The Action Research was Done to the Eight A Grade Students of SMPN 1 Geger Madiun in the Academic Year 2012/2013

1. USING “MOST NAMES”TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING
SKILL IN DESCRIPTIVE TEXT
(The Action Research was Done to the Eight A Grade Students of SMPN 1 Geger Madiun
in the Academic Year 2012/2013)
By
Heny Sulistyo Rini, M.Pd
Nip: 19740812 200701 2 020
ABSTRACT
The research was done in August 2012 in SMPN 1 Geger Madiun. The subject of
the study was the eight year students consisting of 20 students. It was a classroom action
research. The researcher conducted the research in some steps for each cycle. There were
planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. In collecting data, there were two kinds of data
which were used in this study, the quantitative data and the qualitative data. The
quantitative data were in the forms of students‟ scores. The data were students‟ scores
from the beginning of the research to the end of the research. They came from the tests
given. The qualitative data were collected by the following techniques: observations,
interviews, and document analysis. The quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive
statistics. It compares the score of the pretest to the score of the post test. The qualitative
data were analyzed by using analyzed into data reduction, data display and conclusion
drawing/ verification.
The research findings showed that by implementing the “Most Names” in the
speaking class, there were some improvements which can be classified into three main
points as follows: The improvement of students‟ speaking skill; The improvement of
students‟ participation; The improvement of students‟ interest; And the improvement of
students‟ motivation. For that reason, “Most Names” was able to stimulate students to
speak English.
In conclusion, “Most Names” is able to improve students‟ speaking skill in class
VIII/A. However, “Most Names” has its own strength and weaknesses. Most Names
stimulated students to be more active, interactive, and creative to speak English.
In short, it is recommended to the teachers to use “Most Names” to improve the
students‟ speaking skill in English.
Key words: Most Names, Speaking, Descriptive
I. INTRODUCTION
Speaking is one of the four skills
which have been taught at school besides
listening, reading, and writing, and all of
them are taught integrated. They cannot
be separated because all of the language
skills are used to communicate with other
people. Bailey and Savage (in Murcia,
2001: 103) state that speaking in a second
language or foreign language has often
been viewed as the most demanding of

2. the four skills. When students master
communicate at school especially on
speaking English, they will be able to
Friday because there is one day English
earn more money, to fulfill certain
program on the day. All teachers should
education requirements, to travel abroad,
also speak English in the classroom and
to gain access to the culture of English
students must respond it well. Students
speaking nations, or simply to meet more
and teachers should
people.
opportunity to speak English in the
be given the
The aim of speaking is primarily to
classroom or outside the classroom.
communicate his message rather than to
School environment must support to
be nice to the listener and when the
create English atmosphere, so it will
message is the reason for speaking, the
motivate
message must be understood (Brown and
speaking skill.
Yule, 1998: 13). It is needed to give more
opportunity
for
the
students
students
to
practice
their
In fact, the condition was still far
to
from what was expected. In other words,
communicate by using target language
the students speaking skill was still low.
regularly to build their skill in speaking
It happened because of students‟ low
English and try to understand when
competence, low motivation, and the
someone speaking English, so they will
unsuitable method in teaching-learning
be brave to communicate by using the
process.
target language and by using their
knowledge,
and
VIII/A of SMPN 1 Geger Madiun in the
response it, so the communication will be
speaking skill. The average score of
happened.
students in speaking is 67. The highest
The
try
to
aims
understand
There was a serious problem in class
common
to
all
score was 85 and the lowest score was
communicative activities, to have people
46. There were 20 students in the class,
relaxed and enjoy themselves, acquire
just 3 students passed from passing grade
language through natural use, as well as
of speaking and 17 students could not
make language more readily available,
pass the passing grade. It meant that 85%
are particularly important (Edge, 2001:
students failed in speaking test and just
101).
15% students succeed. The cause of the
It was expected that the students of
problems were as follows: students read
SMPN 1 Geger Madiun can speak
the words like in Indonesian; students
English
asked their friends or teachers the
well
or
use
English
to

