Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 88 Vocabulary Enhancement through Presentation, Practice, Production(PPP) Method in the Rural EFL Classrooms Caroline V. Katemba linakatemba@gmail.com Faculty of Teachers Training & Educational Sciences Universitas Advent Indonesia DOI: 10.35974/acuity.v7i1.2774 Abstract The purpose of this research was to look into how to improve students' vocabulary achievement by using the Presentation, Practice, and Production method. This study used both quantitative research and an experimental design. In this study, 68 seventh-grade students from SMP Negeri in Bandung Barat participated. They were split into two groups: the control and the experimental. Both groups received the same pre-test. The Presentation, Practice, and Production method was taught to the experimental group, while the traditional method was taught to the control group. Statistical analysis of the data revealed a significant difference in enhancement between the experimental and control groups. Both groups improved, but the control group did not outperform the experimental group. The researcher recommended that the teacher teach vocabulary using the Presentation, Practice, Production method because it is effective in increasing student vocabulary in rural EFL classrooms.. Keyword: PPP, vocabulary improvement, Experimental vs Control. INTRODUCTION All types of English as a foreign language teaching can be effectively developed if we have a thorough understanding of the learner as well as the teaching and learning process. Teaching English as a foreign language necessitates not only brains but also the ability to make students comprehend, appreciate and interested in learning English as a foreign language. English consists of both skills and sub-skills. It has the following abilities: reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Its sub-skills include vocabulary, grammar, and collocation. Among these sub-skills, vocabulary is one of the most important aspects of English, and learning it effectively is crucial. According to Swan and Walter (1984), "vocabulary acquisition is the largest and most important task confronting the language learner." Course books began to include activities that focused on specific vocabulary." What is the significance of vocabulary? According to Wilkins (as cited in Thornbury, 2002), "you can say very little with grammar, but almost anything with words." https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity mailto:linakatemba@gmail.com Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 89 Today, all second language theorists and practitioners recognize the importance of vocabulary in language teaching. For a long time, it was thought that vocabulary could only be taught in isolated word lists; however, there are now numerous ways to teach vocabulary. The most common belief among them is the critical importance of vocabulary in communication and language teaching; the more words we know, the more fluently we can communicate. (Schmitt 2000, Richards and Renandya, 2002) Aside from the previously mentioned statements about the importance of vocabulary, "it is to emphasize that there have been a great number of different approaches to language learning, each with a different outlook on vocabulary" (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). "Vocabulary learning is now widely regarded as one of the most important aspects of both native language acquisition and foreign language learning (Morra & Camba, 2009). The importance of vocabulary learning and retention in the minds of learners cannot be overstated. As a result, it should be taught in such a way that learners will be able to recall them easily, knowing how to use and when to use words. Until recently, vocabulary had a significant problem in that it was not regarded as an important factor in language teaching. Vocabulary was not as important as it is now, and vocabulary instruction was relegated to a secondary role in foreign language instruction. Furthermore, vocabulary instruction was regarded as unimportant, ineffective, and time-consuming. Vocabulary instruction was not given the necessary importance in foreign language teaching around the world. Fortunately, there has been a lot of interest in vocabulary teaching over the last few decades (Richards & Renandya, 2002). Similarly, Katemba (2019; 2021) stated that Indonesian students struggle to learn English vocabulary due to differences in the form and structure of the language. Students only learn English in primary school; however, not all primary schools in the country introduce English; however, students generally learn the language in junior high school. Furthermore, Taebenu and Katemba (2021); Katemba (2022); emphasized that when teaching English vocabulary, the teacher should use a variety of approaches to pique the students' interest in learning the language and overcome challenges in the classroom. Furthermore, Berliani and Katemba (2021) stated that vocabulary is the most important aspect to learn because it is used for communication to communicate ideas, and vocabulary knowledge is required to comprehend a text. Teacher should have a strong influence in the classroom (Tobing, 2016). Based on these