Microsoft Word - ACUITY, VOL 1 NO.1 2017 24    Study On The Use Of Oral Drills And Role-Play Method In Improving Students’ Interactive Speaking Achievement (A Pre-Experimental Method with One Group Pretest-Posttest Design in the First Year Students at SMP Advent II Setia Budi, Bandung) Kelvri L. Sinambela and Debora Chaterin S., MAEd English Education Department, Universitas Advent Indonesia, Bandung e-mail: kelvrisinambela@gmail.com & deborachaterins@gmail.com Abstract This study examines whether the use of Oral Drills and Role-Play method could improve students’ interactive speaking achievement. This study used quantitative research using pre-experimental method with one group pre and post- test design. The study was conducted in SMP Advent II, Setia Budi, Bandung. The participants of this study were 30 students from the first year students at SMP Advent II Setia budi, Bandung as the sample and they were grade VII at SMP Advent II Setia Budi, Bandung. This study used one experimental group as the sample. A pre-test and post-test were done. The experimental group was given treatment (Oral Drill and Role-Play Method). The data gathered was then statistically calculated and analysed. According to the interpretation, if p Value (Sig.) ≤ (0.05) then HA is accepted and H0 is rejected and If p Value (Sig.) ≥ (0.05) then H0 is accepted and HA is rejected. After calculating the data it was known that the p-value = 0.000 lesser than alpha 0.05. Result of the study showed that there is a significant difference in improving students’ interactive speaking achievement after using oral drills and role-play method. Keywords: Interactive Speaking, Oral Drills, Role-Play Method Introduction Interactive speaking is a process of conveying and sharing ideas (Hoge, 2014). One of the most well-known spoken languages is English. If English learners do not learn how to speak or do not get any opportunity to speak in the language, they may not be motivated and lose interest in learning the language. Moreover, students who do not develop strong oral skills during this time will find it difficult to communicate in English in the future. To be able to communicate in English fluently is a means to tell others that the speaker should implicitly have good interactive speaking. People will value learners’ English level when they speak the language. To communicate orally in English, students should use correct words, structure and clear articulation (Nur, 2004). However, English learners in Indonesia considered speaking as a difficult skill (Nurani, 25    2012). They have learned English for years but they find difficulty in speaking English (Carter & McCarthy, 2007). Actually they are able to understand when someone is talking or asking a question, they know the meaning of the sentence in their minds yet the problem is they can hardly give response in English language because they find it difficult to talk in English so, they end up using Indonesian language and quit trying to speak in English (Wulandari, 2010). Interactive speaking is a face to face conversation through telephone calls or other two way communication (Dow & Ryan, 2000). In which people alternately listen and speak. Rivers (2002) p.159 states that “interactive speaking skills are in the form of agreeing, disagreeing, asking for opinions, giving opinions, asking for clarification, giving clarification, attacking, answering an attack, suggesting courses of action, suggesting alternative course of action, reinforcing suggestions, asking for more exact information and giving more exact information.” On the other side, there are also partially interactive and non- interactive speaking often called one way communication which do not need a conversation between the people who talk. Ascher (2008) states interaction involves not just expression of one’s own ideas but comprehension of each other, one listens to others; one responds (directly or indirectly); others listen and respond. According to Vilagran (2008) some examples of interactive speaking are face to face conversation, telephone calls, chance to ask for clarification, oral drills, or slower speech from a conversation partner. As Ariani (2009) said some speaking situations are partially interactive, such as when giving a speech to a live audience, where the listeners cannot interrupt the speech. The speaker nevertheless can see the audience and judge from the expressions of the listeners faces or body language whether or not he or she is being understood. Lynne & Rico (2008) states to speak fluently and accurately is not something easy to do and it can be achieved by practicing. Students speak with each other and take account of them in our speaking by suiting our output to them, and by acknowledging their input and seeking clarification of what they say. This has two major effects; it strengthens relationship between the people who involved in speaking so that they can more readily communicate with each other, and it provides opportunities for language development to occur, both for the listener and the speaker” (Nation & Hamilton- Jenkins, 2000, p.17). Nowadays, speaking is generally perceived as the most fundamental skill