3. intonation of the sentences, students used
Based on the observation and the
„be‟ and „verb‟ in a sentence; students
interview of class VIII/A students above,
used unsuitable vocabulary, students
it could be identified that there were
spoke word by word so it made difficult
some causes why the students were not
to understand what they talked about.
motivated to
Referring to the questions whether
speak
English during
learning process in the classroom or
students used English to communicate
using
with their friends outside the classroom
communication. They were afraid of
or not, most of them said no and they had
doing mistakes in pronunciations and
various reasons, for example they were
structures, they lack of vocabularies, they
not motivated to speak English because
didn‟t have self-confidence in speaking
they were ashamed or they lack of self-
English, and they didn‟t have more
confidence. They didn‟t
want their
chance to speak English. It could be said
friends considered him to be proud and
that the students need a certain learning
they were afraid of making mistakes.
environment that makes them brave to
They spoke English very little in order to
speak English without thinking of some
fulfill their assignment on Friday English
mistakes, made them had more self-
day. Some students had tried to use
confidence, got many vocabularies they
English in daily activity especially on
need, gave pattern they need and gave
Friday but their friends always responded
them more chance to speak in right
it in Indonesian and this condition made
pronunciations,
them change
expressions. Nunan (1999: 233) states
condition
classroom.
also
into Indonesian. This
happened
When
students
in
it
as
daily
means
structures,
of
and
the
that learners are unmotivated because
didn‟t
lack of success over time/lack of
understand what the teacher said they
perception
of
progress,
uninspired
always keep silent but when the teacher
teaching, boredom, lack of perceived
asked about what they were talking about
relevance of materials, lack of knowledge
there weren‟t any students who could
about the goals of the instuctional
answer the questions. Sometimes when
program, lack of appropriate feedback.
students had to make a dialogue and
Nunan also presents what can be done by
demonstrate it in front of the classroom,
the teacher is making instructional goals
they usually did it by reading their books.
explicit to learners, break learning down
into sequences of achievable steps, link

4. learning to the needs and interests of the
words as „play‟, „fun‟, „cooperative‟, and
learners, allow learners to bring their own
„competition‟.
knowledge and perspectives into the
There are many kinds of language
learning process, encourage creative
games or communication games which
language use, help learners to identify the
we can apply for our students in order to
strategies underlying the learning tasks
improve their speaking skill. It will create
they are engaged in, and develop ways in
students-centered speaking climates and
which learners can record their own
it will make students conduct direct
progress.
conversation program quite well because
According to Bygate (2000: 3) one of
a
game
can
be
stimulating
and
the basic problems in foreign-language
entertaining, and when the participants
teaching is to prepare learner to be able
have stopped playing the game teacher
to use the language. It is also stated that
can use it as a stimulus for additional
how this preparation is done, and how
conversation (Dobson, 1987: 107).
successful it is, depends very much on
By using games, students will be
how we as teachers understand our aims.
stimulated to speak English in their daily
Richards, et al. (2002: 204) also state that
life both in the classroom and outside the
it is difficult for EFL learners, especially
classroom. The most important is by
adults, to speak the target language
using the games the average score of
fluently and appropriately.
students in speaking will improve too. It
Dealing with the condition above, the
was expected that more than 75%
solution offered was related to “Most
students of class VIII/A can reach
Names”. “Most Names” is a kind of
Passing Grade of speaking.
guessing game. Game is one of the
techniques that can be applied in teaching
II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
speaking because games give students
pleasure
to
practice
to
This study applied Classroom
express
Action Research (CAR). Action Research
themselves. Games are also useful to
is the name given to a series of
encourage students‟ interaction in oral
procedures teachers can engage in,
communication. Games offer the creation
perhaps because they wish to improve
of an enjoyable atmosphere to learn.
aspects
(Edge, 2001: 101) states that the game is
alternatively,
of
their
teaching,
or,
because they wish to
evaluate the success and/or apropriacy of