specific cases, the researcher in this study intends to investigate a method for improving vocabulary learning. Apparently, there are numerous operative vocabulary learning methods; the researcher employs Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP) as one of several methods for teaching vocabulary. The researcher demonstrated how effective the Presentation, Practice, and Production method is in improving students' vocabulary achievement. This method has been used for many years, but researchers modified it to include communicative activities to learn vocabulary as the foundation for https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 90 learning English as one of the foreign languages for Indonesian students, which must be learned from Junior High School until University level. Knowing this case, the researcher wanted to find an interesting method to teach vocabulary as the way to enhance students learning in English. The researcher applied the modified Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP) method. Practicing the modified Presentation, Practice, Production in teaching can increase students vocabulary in the classroom, and the students will not be bored with the communicative activities material given by the teacher, and the students will feel it likes a game but, it will be able to enhance their vocabulary. Pham & Do (2021) did a study on a quasi-experimental comparing two classes one used the PPP( Presentation, Practice, Production) method and the other uses TBI (Task Based Instructions) found that the TBI group increases their grammatical performances in Speaking and Writing but did not outperform the PPP group. Based on the information presented above, the researcher wishes took a topic in titled " Vocabulary Enhancement through Modified Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) Method in the Rural EFL Context" at SMP Negeri Cisarua in Bandung. This study then intended to answer the following questions: Is there any significant difference in the vocabulary enhancement of grade VII students between those who are taught through a modified Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP) method and those who are taught through conventional method? Based on the problems mentioned above, especially supported by previous researchers about the use Presentation, Practice, Production in learning strategy in improving students’ vocabulary, the researcher provided the hypothesis as follows: Null Hypothesis (Ho):There is no significant difference in the vocabulary enhancement of grade VII students between those who are taught through a modified Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP) methods and those who are taught through conventional method? Alternative Hypothesis (Ha): There is a significant difference in the vocabulary enhancement of grade VII students between those who are taught through a modified Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP) methods and those who are taught through conventional method? With this study, the writer hopes that this study may be useful for the teachers, curriculum planner and the future researcher: (1). English Teacher: This study is expected to make sure it can help teachers to become a skillful teacher in teaching vocabulary through Presentation, Practice, Production method. (2). Future Research: This study helps the English major students as future researcher to consider for another study using this method in different context. (3). https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 91 Curriculum Planner: To help the curriculum planner to consider this methodology/method to be included as a part of teaching vocabulary achievement at the beginner level. METHODOLOGY This research uses quantitative research and experimental design, where the researcher started to test the understanding of the students through pre-test giving the treatments and the last is post-test to find out if learning vocabulary through a modified Presentation, Practice, Production method gave a significant effect towards students’ vocabulary achievement. The research design is described in the following table: Table 1: Research Design Note: O : Students’ vocabulary pre-test and post-test X : Using modified Presentation, Practice, Production method Participants The population for this study was all students in grade VII at SMPN Cisarua in Bandung, which consisted of five classes. And the sample in this study consisted of two classes from grade VII B and grade VII D, with grade VII B serving as the experimental group and grade VII D serving as the control group. The experimental group consisted of 37 students, while the control group consisted of 39 students. The total number of respondents was 68 students. Research Instrument This study's instruments were a pre-test and post-test vocabulary test. The pre-test is intended to assess students' vocabulary abilities prior to implementing the Presentation, Practice, Production method. The post-test is intended to assess the study's outcome after employing the modified Presentation, Practice, and Production method. The vocabulary tests are in the form of fill-in-the-blank questions and a picture test. In this study, visual aids were used in the Presentation and