to acquire. In Indonesia English is still used as foreign language. Since English is a foreign language it means that the skill of speaking is not automatically transferable from the speaker’s first language to the second language (Thornbury, 2007). Even private knowledge of the target language’s grammar and vocabulary, which often presented by advance students of foreign language department, does not guarantee success in oral communication when this knowledge is not properly accessed (Aleksandrzak, 2011). Speaking is an 26    interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing verbal and nonverbal information and the speaker also takes the role of listener. Speaking skill is assumed as a difficult skill to master by almost all students at any age (Natalia, 2008). As Krashen (2003) the well known linguist stated that interaction is the key to teaching language for communication then the researcher chose interactive (interaction) speaking as the dependent variable of this study. Moreover, there are several factors affecting Students’ Slow Progress in Interactive Speaking. It is assumed that developing speaking skill to young learners in Indonesia is not easy because of the status of English as a foreign language. It means “it is taught in schools, often widely, but it does not play an essential role in national or social life” (Broghton et al, 2003 p.73). Speaking skill has been neglected in some classrooms. Children learning English as a foreign language tend to consider English as a subject, not as a language for communication. Students do not get any chance to speak English either in the classroom or outside the classroom. Moreover speaking is often concluded in the examination (Bashir, Azeem & Dogar, 2011). Most English teachers prefer to give grammar, reading and writing test in the examination day rather than speaking and listening skills. Hence students’ interactive speaking achievement develops slow progress. As Tsou (2005) stated that getting students to response in a language classroom especially a foreign language class is a problem that most language teachers face. Wulandari (2010) said that some English teacher often using an interesting media to conduct the learning process and the class activities seemed less interesting. Renandya (2004) suggests that the teaching of speaking depends on how the classroom culture need to become ‘talking classroom’. Further, Katemba (2016) stated that Indonesians love to talk, and are instinctively inquisitive people. It means students will be much more confident if they practice to speak interactively regularly. The one who can make the classroom come to life in speaking is the English teacher. Encouraging students to respond in language classroom is a problem that most language teachers face (Katz, 1996). Researcher found during practice teaching and while doing research some English teacher often asked their students to have a written examination as an output and not speaking examination because it consume more time and energy to be done. Compared with written examination, it is easier and it minimize the teacher’s time in teaching. And finally, as Harmer, (2011) said the more students have opportunities to activate the various elements of language they have stored in their brains, the more automatic their use of these elements become. As a result, students gradually become autonomous language users. This means that they will be able to use words and phrases fluently without very much conscious thought. Besides, some problems also caused by the students. There are some reasons why students find a hard time to speak interactively: 27    Inhibition. Ur (2009) stated unlike reading, writing and listening activities, speaking requires some degree of real-time exposure to the audience. Learners are often inhibited to speak foreign language in the classroom. Learners worried about making mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face, or simply shy of the attention that their speech attracts. In addition, Nurani (2012) states that speaking is interactive and requires the ability to cooperate in the management of speaking turn. Moreover, some students are shy to express themselves in front of the people include their classmates and they worry about speaking badly (Harmer, 2003). Therefore, the students tend to be less participation because they worry about being brainless in front of their friend. Lack of Word Storage. Even if they are not inhibited, it was often to hear learners complain that they cannot think of anything to say; they have no time to express themselves beyond the guilty feeling that they should be speaking (Carter & McCarthy, 2007). In addition, Saputro (2008) found that some difficulties faced by the students in expressing idea are nervousness, lack of confidence, and lack of linguistic supports including vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. Kartikasari (2014) states speaking skill is assumed as a difficult skill to master by almost all students at any age and to be able to speak English, ones have to know the knowledge of the language. In adition, when they are speaking, they do not have much time to think