IMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY BY USING WHOLE BRAIN TEACHING (WBT) METHOD AT THE FIRST YEAR STUDENTS’ OF SMP NEGERI 1 BARAKA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26618/exposure.v3i1.799Abstract
The objectives of the research were to find out the improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy and the improvement of the students’ speaking fluency through the use of Whole Brain Teaching (WBT) Method at the first year students’ of SMP Negeri 1 Baraka. This research used Classroom Action Research that consisted two cycles. The research population was the first year of SMP Negeri 1 Baraka academic year 2012. The sample of this research consisted of 30 students.The researcher obtained the data by using speaking test and observation sheet. The result of this research indicated that the improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy was 6.5 classified as good and the improvement of the students’ speaking fluency was 6.9 classified as good. It could be stated that the students’ speaking ability through the use of Whole Brain Teaching (WBT) Method at the first year students’ of SMP Negeri 1 Baraka improved to a good level after test in the second cycle.
References
Baffle, J. Concept of Whole Brain Teaching. Download on July 7.2009 from HTTP:www.wholebrainteaching.comindex.phfirst-stepsfiveclassrom-rules.html
Barkers, 2005. Interaction And Greatest Efficiency. Retrieved from httpmrpamps multiple.com
Brew, and Ellis. 2002. Learner Might Be Fluent. London. University Press.
Bowen, J. Donald. 1985. Tesol Techniques and Procedures. London: Newbury Howse Publishers, INC.
Buzan, 1980. Whole Brain Teaching Emphasize Active. Downloaded on October 19 from http:www,wholebrainteaching.com
Gay, L. R. 1981. Educational Research, Competencies for Analysis. New York: Charles E. Merill Publishing Co. A Bell and Hawel Company.
Hirai, Debra L. Cook, and Friends. 2010. Academic Language Literacy Strategies for Adolescents A “How to” Manual for Educators. New York: Routledge Companion
Hornby, A.S, E. V. Gatenby, H. Wakefield. 2005. The Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. London: Oxford University Press.
Hughes, Arthur. 2003. Testing For Language Teachers Second Edition. England: Cambridge University Press
Laura. 2010. Whole Brain Learning. Downloaded on October 21from http:www,wholebrainlearning.comindex.php.htm
Maybin, Janet and Joan Swan. 2010. The Rutledge companion to English Language Studies. New York: The Route Ledge Companion
Nuratifah. 2008. The Role of The Teacher in Improving the students Motivation to Ask Question During The Classroom Interaction at SLTP 1 Bulukumba. Thesis, Graduated of Makassar Muhammadiyah University
Pedersen,(1985:95). Whole Brain Learning Process. PB ( Revised ed). Greenwich, Information Age Publishing.
Sudjana, Nana. 1999. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya
Schuster, 1999. Improving the students speaking to ask the question during the classroom interaction. Retrieved from http.com
Widdowson, H. G. 1983. Teaching Language as Communication. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wiriaatmadja, Rochiati. 2006. Metode Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