Practice stages, as well as communicative activities. Data Gathering and Procedures In gathering the data and procedures, the researcher employed the following steps: Experimental O X O Control O - O https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 92 Preparatory Phase A. Construction of all instruments needed - Preparation of the lesson plan - Preparation of the teaching material of a modified Presentation, Practice, Production from the text book of grade VII and internet. - Constructing of the pilot test to be administered B. Pilot test or try out of instructional to other group of students at SMPN Cisarua, Bandung. C. Submission of instructional materials such as pilot test and teaching preparation to the English language expert. D. Polishing the instrument to be used in this study and submitted to the language expert. Actual Research Pre-test Pre-test is conducted to diagnose the students’ prior ability in vocabulary knowledge, and it is conducted before the researcher gives the treatment. Pre-test instrument was in the form of multiple choice question, fill in the blank, matching test form and picture test. Treatments on the daily lesson Following the administration of the pre-test, the treatments were administered to the experimental group. The control group, on the other hand, used the traditional method, relying solely on the school's text-book. For the experimental group, there are several steps in teaching vocabulary using the Presentation, Practice, and Production method: Presentation The teacher introduces the day's lesson. The teacher introduces new words or structures through activities such as: Displays the image as well as its name. demonstrates the brevity of the conversation Provide a matching game Provide a simple song. Using a puppet, tell a story. Practice Students practice controlled use of words or structures, such as making sentences from prompts, asking and answering questions, and providing sentences based on a picture. Oral or written practice is acceptable. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 93 Production The teacher instructs the students to create a list of pictures and their names, to hold a group conversation and to perform it in front of the class, and to create a list of words in the form of flashcards. Post-Test After the treatment, both the Experimental and Control groups of students were given a post-test. By calculating the data, the researcher discovered that there is a significant enhancement in students' vocabulary after implementing the Presentation, Practice, and Production method, particularly to see if there is a significant difference between the mean of the Experimental class's pre-test and post-test and the mean of the Control class's pre-test and post-test. The post-test instrument consisted of multiple-choice questions, fill-in-the-blank questions, and a picture test. Several statistical tests were done for the instruments used such as finding the Validity, Level of Difficulty, Discrimination index and the Reliability in which it was calculated through Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) and excel software and the result can be found in the following recapitulation table. Recapitulation Table From this table, the researcher knows what number that can be used in this research as the pre-test and post-test. The recapitulation table can be seen in the Table 2. Table 2: Recapitulation Number of questions Validity Level of Difficulty Discrimination Reliability 7, 12 Not valid Moderate Very bad High 13, 36, 66, 67 Not valid Difficult Very bad 17 Not valid Easy Very bad 3 Very low Moderate Satisfactory 8, 64, 69 Very low Difficult Poor 10 Very low Difficult Very bad 11 Very low Moderate Very bad 24, 57 Very low Easy Poor 46, 48 Very low Moderate Poor 2, 34, 40, 63 Low Moderate Poor 4, 15, 19, 33, 37, 41, 44, 45, 47, 49, 50, 68 Low Moderate Satisfactory https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 94 9 Low Difficult Good 16 Low Difficult Satisfactory 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 31, 32 Low Easy Poor 27, 56 Low Easy Good 38, 54 Low Easy Satisfactory 42 Low Moderate Good 1, 5, 6, 18, 28, 29, 51,70 Moderate Moderate Good 30, 52, 55, 59, 61 Moderate Easy Good 39, 43, 60, 62 Moderate Easy Satisfactory 65 Moderate Difficult Satisfactory 14, 25 High Moderate Exellent 35, 58 High Easy Good 53 High Easy Exellent Based on the recapitulation test, this research used 50 questions for pre-test and post-test; it is based on the result of the researcher’s observation and used testing instrument through Anates V4 and also consideration from the advisors. There are 63 questions were valid and then the researcher decided to take 50 questions and the researcher used number 8, 9, 10, 16, 64, 65, 69 (7 questions) as the difficult questions. As the moderate questions, the researcher used 31 questions, and the number of the questions are; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 25, 28, 29, 33, 34, 37, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 63, 68, 70. For the easy questions, the researcher took 12 questions, and the number of the questions are; 30, 35, 39, 43, 52, 53, 55, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62. For the questions with the number 7, 12, 13, 36, 66, 67, 17, they are not used for this research because they are not valid questions. There are also several numbers that are not used and it is based on the validity test, level of difficulty and discrimination test and the number of the questions are; 24, 57, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 31, 32, 27, 56, 38, 54. They are not used because from the level of difficulty in the recapitulation table they are classified easy questions. So, there are 20 that were questions are not used from 70 questions for this research. Data Processing The researcher used Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) to calculate the data. SPSS is a kind of computer program for statistically computation. The level of significance is 5%. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 95 Normalized Gain Gain is the result of the test which is achieved by a student in an examination in certain subject through deduction process of pre-test and post-test,. So, this formula is used to find whether an improvement of students’ achievement vocabulary appeared in both experimental group and control group from the result of the pre-test and post-test. (g) = % 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡− % 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 100 %−% 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 Where: (g) : Normalized gain % pre-test: Percentage of pre-test scores % post-test: Percentage of post-test Classification of Gain Score: Table 3 : Classification of Gain Score Test of Normality Normality test is done to see whether the population normalized gain score are normally distributed or not. In this normality test, normalized gain may be considered normally distributed if the significance (Sig) > α 0.05. Shapiro-wilk test is the most powerful normality test and because the data were 60 above. (Razali and Wah, 2011). Criteria of Normality test: 1. If p-Value (Sig.) ≥α = 0.05, means the population normalized gain score is normally distributed 2. If p-Value (Sig.) ≤ α = 0.05, means the population normalized gain score is not normally distributed. Homogeneity Test Homogeneity test is a test to discover whether the population variances of the two groups is distributed homogeneously to one another or not. Criteria of Homogeneity: 1. If p Value (Sig.) ≥ α= 0.05, means the population variance is homogeny 2. If p Value (Sig.) ≤α= 0.05, means the population variance is not homogeny Gain Score Value Interpretation 0.00-0.30 Low 0.31- 0.70 Moderate 0.71- 0.100 High https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 96 Hypothesis Testing The researcher used this formula to find the differences between scores of pre-test and post-test from both experimental group and control group after being given the treatment. The hypothesis to be tested: Ho: µ1 = µ2 Ha: µ1 ≠ µ2 Where: µ1: Average normalized gain of the Experimental group of students’ vocabulary achievement µ2: Average normalized gain of the Control group of students’ vocabulary achievement Criteria of t-test: If, pValue (Sig.) ≤ α (.050): Ho is rejected. It means there is a significant difference in the vocabulary achievement of grade VII students between those who are taught through modified Presentation Practice Production (PPP) method and those who are taught through conventional method. If, pValue (Sig.) ≥ α (.050): Ho is not rejected. It means there is no significant difference in the vocabulary achievement of grade VII students between those who are taught through Presentation Practice Production (Presentation, Practice, Production) modified method and those who are taught through conventional method. DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS In gathering the data of the research, the researcher gave Vocabulary test to see the enhancement of students’ vocabulary through Modified Presentation, Practice, Production method. The data was calculated through Excel and SPPS computer software programs. Table 4: Pre-test, Post-test and Normalized Gain Experimental Group Control Group Mean St. Deviation Mean St. Deviation Pre-test 27.230 3.786 30.108 2.903 Post-test 43.205 2.627 35.513 3.678 Normalized Gain 0.710 0.087 0.278 0.116 Based on the result of the Table 4, the average of the control group in pre-test is 30.108 and the post-test is 35.513, and the mean in the experimental group of pre- test is 27.230 and the post test is 43.205. Standard deviation each group in SPSS https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 97 16, the results is 0.116 for the control group, while the experimental group is 0.087. So, from the table above, the normalized gain of experimental group is higher than control group. Normalized Gain In this research gain of the test has been conducted in the vocabulary achievement of grade VII students between those who are taught through a modified Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP) modified method and those who are taught through conventional method, and it was based on the pre-test and post-test result of each group and it can be seen from the table 5. The researcher discovered an average gain score for the control group is 0.278 and for the experimental group is 0.710. It shows that there is an increasing of