what they want to speak. They need to think and speak in the same time. The same idea with Schneidereit (2004) he states that the ability to speak fluently presupposes not only knowledge of language features, but also the ability to process information language on the spot. Low or Uneven Participation. In this case, the learners or participant can talk at a time if he or she is to be heard; and in large group this means that each one will have only very little talking time. This problem is compounded by the tendency of some learners to dominate, while others speak very little or not at all (Nur, 2004). Mother-Tongue Usage. Most learners which English is their foreign or second language, still finds a hard time to stop using the mother-tongue when they learn to speak in English . In classes where all, or a number of, the learners share the same mother tongue, “they may tend to use it; because it is easier, because it feels unnatural to speak to one another in a foreign language, and because they feel less ‘exposed’ if they are speaking their mother tongue. If they are talking in small groups it can be quite difficult to get some classes-particularly the less disciplined or motivated ones – to keep to the target language” (Bryson, 2015 p. 121). A research conducted by Yastutik (2007) shows that there are some speaking 28    difficulties appear in a conversational class. Those difficulties are worrying about others’ responses, using Indonesian rather than English, having inadequate English vocabulary, being unable to pronounce well, being timid or less confident of speaking English. These difficulties may affect students’ ability in speaking. Hence students with speaking difficulties tend to be passive or participating less in the classroom (Ascher, 2008). Based on those problems, it is assumed that it is necessary to find some good methods in learning speaking to make the students feel enjoyable to learn English and to help the students have the ability to use English to communicate. Tice (2004) said that drilling (oral drills) remains a useful technique if it is used appropriately. Oral drills and exercise could build and strengthen memory (Cabaroglu et al., 2010). The use of this technique not only to give the students chance to speak in the class and practice their speaking, but also their comprehension of the text can be reached through this technique. Therefore, it is suggested that the use of this technique could motivate the students to speak in the class and students’ speaking achievement could be improved through oral drills. It is a common belief that children learn English in order to speak it. It is true that they learn English because of their parents demand or enforcement but soon, as they start learning it, they wish to speak it (Sutiyono, 2012 cited from Sadtono, 1997) To speak is part of communication therefore speaking is an essential part in human’s life. According to Vilagran (2008), there are three types of speaking. First is interactive, second is partially interactive, and the last is non-interactive. Dow and Ryan (2002, p. 106) states that “interactive speaking is a face to face conversation, can be talked through telephone calls or other two way communication. In interactive speaking people listen and speak alternately. Some interactive speaking skills are in the form of agreeing, disagreeing, asking for opinions, giving opinions, asking for clarification, giving clarification, attacking, giving more exact information, and so forth.” According to a study that has already done by Kartikasari (2014), she said that students in SMP Negeri 6 Ketapang, Pontianak-Indonesia, most of 7th grade students felt hesitant to communicate with their teacher because they were afraid of making mistakes in speaking. They had in mind that English was a hard language, moreover, they did not have self-confidence because of limited vocabulary. As the result the students became passive in the class. Based on an investigation among all students in the Business English Department of Changsha Vocational and Technical College, nearly 70% - 80% students will choose International Business as their future career because business trades in several countries involve the use of English as means of communication. Therefore speaking capacity holds vital role in business communication (Hui, 2011). Tsou (2005) added, in other countries which are English is their foreign language they have the same problems in speaking the 29    English language especially inside the classroom. Ur (2009) wrote that there are four reasons why students can hardly speak interactively. They are anxious and they do not know what to convey; they have a low participation because someone dominates the class and moreover the frequency of mother tongue usage is high. In addition, several activities which can be used to promote interactive speaking are “discussion, role-play, simulations, information gap, brainstorming, storytelling, interviews, story completion, reporting, playing cards, picture narrating, picture describing and find the difference” (Lynne & Diaz, 2008 p. 140). According to Jarvis (2002), role-play as a teaching method offers several