5. certain
activities
procedures
how effective they were, how they
(Harmer, 2003: 414). According to Mills
looked at their students, how they looked
(2000: 6) Action Research is any
at themselves if they were observing on
systematic inquiry conducted by teacher
teaching and they would improve their
researcher, principals, school counselors,
quality in teaching to achieve their goal
or other stakeholders in the teaching
in teaching-learning process.
learning
and
environment,
to
gather
Action research is described as a
information about the ways that their
spiral of steps and there are four stages:
particular schools operate how they teach
planning, acting, observing, reflecting
and how well their students learn. This
(Lewin in McNiff, 1998: 22)
information is gathered with the goals of
In Planning, students‟ problem in
gaining inside, developing reflecting
speaking English was classified based on
practice, effecting positive changes in the
the interview and observation in the pre
school environment (and on educational
cycle of class VIII/A of SMP Negeri 1
practices in general), and improving
Geger Madiun. There were four students‟
student outcomes and the lives of those
problems to solve; students had very
involved.
limited chance to speak English, they had
The Classroom Action Research
low interest and motivation to speak each
is aimed at educating teachers by the
other, they had limited vocabulary and
process of becoming self conscious about
they had many mistakes to pronounce in
their work, and that is as important an
English. Based on the problems stated
aim
information
above language games were implemented
gathering (Brumfit and Mitchell, 1989:
to overcome the problems with the
9). (Maley in Harmer 2003: 414) states
following
that the aims of the action research is to
language game activities in English class,
abstract a theory from classroom practice
(2) setting the objective that would be
besides to solve immediate problems, or
achieved, and (3) designing the tests that
answer
woulds be used to know the success of
as
evaluating
urgent
or
personally-relevant
questions.
activities:
(1)
designing
the action.
By doing action research teachers
In acting and observing step,
knew more about their students and what
language games would be implemented
they found motivating and challenging.
in this step and the activities done here
Teachers learnt more about themselves-

6. were designed based on the students‟
from the tests given. The qualitative data
problems.
are collected by the following techniques:
Many kinds of language games
like guessing games and describing
observations,
interviews,
and
documentation.
games would be applied to the students
The observation is done to observe
of VIII/A grade of SMP 1 Geger Madiun.
how the students of VIII/A grade skill in
The games would be done classically, in
speaking especially their activity before
pairs or group of four till six. The teacher
and after using guessing game. Sutrisno
and the collaborator would act as
Hadi (1986) in Sugiono (2007: 145)
facilitators and observers. The individual
states that “Tehnik mengumpulkan data
test would be given to know the
menggunakan observasi dilakukan jika
improvement of the students‟ speaking
peneliti ingin mengetahui tingkah laku
skill. At the end of the class, students
manusia, proses kerja fenomena alam
would be interviewed to know their
dan responden yang diteliti dalam jumlah
opinion and response of the language
kecil.
games implementation.
The statement above means that by
The last step is reflecting. It‟s
using the observation, the researcher
time to reflect or review everything
wants to understand the behaviour of
which had been done in the action
people, working process and, natural
activity. It would be analyzed to find the
phenomenon. Few respondents, in this
strength and the weakness and evaluate
case, the researcher was actively in the
the success and the failure of the
research to observe exactly how the
implementation of language games to
behaviour of student and the studying
solve students‟ problems. Then, the
process
weakness and the failure would be solved
observation the researcher will present
in the next cycle.
the check-list as the result of the
There are two kinds of data which
of
student.
While
doing
observation.
are used in this study, the quantitative
The writer also used interview to
data and the qualitative data. The
collect the data.”Inteview adalah alat
quantitative data are in the forms of
pengumpul
students‟ scores. The data are students‟
mengajukan sejumlah pertanyaan. Ciri
scores from the beginning of the research
utama dari intervew adalah kontak
to the end of the research. They come
langsung dengan tatap muka antara
informasi
dengan
cara

7. pencari
informasi
(interviewer)
sebagainya. It means that documentation
informasi
sumber
dan
method is an activity in finding data
(interviewee).”(Margono, 2000: 165).
That
statement
means
which is formed in writing forms such as,
that
notes, transcript, newspaper, magazines,
interview is a tool to get information by
and agenda.
giving
the
This research takes document from the
respondents answer them orally too. The
English book used for teaching and
main
is
learning, speaking scores of the eighth
directly contacts between interviewer and
grade students of SMPN 1 Geger Madiun
interviewee. In this research, the writer
both pre research and after the research
interviews some students VIII-A grade in
was done, RPP, and photographs.
questions
orally
characteristic
of
and
interview
questioner form about the learner ability
The quantitative data will be
in speaking. This Interview was done to
analyzed by using descriptive statistics. It
get the information from students what
analyzes the comparison between the
problem faced by students in speaking
score of the pretest, before implementing
and what they feel after they study in
Most Name and the score of the posttest,
speaking
after implementing Most Name.
by
using
most
names.”
Didalam interview, penulis berusaha
The qualitative data would be
mendengarkan yang responden rasakan
analyzed into data reduction, data display
(Sugiono: 2007: 141).
and conclusion drawing/ verification
The last data collecting technique
such as stated by Mile and Huberman in
used by the writer is documentation,
Sugiono (2006: 337-345). The complete
documentation helps the way to collect
explanations are as follows.
data by using books, theories, and laws
Data reduction is the way where the
(Margono 2000: 181). In this research,
researcher summarizes, writes down the
the writer used books and collected some
important data and throws away the
theories to support the research.
unimportant data. It makes the researcher
According to Suharsimi Arikunto
(2002:206),’Metode dokumentasi yaitu
mencari data mengenai
easier to give a clear description of the
research and to collect data.
hal-hal atau
In qualitative research, data display
variabel yang berupa catatan, transkrip,
can be made in the form of table, graphic,
buku, surat kabar, majalah, prestasi,
pie chart, and pictograph. Besides that, it
notulen rapat, legger, agenda, dan
can also be presented by giving short

