1 SD1 =

= 15,09

So, the result of standard deviation is 15,09

2.

Analyzing the Pre-Test of Control Class For the needs of the following analysis, the writer analyzes the data by

using the same formula as done to the experimental class above. To make it easy to analyze, the writer firstly arranges the data from the highest score to the lowest score. 22 39 39 50 56 56 22 39 39 50 56 56 28 39 39 50 56 61 33 39 44 50 56 61 33 39 44 56 56 72

After arranging the test scores, the writer then comes to analyze the available data above by following the procedures as done to the experimental class: 1) R = Hs Ls

38

= 72 22 = 50 2) I = 1 + 3,3 Log N = 1 + 3,3 log 30 = 1 + 3,3 (1,477) = 1 + 4,87 = 5,87 =6 3) P = R I 50 6

= 8,33 =8 Table 9: Frequency Distribution of Students Pre-Test of Control Class Class Interval 22 29 30 37 38 45 46 53 54 61 62 69 70 77 fi 3 2 7 4 14 0 1 xi 25,5 33,5 41,5 49,5 57,5 65,5 73,5 xi2 650,25 1122,25 1722,25 2450,25 3306,25 4290,25 5402,25 fi xi 76,5 67 290,5 198 805 0 73,5 fi xi2 1950,75 2244,5 12055,75 9801 46287,5 0 5402,25

39

Total

30

1510,5

77741,75

X2

fixi fi
1510,5 30

= 50,35 So, the result of mean is 50,35 SD2

2

n fixi 2 ( fixi ) 2 n(n 1)

30(77741,75) (1510,5) 2 = 30(30 1) = 2332252,5 (2281610,3) 30( 29) 50642,2 870 58,2 7,63

= SD2 SD2 = =

So, the result of standard deviation is 7,63 Before calculating the t-score, its necessary to calculate the combined SD1 and SD2 by using the following formula: S2 =
2 (n1 1) SD12 + (n2 1) SD2 n1 + n2 2

S2

(30 1)(15,09) 2 + (30 1)(7,63) 2 30 + 30 2

40

S2

29(227,7) + 29(58,22) 58 6603,3 + 1688,29 58

= 142,95 S S = 142,95 = 11,95

So, the total standard of pre-test between experimental class and control class is 10 X1 X 2 1 1 t-score = S + n1 n2 43,16 50,35 = 11,95 1 1 + 30 30 7,19 11,95 0,033 + 0,033 7,19 3,07

t-score = -2,34 3. Analyzing the Post-Test of Experimental Class Next, the writer analyzes the data of post test in experimental class. To make it easy to analyze. The writer arranges the data from the highest score to the lowest score. 50 50 50 56 56

41

61 67 72 72 78

67 72 72 72 78

67 72 72 72 78

67 72 72 78 78

67 72 72 78 83

After arranging the test score, the writer then analyzes the available data by following the procedures: 1) For the first step, the writer measure the ranger score, where the highest score was 83 and the lowest score was 50. And the results was: R = Hs Ls = 83 - 50 = 33 2) results was: I = 1 + 3,3 Log N = 1 + 3,3 Log 30 = 1 + 3,3 (1,477) = 1 + 4,8741 = 5,8741 =6 The second step was to find out amount of interval. The

42

3) results was: R I

The next step was to find out the class interval score. The

P=

33 = 6 = 5,5 =6

After getting score of range, interval and class interval, the writer nade the frequency distribution of the post-test score in order to out the mean. So, it could be seen in the following table. Table 10: Frequency Distribution of Students Post-Test of Experimental Class Class interval 50 55 56 61 62 67 68 73 74 79 80 85 Total fi 3 3 5 12 6 1 30 xi 52,5 58,5 64,5 70,5 76,5 82,5 xi2 2756,25 3422,25 4160,25 4970,25 5852,25 6806,25 fixi 157,5 175,5 322,5 846 459 82,5 2043 fixi2 8268,75 10266,75 20801,25 59643 35113,5 6806,25 140899,5

Based on the frequency distribution above, the mean could be calculated by using the following formula:

43

X =

fixi fi
2043 30

= 68,1 So, the result of mean is 68,1 After calculation the mean, the standard deviation could be found. The standard deviation is measure of validity calculated from the mean. The results of standard deviation is obtained by using the following formula: SD SD1
2

=n =

fixi

n fixi 2 ( fixi ) 2 n(n 1)