advantages for both teacher and students. In addition, Harmer (2011) stated that role-play can be used to encourage general oral fluency, or to train students to learn the language and role-play method may facilitate the acquisition of a second language. Cornilie et al (2011) states that this method undeniably contain the most language of all methods, although the kind of language and the way language is presented is not always favorable for second language learners. Teaching English to learners also needs a special method that is appropriate to their characteristics. The method needs to provide meaningful and contextual environment to practice speaking English. This is in line with Pinter (2006) who states that learners need much practice (by oral drills) to be able to speak English fluently. In the view of this, oral drills is one of the methods recommended to be used. Oral drills is defined as repeated. Oral drills is one of the most basic learning techniques. Oral drills and excercise could build and strengthen memory (Cabaroglu et al., 2010). Besides, Baleghizadeh and Derakhshesh (2012) reported that the task of oral drills could give opportunities to get accuracy. By doing oral drills the comprehension of a language lesson will be better. Oral drills could help students to use new language many times in real communicative situation especially in doing interactive speaking activity. For many years, Mckay (2006) said that teaching speaking only focuses on oral drills and memorization of dialogues, these techniques did not develop students’ communicative ability, these techniques limitted the students’ ability to express themselves and this caused the decrease of students’ interest in speaking. This often makes learning less meaningful for students, they tend to have little motivation to practice, feel shy, unconfident and afraid to use the language (Brown, 2004). Oral drills usually seen as a boring and old method which can only help the students memorize sentence or words but they do not understand what they are saying. The students with low memorization will find a hard time to recall all the sentences that are given (Kaplan, 2010). One possible for students to be fluent in mastering the language through oral drills is by giving them more time to study and practice because practice makes perfect. Since students usually think that learning is boring and difficult so they need more time to be acquainted with the lesson (Aisah, 2008). 30    Teaching English to young learners is different from teaching English to adult learners since they have different characteristics. It will be different in many ways, such as delivering the lesson, conducting the activities, assessing the learners, using the media, etc. Linse (2005) stated that in teaching speaking skills to young learners, it is important to choose activities and media that are appropriate to their characteristics. By knowing their characteristics, the appropriate ways of teaching them will also be known. Kayi (2008) said several activities which can be used to promote interactive speaking are discussion, role-play, simulations, information gap, brainstorming, storytelling, interviews, story completion, reporting, playing cards, picture narrating, picture describing and find the difference. Role-play method is classroom activities in which students take the roles of different participants in a situation and act it out. In doing role-play method the students are expected to be able to express their argument, idea, and even self-existence through certain roles in which speaking skill is explored. The teachers, however, should consider some points in designing the activities, because not all students feel easy to speak or even to pretend to be someone else (Tice, 2004). In addition Role-play is a speaking activity where the teacher gives the situation and students have to make conversation according to the situation given. Role-play method help the studens to improve their interactive speaking skill, they are forced to commiunicate to the other students like in the real world. Cornilie et al (2011) also stated that in role- play teachers add the element of giving the participants information about who they are, and what they think and feel. Role-play method is having the following characteristics: Role play is assumed as a particular value, it usually to the participants speaking ability rather than development of an art that is focusing on the mimicry, feeling or emotion. It usually does in a dramatic play by children but it also used as a tool by psychologist and therapist (Huang, 2008). From the information above it can be conclude that role-play method is an interactive speaking activity where the students is asked to pretend or act as somebody else or put themselves into an imaginary situation. Huda (1997) suggested that role- play method could help students in language acquisition. Utilizing role-play method encourages learners’ speaking ability, improve vocabulary, and build problem solving ability. There are many methods in teaching interactive speaking ability. Each method has advantages and disadvantages, but whatever method will be used in reaching