8. text, chart, or flowchart. By displaying
Based on the observation in cycle
data, it will make easier for researcher to
1 and cycle 2, it was found that each
understand what happens in the research
indicator of speaking improved. There
and then plan what should do based on
were improvements on: (a) students‟
the data display.
accent,
It is the time where the researcher
concludes
the
research.
The
some
something
in
students
could
say
a
stress
and
good
first
intonation, they could pronounce each of
conclusion is usually temporary and it
the word well; (b) students‟ vocabulary,
will be changed if there is no evidence
students got some new words about
supporting the collecting data done in the
adjectives, part of the body, possessive
next step. If the first conclusion is
adjectives. Most students could use the
supported by the evidences, it will be a
words correctly in applying the game; (c)
credible conclusion.
Students‟ grammar, Most of students
The conclusion of the qualitative research
could arrange and use nominal and verbal
can be a description of the object,
sentences in descriptive text well. They
hypothesis or theory.
could change positive sentences into
negative and interrogative sentences and
also arrange and use the noun phrase
III. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND
well; (d) Students‟ comprehension, Most
DISCUSSION
The previous condition of the
of students could ask to their friends and
eight grade students was far from what is
answer each of the questions which were
expected. Based on the interview and
given in the game from their friend to
some questionnaires answered by the
find someone or something in the
students
be
describing well. It means that they
concluded that the students had problems
understood the topic; (e) Fluency, Most
in speaking English especially on accent,
of students could someone‟s appearance
grammar,
clearly and fluently from cycle 1 to cycle
and
teacher,
vocabulary,
it
could
fluency,
and
comprehension.
2. They always got some experience from
Based on what were found in this
research, there were some improvements
as follow:
1. The
Improvement
Speaking Skill
the previous cycle, so they could tell
more clear and fluent.
By using the most names which
of
Students’
had been applied in this research, there
were improvements in each of speaking

9. indicators. It happened because games
focus
student
specific
and analyze the indicators of speaking, it
grammatical patterns and
can be seen that the implementation of
vocabulary items as has been stated by
most names as a kind of guessing game
Callum (1998: ix).
could improve students‟ speaking skill.
structures,
attention on
Based on the explanation above
The students‟ speaking score
improved from cycle 1 to cycle 2 which
2. The
can be seen from the following table.
Level
Pre-Test Post-Test 1
1
High score
Post-Test 2
85
85
95
67.15
74.8
81.1
46
61
67
Average
2
score
Lowest
3
score
Students’
Participation
Comparison of high, average, and lowest
score of pre-test, post- test 1 and posttest 2
No
of
Improvement
Most Names which had been
applied in this research from cycle 1 to
cycle 2 was very challenging. Each group
played in turn to be the winner of the
competition. So, they had to cooperate
among their friends in their own group to
do the game well. As stated by Edge
Comparison of students achieved the
as
passing grade
No
1
2
Explanation
Score above
passing grade
Score lower
passing grade
Passing
Number of Students
grade Pre-Test
(2001: 101) that game include such word
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
„play‟
fun,
cooperation
and
competition. All students should be
involved in the game especially in their
80
4
11
17
own group because each of group
80
16
9
3
members had different task. There were
students as the representatives of the
From the table above, it could be
group and students who answered the
score
questions, and shared their ideas to
improved from cycle 1 to cycle 2. At the
decide the best answers. All of the class
last of the research or cycle 2, there were
should be involved in one way or another
17 students or 85% student who fulfilled
as has been stated by Callum (1998: xi).
concluded
that
the
students‟
the passing grade while the rest, 3
Most
Names
as
a kind of
students or 15% student did not pass
Guessing Game which had been applied
from the passing grade. This study could
was student centre. The teacher was as a
be said successful because more than
facilitator and prepared the media of the
75% student could fulfill the passing
game. The players were all students in
grade.
the classroom, so all students had to