30(140899,5) (2043) 2 30(30 1) 4226985 (4173849) 30(29) 53136 870 61,07

= SD1 SD1 =

= 7,82

So, Standard deviation is 7,82 4. Analyzing the Post-Test of Control Class For the needs of the following analysis, the writer analyzes the data by using the same formula as done to the experimental class above. To make it easy

44

to analyze, the writer firstly arranges the data from the highest score to the lowest score. 33 44 44 56 56 61 33 44 44 56 56 61 39 44 50 56 56 67 39 44 50 56 61 72 44 44 56 56 61 72

After arranging the test scores, the writer then comes to analyze the available data above by following the procedures as done to the experimental class: 1) R = Hs Ls = 72 33 = 39 2) I = 1 + 3,3 Log N = 1 + 3,3 log 30 = 1 + 3,3 (1,477) = 1 + 4,87 = 5,87 =6 3) P = R I

45

39 6

= 6,5 =7

Table 11: Frequency Distribution of Students Post-Test of Control Class Class Interval 33 39 40 46 47 53 54 60 61 67 68 - 74 Total fi 4 8 2 9 4 3 30 xi 36 43 50 57 64 71 xi2 1296 1849 2500 3249 4096 5041 fi xi 144 344 100 513 256 213 1570 fi xi2 5184 14792 5000 29241 16384 15123 85724

X2

fixi fi
1570 30

= 52,33 So, mean score is 52,33

46

SD2

n fixi 2 ( fixi ) 2 n(n 1)

30(85724) (1570) 2 30(30 1) 2571720 (2464900) 30(29) 106820 870

= SD2 SD2

= 122,78 = 11,08

So, standard deviation is 11,08 Therefore, before calculating the t-score, its necessary to calculate the combined SD1 and SD2 by using the following formula: S
2 2 (n1 1) S12 + (n2 1) S 2 = n1 + n2 2

(30 1)(7,82) 2 + (30 1)(11,08) 2 = 30 + 30 2 = 29(61,15) + 29(122,76) 58 1773,35 + 3560,22 58 5333,57 58

S2

= 91,95 S = 91,95

47

= 9,59

So, the total standard of post-test between experimental class and control class is 9,59 X1 X 2 1 1 t-score = S + n1 n2 68,1 52,33 = 9,59 1 1 + 30 30 15,77 9,13 0,033 + 0,033 15,77 2,34

t-score = 6,74 E. The Analysis of Interview The interview for the teacher have done to analyze whether the teacher have some problems or difficulty in teaching speaking. Learning speaking is a very important part of learning a language. Here some reasons why speaking is so difficult to study 1. Verb Tenses English has a relatively large number of verb tenses, the correct mastering of which is important for communicating shades of meaning in English. To complicate the difficulty, English uses many auxiliary words, instead of verbal inflection, to create its tenses. 2. Writing System

48

There is often little connection between the way a word is written and the way it is pronounced. Consider cough vs. through and flood vs. door. Other inconsistencies include heteronyms, words that are spelled the same but pronounced differently, such as wound (wrapped up) and wound (an injury), and row (a fight) and row (a line of something).

3. Plural nouns Though most nouns in English simply add "s" to their singular form to create the plural, there are many exceptions to this rule. These include words ending in "f" or "fe" (wife/wives, knife/knives), words ending in "y" (spy/spies, fly/flies), words that change interior vowel sounds (man/men; mouse/mice), and Old English plurals, such as child/children and ox/oxen. To answer these problems, the teacher gives some ways or strategies in learning vocabulary. There are: The students asked to learn the words that are important to the

subjects of study again The students asked to speak aloud as often as possible and be sure The students asked to learn the words that read or hear again and

to let them know it is fine if they feel the need to repeat things over and over, as well.

49

The teacher uses picture and create a learning game for the

students. Many pictures of common items such as fruits, animals and places are prepared in teaching speaking. F. Examining Hypothesis Based on the result above, the writer examined his hypothesis. There was only one hypothesis, there is Using pair work can improve speaking skill of the first year students of SMA Negeri 1 Baktiya.. The researcher could understand that it is easy for the students to study speaking by using pair work and they could improve their speaking easily. The students was interested in following the lesson until the end of experimental teaching. So, it could be said that pair work was very effective in improving the students English vocabulary. It can proved by looking the comparison before and after the treatment done on t-score. At pre-test, the students get t-score -2,34; while at post-test, the students get t-score 6,74. it means t-score of post-test (6,74) > pre-test (-2,34). Based on the explanation above, it can be concluded that the writers hypothesis can be proved or it can be accepted, or it can be said the hypothesis is well-accepted.