the best result it is all according to the teacher and students’ readability and cooperation. Each method has their advantages and disadvantages and it also happen in role-play method. Here are some advantages of using role-play method. First, “role-play method can make the learners pay attention to what their partner is saying, ask for and give clarification, repair a communication breakdown, or express themselves explicitly” (Barbara et al, 2011p. 43). Second, role-play method can be used to encourage general oral fluency, or to train students for 31    specific situations especially where they are studying English for specific purpose (Rani, 2009). Third, Role-play method will make the students interested in the topic, moreover, students’ involvement will lead them to have empathy and understanding of different perspectives (Jarvis, 2002). Fourth, role-play method also suitable in its implementation in education where it will work for all personalities and under all teaching circumstances. The main benefit of role-play method is that enables a flow of language to be produced that might be difficult or impossible to do (Bradbury, 2013). In any technique in language teaching problems are bound to arise. However, these problems are not insurmountable. Below is a brief description of some of the possible problems that may arise in the carrying out of role-play method activities. Dougill (2009) said that some students have fixed ideas as to what a good class teacher is they expect a rigid, fixed procedure in teaching. They are used to being passive and expect teaching to be teacher-centered. Attitudes like these have to be changed. Before this can be done the teacher's attitudes have to be changed too. Mancera et al (2009) said that role-play and simulation take a lot of time especially if they include preparation and follow-up work. It also depends on the ability of the class to perform the tasks. The teacher thus has to know the class well so as to assign the students activities to suit their abilities. Time constraints are especially felt in examination classes which have a set syllabus to follow and to complete. The lack of space and the large number of students can make the organization of the activities difficult. Noise level will also be high especially, if the size of the classroom is small thus making concentration difficult. Monitoring of the different groups may also be a problem. The teacher thus has to adapt and improvise accordingly, for instance looking for an alternative place or even carrying out the activity outdoors (Paul, 2003). Koneru (2011) write that when students are encouraged to produce spontaneous speech, mistakes are bound to appear especially in L2 classes. The question on how to correct and when to correct could be a problem to the teacher. The teacher must bear in mind that fluency rather than accuracy is more important. However, Hui (2011) said that it does not mean that the teachers do not correct mistakes at all. This should be done during the discussion and feedback sessions at the end of the activity and not while the students are preparing or carrying out the tasks. The advantages and disadvantages of role-play and simulation discussed here are not exhaustive. However, by bearing them in mind, it is hoped that they would help the teacher be better prepared as the teacher launches out to use role-play and simulation in the language classroom (Sitinjak, 2007) 32    In doing role-play, some experts suggest several steps, Ladefoged and Johnson (2014) assert six major steps in the role play procedures that will be joined with oral drills strategy. First is deciding the material, the second is creating the dialogue, third is teaching the dialogs through oral drills then asking the students to practice the dialog by using role-play method after that have the students modify the situation and dialogues until they become familiar with the situation and finally evaluating the students’ achievement and comprehension. Therefore the researcher concludes that speaking is not an easy skill for English learners because there are still many barriers that obstruct the learners to learn speaking. To have a really good communication skill in speaking someone should be able to speak fluently as Johnson (2013) states that fluency refers to the absence of pauses and other indices of word-finding (or grammatical) difficulty. Methodology The method that the researcher used in this study is Pre-experimental research design. The research design that is used in this study is one group pretest- posttest design. In this kind of design, before treatment is implemented the sample is giving a pre-test (in the beginning) and at the last meeting of the research the sample is giving a post-test. This design is used based on the goal purpose that is to know the improvement of interactive speaking achievement of students after using oral drills and role-play method. Below are the design table of one group pretest-posttest design. Pre-test Treatment Post-test 01 X 02 (Sugiyono, 2008) Where: 01 : Pre-test before giving a treatment X : Treatment 02 : Post-test After giving a treatment The population of the research