experimental group after treatment. However, the conclusion should be drawn after the statistical Normality Test After gain has been conducted and the researcher discovered an average normalized gain score for the control group is 0.278 and for the experimental group is 0.710, and the researcher used the SPSS 16 to calculate the normality of the data for examining the probability distribution of the data. Table 12 shows the result of the normality test: Table 5: The Result of Normality test Tests of Normality a. Lilliefors Significance Correction Based on the data result in the Table 5, this research used the output from the Shapiro-Wilk, because Shapiro-Wilk is the most powerful normality test and because the sample of the data were 60 above (Razali and Wah, 2011). According to the criteria of the normality test, the data is normally distributed if both data have p-value (sig) larger (>) than 𝛼=0.050 and data is not normal if p-value smaller (<) than 𝛼= 0.050. And based on the result from the table above, both data was normally distributed because the significant score of the gain score for the experimental group was (sig) .098 larger (>) than 𝛼 =.050 and the significant of the gain score for the control class was (sig) .070 larger (>) than 𝛼 =.050. Group Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. Gain Control Group .950 37 .098 Experimental Group .948 39 .070 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 98 Homogeneity Test Based on statistics if both of the data were normally distributed, then homogeneity test was used. The result of the homogeneity can be seen in the following table: Table 6 Based on the table above this research used the data that based on mean because the data was normally distributed. According to the criteria of the homogeneity tests the data is homogenous if p value (sig) larger (>) than 𝛼 = .050 and the data is not homogenous if p value is smaller (<) than 𝛼= .050. Based on the result of the data above, it can be conclude that the population variance are homogenous. Hypothesis Testing Because it was proven that the value of the gain score of the students was normally distributed, the researcher had to perform hypothesis testing by using parametric Independent Sample t-test. Independent Samples Test Based on the data above, the researcher used the data of equal variance assumed concern that the population variances are homogenous and sig (2-tailed, it is according to the criteria of independent of sample t test, if the value (sig) is smaller (<) than 0.05 it means that Ho is rejected, if value (sig) is larger (>) it Test of Homogeneity of Variances Gain Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. Based on mean 2.401 1 74 .126 Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. T Df Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Differenc e Std. Error Differenc e Lower Upper Gai n Equal varianc es assume d 2.40 1 .126 - 18.43 1 74 .000 - .4324160 .0234612 - .479163 5 - .385668 5 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 99 means that HO is not rejected. And based on the result sig (2 tailed) the sig. Value is 0.000 and it is smaller < than 0.05. Discussion The study sought an answer to the question, "Is there any significant difference in the vocabulary enhancement of grade VII students between those who are taught using a modified Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP) method and those who are taught using a conventional method?" Based on the data presented above, it was discovered that there is a significant difference between the experimental and control groups. It is clear that the experimental group outperformed the control group. According to Lagalo (2013), learning vocabulary through the Presentation, Practice, and Production Method is effective and interesting, and it has been demonstrated that students' post-test scores are higher than their pre-test scores; additionally, it has motivated students to learn vocabulary as a foundation for learning a language. So, to determine the effectiveness of the method in teaching, the researcher can look at the results of the post-test from the students in the experimental group, and Presentation, Practice, and Production Method is the most effective method in teaching English vocabulary. Thamrin (2008) stated that the Presentation, Practice, and Production methods produce significantly different results, implying that the Presentation, Practice, and Production method is a more effective method than the traditional method for improving students' vocabulary achievement. The Presentation, Practice, and Production method is an engaging way for students to learn English. As a result, the researcher used the Presentation, Practice, and Production Method in this study to improve student vocabulary achievement, and the Presentation, Practice, and Production Method is beneficial in improving student vocabulary achievement in grade VII students at SMPN 3 Cisarua. Otherwise, the researcher can conclude that using the Presentation, Practice, and Production method can improve students' vocabulary because it has been proven and supported by several theories and studies that show the Presentation, Practice, and Production method is the most effective in teaching