10. participate in the game. Games ensure
of
speaking.
The
problems
which
maximum student participation for a
happened in the previous cycle could be
minimum of teacher preparation (MC
covered in the next cycle. Competitions
Callum, 1998: ix).
were the students‟ favorite activities.
Each of the cycle competed in group.
3. The Improvement of Students’
Students were motivated to be the winner
of the competition. As the result they
Interest and Motivation
Based on the collaborator and the
played the game seriously.
researcher observation from cycle 1 to
Individual test was students‟ duty
cycle 2, most of student said that they
in each cycle. Every student had to
enjoyed the game very much. They didn‟t
perform
feel boring and sleepy when they were
appearance to get the individual score. As
playing games. They also felt that the
the result student tried to do the best in
time too fast because they didn‟t want to
order to get good mark from the teacher.
stop playing the games.
Beside the indicators of speaking which
By Most Names which had been
applied in this research, students were
in
describing
someone‟s
students attended, they used eye contact,
gesture, expression, and intonation well.
motivated to be the winner of the
competition, so they were motivated to
study hard. They tried to find each of the
word which they did not know the
IV.CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION,
AND SUGGESTION
The
research
was
done
meaning of it; they memorized the
completely in August, 2012. The research
words; and tried to use the words to make
was done in two cycles. Based on the
good sentences so their friends could
findings in implementation most names
understand what they talk about. It means
in teaching speaking, the researcher made
that most names improved students‟
conclusion
interest
speaking skill, the strengths and the
and
motivation.
Games
viewed
from
students‟
also the students‟
automatically stimulate student interest, a
weaknesses, and
properly introduce game can be one of
responses toward the implementation of
the highest motivating techniques (MC
most names.
Callum, 1998: ix).
First, Most Names can improve
In the first and second cycle, most
students‟ speaking skill. The speaking
names had been done to achieve the skill
skill includes saying in a good accent,

11. using correct grammatical sentences,
group members so this condition could
selecting
and
add their knowledge because they shared
expressions, comprehending the topic of
each other; the self confidence could be
conversation, and saying in a clear and
developed when they delivered their
fluent voice so the other people can
ideas to their friends in group, their
understand what we talk about. Those
friends were appreciated them, and when
indicators of speaking can be achieved by
one of the group members to be the
the implementing of most names and
representative, he or she would describe
from the research, it could be seen that
someone, it made his or her self
the students could improve their speaking
confidence increased; the eye contact,
skill from cycle 1 to cycle 2.
body movement,
appropriate
words
and gesture were
Second, Most Names had more
developed by explaining someone in
strengths than weaknesses, It made
detail. They used eye contact, body
students work in a group and familiar
movement, and gesture to make clear
each other, the students are as the subject
their sentences so their friend could guess
so they did everything by themselves, all
someone in describing.
students involve in the activity, students
Student
had
more
good
learn not only from their teacher but also
relationship with their friends in the
from their friends, students motivate to
group because they always play the game
study hard like their friend which success
and share among their friends in the
in the game, and students competed one
group. From the result of the research,
another to study hard to be the winner of
there were some positive responses to the
the competition.
students in teaching learning process in
Third,
good
order to achieve the goal and the
responses in the implementation of the
researcher had recorded the strengths and
most names. They like doing most
the weaknesses of applying game to
names. They enjoyed the game very
improve the students‟ speaking skill. The
much and felt that the time ran too fast.
strengths were more than the weaknesses.
They did not feel sleepy and were not
All the improvements achieved by the
bored. By applying most names, they
students can improved their skill in
became
speaking English.
more
students
confident
gave
with
their
speaking skill. Most Names were done in
group. They gathered ideas from the
In teaching
learning
process,
especially in teaching speaking, it is