was taken from all students in the first year of SMP Advent schools in west Bandung. The sample were 30 students from SMP Advent II Setia Budi, Bandung. The 30 students were the first-year students of junior high school. To get the sample, this study used purposive sampling technique; it is based on particular consideration and teacher recommendation. Sutedi (2009) states that research instrument is a tool that is used to collect or to provide various data that are needed in a research activity. Besides, according to Sugiyono (2008) research instrument is used to collect data in order to answer research questions and research hypothesis. Instruments that are being used truly determine the result of a research activity. Therefore the instruments that were being used in this study are as follows: Test Instrument, Speaking Assesment, and Interview. 33    Test Instrument. Triani (2013) cited from Danasasmita (2009) which says that test is a series of questions that must be answered by the students. Test that is used in this study is a subjective test in the form of oral interview questions that will be answered orally by the students (do not required a written result). In this study the researcher provide 25 essay questions that is conducted before and after giving a treatment (pre-test and post-test). Oral interview questions test is a type of test of research improvement that needs an answer in the form of explanation and description of words. The test that was being used is just the same in the beginning and in the last test. Data Analysis of Test Instrument. Before the instrument is being used in the research, the instrument firstly being pilot tested to the higher level that is the second year students of junior high school (eight grade students) that already learn about interactive speaking in the previous semester. After the instrument is being tested it is then processed and analysed. Below are the series of the analysis that are being used to know whether the test is feasible or not to be used. After counted using Anates-uraian, below are the recapitulation of the result of Testing Instruments on Thursday January 28th, 2016 of the second year of JHS students at SMP Advent II, Setia budi, Bandung. The followings are analysis of instrument validity, analysis of instrument reliability, difficulty index, and discriminating power index. Test Analysis of Questions Validity Reliability Difficulty Index Discriminating Power index 1 Valid Very High Moderate Good 2 Valid Moderate Poor 3 Valid Moderate Poor 4 Valid Moderate Good 5 Valid Moderate Poor 6 Valid Moderate Good 7 Valid Moderate Poor 8 Valid Moderate Good 9 Valid Moderate Good 10 Valid Moderate Good 11 Valid Moderate Good 12 Valid Moderate Poor 13 Valid Moderate Poor 14 Valid Moderate Poor 15 Valid Moderate Good 16 Valid Moderate Poor 17 Valid Moderate Good 18 Valid Moderate Good 19 Valid Moderate Good 20 Valid Moderate Poor 21 Valid Moderate Poor 34    22 Valid Moderate Poor 23 Valid Moderate Poor 24 Valid Moderate Good 25 Valid Moderate Poor According to table 3.9 there are 12 questions which is valid, with high reliability, the difficulty index is moderate and the discriminating power index is good, they are questions number 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 25. There are 13 questions which is valid, with high reliability, the difficulty index is moderate and the discriminating power index is poor, they are questions number 2, 3, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24. Therefore, the researcher used all the 25 oral interview question to be the researcher instrument for pre and post-test. Speaking Assesment. In this study, assessment technique that was used was limited response technique in which the students were required to respond the questions limitedly using aural cues ( What do you like about school life?) and by requiring spoken answer (Things that I like about school is playing with friend). During the study, the assessment will be conducted two times during the pre-test and post-test. The speaking assessment sheet contains five aspect of speaking skill, namely comprehension, vocabulary, grammar, fluency and pronunciation. Each aspect has its own criteria scaled from 1 – 5 (Brown, 2004). The criteria of speaking assessment are as follow. 1. Comprehension refers to understanding what people convey and what to respond. The indicators of students’ comprehension in this study is seen from their responds to the teachers’ questions whether they can understand the questions at once, or they need many repetitions to answer the questions (Katz, 1996) 2. Vocabulary refers to a set of words within a language which are chosen based on communication context. Without vocabulary, nothing can be conveyed (Harmer, 2011). As the consequence of it, vocabulary is assumed to influence other aspects of speaking skill. This is in line with Pinter (2006) saying that vocabulary contributed the most to speaking proficiency at a novice level. In this study, the indicator of students’ vocabulary aspect is seen from the number of English words the students produce on how they use the phrasal verbs continuosly rather than using single