vocabulary. Conclusion As a result, it is concluded that using a modified Presentation, Practice, and Production improved the vocabulary knowledge of EFL students in a rural area of Bandung, Indonesia. It can help students learn vocabulary in an easy way, and they can be more active by doing the presentation. It can also help students understand better by practicing, and it can help students be more creative by creating a product from their learning, which can make them interested in learning English. Recommendation After the findings of this research, the researcher gave several recommendations to increase students’ vocabulary achievement through Presentation, Practice, Production method: https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 100 English Teacher: The Presentation, Practice, and Production method is recommended for English teachers when teaching vocabulary because it can pique students' interest, motivate them, and make them more active, understandable, and creative in their use of the vocabulary in their daily lives. Future Researchers: The researcher also advises future researchers to use the Presentation, Practice, Production method in teaching vocabulary to students for a longer period of time and to compare several classes to see if there is a significant difference between students who were taught using the Presentation, Practice, Production method and those who were taught using the conventional method, and this result can be used as a reference, resource, and guidance for the same research in getting the same results. REFERENCES Berliani, N., A. & Katemba, C., V. (2021). The Art of Enhancing Vocabulary Through Technology. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (SMART). Vol.7 no.1. https://doi.org/10.26638/js.1340.203X Bui, T. L. D., & Newton, J. (2021). PPP in action: Insights from primary EFL lessons in Vietnam. Language Teaching for Young Learners, 3(1), 93-116. Katemba, C., V. (2019), Students’ Vocabulary Enhancement at Grade 10: A Comparative Study Using CALL & MALL in Indonesia. CALL-EJ, 20(1), 87-114. http://callej.org/journal/20-1/Katemba2019.pdf Katemba, C. V. (2021). Enhancing Vocabulary Performance Through Mobile Assisted Language Learning at a Rural School in Indonesia. Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature and Culture, 6(1), 1- 11. https://doi.org/10.35974/acuity.v6i1.2457 Katemba, C.V. (2022), Vocabulary Enhancement through Multimedia Learning Among Grade 7th EFL Students. MEXTESOL Journal, Vol.46 no.1, 2022. http://www.mextesol.net/journal/index.php?page=journal&id_article=46009 Morra, S., & Camba, R. (2009). Vocabulary learning in primary school children: Working memory and long-term memory components. Journal of experimental child psychology, 104(2), 156-178. Pazmiño Vargas, R. J. (2021). Effectiveness of presentation, practice and production method on the development of speaking fluency (Master's thesis, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador). Pham, V. P. H., & Do, T. H. (2021). The Impacts of Task-Based Instruction on Students' Grammatical Performances in Speaking and Writing Skills: A https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity https://doi.org/10.26638/js.1340.203X http://callej.org/journal/20-1/Katemba2019.pdf https://doi.org/10.35974/acuity.v6i1.2457 http://www.mextesol.net/journal/index.php?page=journal&id_article=46009 Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol. 7 No. 1 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 101 Quasi-Experimental Study. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 969-986. Razali, N. M. and Wah, Y. B. (2011), Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics, Vol 2 (1):21–33. Richard-Amato, P. A.(2003). Making It Happen: from Interactive to Participatory Language Teaching: Theory and Practice, 2nd Ed. New York: Longman. Richards, Jack C. and Renandya Willy A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of current practice Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schmitt, Norbert. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching: Cambridge Language Education. Cambridge: University Press. Swan, M. (1984). Basic English usage. Oxford University Press. Taebenu,S.F., & Katemba, C.,V. (2021). Vocabulary Enhancement through Memrise and Google Classroom. Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching. Volume 5, Number 1, pp: 228-241. https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v5i1.3813 Tarina, F. N., & Yana, Y. (2021). An analysis on the eighth students’ perception of the aplication ppp (presentation, practice and production) technique in teaching writing descriptive text. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 4(5), 783-788. Thornbury, S. (2002). cited in David Wilkins. 1972. How To Teach Vocabulary.(London: Person Education Limited, 2002). Tobing, J. H. L. (2016). School Leadership, Culture, Strategy And Teacher’s Working Performance. Journal of International Scholars Conference - Educational/Sciences 1(2), 119-134. Retrieved from https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/jiscedu/article/view/288 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v5i1.3813 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/jiscedu/article/view/288