12. necessary to implement an appropriate
students should not very hard; working in
technique. The technique used by English
a group can solve this problem. The time
teacher is based on the purpose of the
should be attended to get the maximal
related lesson, the characteristic of the
result.
class, the ability, and the reason of
language
learning.
Most
Most Names as the game is one of the
Names as the game in teaching speaking
alternative techniques to achieve the
is an effective way to teach descriptive
students‟ speaking skill in English.
text.
Teacher should not measure the students‟
Most
support
competence from their ability in finishing
students‟ motivation. They are motivated
the task but rather on the students‟ skill
and enjoy in teaching learning activity. It
in using the language communicatively in
helps students comprehend the material
their daily life.
they
Names
Choosing
The teacher should remember that
learn.
can
Consequently,
their
achievement improved.
students to practice speaking. One of
By considering the fact, there are
students‟
significant
The teacher should facilitate the
improvements
them is through most names which can
be held in the form of competition among
achieved by the students and benefits
the students at school.
when Most Names is implemented in the
2. The Student
classroom activities. It implies that most
The students should be more
names is urgently needed to improve
confidence and brave to speak English.
students‟ speaking skill.
By applying Most Names, it is easy for
Realizing that Most Names is
students to practice in speaking English
very essential in developing students‟
among their friends. Students should
skill in speaking, some suggestions are
practice English everyday in the daily life
put forward to the English teachers, the
and it will improve their speaking skill.
other researchers, and the students.
English is very important for us. By
1. The Teacher
mastering English, it will be easy for us
The teacher should be creative
to get a good education, to get a good
and innovative to design the activity in
relationship, and to get a good job.
studying-learning process especially in
3. The Other Researcher
speaking activity accordance with the
Most Names as a kind of guessing
students‟ problem. The task given to the
game is one of interesting and joyful

13. techniques that can be applied in the
classroom to improve the students‟
speaking
skill.
There
were
some
weaknesses in this study so it is hoped
that the other researcher could help to
overcome the weaknesses which were
found.
V. REFERENCES
Arikunto Suharsimi. 1986. Prosedur
Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan
Praktek. Jakarta: PT. Bina Aksara
Brown Douglas H. 2004. Language
Assessement:
Principle
and
Classroom
Practice.
San
Fransisco: Pearson Education, Inc
Brown Gillian, George Yule. 1983.
Teaching the Spoken Language:
An Approach based on the
Analysis of Conversation English.
UK: Cambridge University Press
Brumfit
Christopher,
Mitchell
Rosamond, 1995. Research in the
Language Classroom, Modern
English
Publications
in
Association.
Bygate Martin. 2000. Speaking. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Language. USA: Longman Inc
Callum George P Mc, 1980. 101 Word
Games. Oxford University Press.
Dobson Julia M. 1987. Effective
Techniques
for
English
Conversation
Groups.
Washington D.C: United States
Information Agency
Edge Julian. 2001. Essentials of English
Language Teaching. London:
Longman Kingdom: Cambridge
University
Hadi Sutrisno. 1991. Metodologi
Research. Jogjakarta: Percetakan
dan Penerbitan ANDI OFFSET
Harmer Jeremi. 2001. How to Teach
English: An Introduction to the
Practice of English Language
Teaching. England: Longman
http://universityofibnkhaldunbogorindonesia.blogspot.com/2010/01
/improving-speaking-skill-byconnective
Kistono, 2007. The Bridge Competence.
Yudistira
Klippel Frederike. 1998. Keep Talking.
United Kingdom: Cambridge
University Press
Larsen-Freeman, 2004. Techniques and
Principles in Language Teaching.
Oxford University Press
Louma Sari. 2005. Assessing Speaking.
United Kingdom: Cambridge
University Press
Madsen Harold S. 1983. Technique in
Testing. New York: Oxford
University Press
McNiff, Jean, 1988. Action Research,
Principle and Practice, Mac
Millan Education Ltd.
Murcia Marianne Celce. 2001. Teaching
English as a Second and Foreign
Language. USA: Heinle and
Heinle
Nunan David. 1989. Design Task for the
Communicative Classroom. Great
Britain: Cambridge University
Press
Oller, Jhon W, 1979. Language Test at
School, Longman
Ricard Jack C, Renandya Willy A. 2002.
Metodology
in
Language
Teaching. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press
Smaldino, Sharon F et all. 2005.
Instructional Technology and
Media for Learning. New Jersey:
Pearson Education, Inc
Spatt mary, et all. 2005. TKT (Teaching
Knowledge
Test).
United
Kingdom. Cambridge University
Sugiono. 2006. Metode Penelitian
Pendidikan:
Pendekatan
Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R &
D: Bandung

14. Weir Cyril J. 1990. Communicative
Language Testing. New York:
Oxford University Press