word. 3. According to Azar and Hagen (2009), grammar is a set of rules and examples dealing with the syntax and word structures of a language. In this study grammar refers to the ability to arrange correct phrases, using compound noun, compound adjective, compound verbs, and tenses in conversation. The students are expected to produce at least a simple sentence consisting of a subject and and a verb phrases referring to small group of related words within sentence or clause. For example, when the students asked their friend “How are you today?” the other students will answer “I feeling great” rather than saying the common answer “I am fine, thank you and you?” 35    4. Fluency refers to continuity when speaking without pauses or hesitancy indicated by such as “ums” or “ers”. It is in line with Linse (2005) who define fluency as how fast and how much a learners speaks without pausing, repeating the same words, and doing false-start in coping with the real time processing. In this study, the indicators of students fluency is their ability to use the English word or phrase fillers (Gap filler). 5. Pronunciation refers to the ability to produce correct, rhythm, and intonation of words in a spoken language. Mckay (2006) stated that the central criterion of pronunciation assessment, especially for EFL learners, is intelligibility or comprehension of what the students’ convey. In this study, the indicator of students’ pronunciation is also intelligibility and some traces of foreign accent. The more native-like is better. Below are the criteria of grading system to collect the result of students’ achievement on interactive speaking. Interview. The researcher used interview as a tool of data collection in this study. Interview is held as a media to collect the data when students speak orally to answer the questions. The 25 questions were asked in the form of interview and after that the data recording was transcribed and printed to be graded. The grading system was based on the speaking assessment of Brown (2004). Normalized Gain The normalized gain is known to assess students’ performance in pre-test and post-test. The normalized gain is done to know how far the improvement of the students’ interactive speaking ability after using oral drills and role-play method. Criteria Comprehension Vocabulary Grammar Fluency Pronunciation Appears to understand Speaks L2 with Produces complete and Speaks in L2 very fluently Speaks in L2 Intelligibly everything without difficulty accurate English word accurate sentences and effortlessly. and has few traces of (E.g, 1. This is KFC, 2. I can see foreign accent. many people there, 3. I can buy some clothes) Understands nearly everything Speaks mostly in L2 Produces some phrases instead Speaks in L2 less fluently Speaks mostly in L2 at normal speed, although with few L1 words of complete sentences with due to few problems of Intelligibly with mother occasional repetition may be consistent and accurate word vocabulary/selection of tongue accent necessary order (E.g, 1. KFC, 2. Seeing words. many people. 3. Buying some clothes) or produces consistent omitted sentence. (E.g buy some clothes, see many people) Understand most of what is Produces 4-6 English Produces inconsistent and Speaks mostly in L2 with Speaks mostly in L1 said at slower-than-normal words. incorrect sentences/phrases some long pauses and but produces 1-3 English speed with many repetitions (E.g I can walking around, hesitancy. Words and pronounce buy food, some game, etc) them in intelligibly mother tounge accent Has great difficulty Produces 1-3 English Answers mostly in L1, with 1-3 Speaks mostly in L1, Speaks mostly in L1 understanding what is said, words (brands or English words/phrases tries to speak in L2 but produces 1-3 English often misunderstands the place names such as but so halting words, needs some questions KFC, Roppan, etc do with so many pauses repetition in not count as English and "er..." pronouncing the words word/vocabulary to understand them. (due to limited vocabulary) Unable to comprehend the Vocabulary limitations Unidentified because of speaking Unidentified because Unidentified because material so that unable to so extreme as to make in L1 all the time. of speaking L1 of speaking in L1 express/ respond the conversation in L2 all the time all the time. questions correctly. virtually impossible so that the student speaks in L1 all the time. As adapte d from Brown (2004) 1 2 3 4 5 36    Normalized gain analysis that will be counted using Hake formula in Tauran (2013) as follows Gain classification according to Hake as cited in Tauran (2013) can be seen below Normality Test The normality test as the result of pre-test and post-test will be used to know whether the data that have been used distributed normally or not. Normality test that will be used in this study is Shapiro-Wilk Razali formula in Sianipar (2014). According to the rule, the data are normally distributed if Value (Sig) ≥ (0.05). ∑ ∑ ̅ Explanation: W = Normality test = sample data i = The constants obtain from the average value ̅ = The average of sample data Result and Discussion In processing the data of the study, the researcher taught one class at SMP Advent II Setia Budi, Bandung as the experimental group. The researcher chose first year students as the sample that consisted of 30 students in a class. This study used statistical program, SPSS 16 to calculate the data that were being collected after giving pre-test and post-test to the students. The table below was a brief explanation to show that there was improvement on students’ interactive speaking achievement on post-test after giving the treatment. For example student 1 had an improvement from 195 to 309. After calculating the data, it was found that the mean from pre-test was 143.43 and the mean for post-test was 294.03 and from both score of pre and post-test the gain was calculated that is 0.3250. Gain Value Interpretation 0,70 High 0,30 0,70 Moderate 0,30 Low 37    Result of Pre- test, Post-test, Standard deviation, and Gain Sample Group Mean St. Deviation Pre-test 143.43 111.311 Post-test 294.03 119.312 Gain 0.3250 0.17871 Through the descriptive statistic done by SPSS 16, it can be seen that the students’ interactive speaking achievement after using oral drills and role-play method has improved moderately. The average gain for interactive speaking achievement is 0.3250. According to Hake (1998) in Tauran (2013) if 0,30 0,70 it means that the improvement of the students’ performance after pre-test and post-test is moderate where 0.30 < 0.3250. Normality Test According to the data on table above it is shown that the Sig. of the normality test is 0.487, if Value (Sig) ≥ (0.05) it means that the data is distributed normally (Sianipar, 2014). From the data above the p-value Sig is 0.487 is greater than (0.05) so it is conclude that the data used in this study is distributed normally. One Sample Test One sample test is used to calculate the significance of the research. If p Value (Sig.) ≤ (0.05) then HA is accepted and H0 is rejected and If p Value (Sig.) ≥ (0.05) then H0 is accepted and HA is rejected. After using SPSS 16, the result of the data after using one sample test formula is shown below One-Sample Test One-Sample Test Test Value = 0 Shapiro-Wilk Statistic Df Sig. n_gain .968 30 .487 38    t Df Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper n_gain 9.959 29 .000 .32496 .2582 .3917 Based on table above, the p-value = 0.000, which means that the p-value 0.000 is lesser than (0.05). From the interpretation it can be conclude that p- value (0.000) < (0.05) it means HA is accepted and H0 is rejected. From the interpretation above it can be conclude that there is a significant difference in students’ interactive speaking achievement after using oral drills and role-play method. The result of the study shows that there is a significant difference in students’ interactive speaking achievement after using oral drills and role-play method. According to Pinter (2006) role-play method can make the learners pay attention to what their partner is saying, ask for and give clarification, repair a communication breakdown, or express themselves explicitly. From what Pinter said it can be concluded that oral drills and role-play method could improve students’ interactive speaking ability because the indicator of interactive speaking is to ask for clarification, giving idea, and so on. Since there is a significant difference in students’ interactive speaking achievement it can be concluded that oral drills and role-play method is an effective method to teach student how to speak interactively. By analyzing the transcription of students’ answers, it can be concluded that there is a good improvement in students’ interactive speaking before and after giving treatment. This sample shows how the pre and post-test was conducted. When the researcher asked in pre-test “Why is it important to study in the school?” a student gave simple answer by saying “pass.” If the answer is calculated in the students’ speaking assessment grading form, the word ‘pass’ in Comprehension column interpreted ‘Unable to comprehend the material so that unable to express/respond the questions correctly. In Vocabulary, Grammar, Fluency and Pronunciation column there is no point on this simple answer because the answer did not fit the grading criteria from point 1 until 5. After giving treatment the student answer by this sentence in post-test “Because I want to study together with my friends” From this short excerpt it can be concluded that the students has a really high improvement in speaking. In Comprehension column it can be interpreted ‘Appears to understand everything without difficulty’ and it is counted 5 points. In Vocabulary column it can be interpreted ‘Speak L2 with accurate English word’ with 5 points also. In Grammar column it can be interpreted as ‘produces complete and accurate sentences’ with 5 points. In fluency column it can be interpreted ‘Speak L2 less fluently due to few problems of vocabulary selection of words’ with 4 points. The last is pronunciation column it can be interpreted ‘Speak mostly in L2 intelligibly with mother tongue accent’ with 4 points. In the data of pre-test the total grading is 625 as 100% right. According to the result none could achieve perfect score 625. There is one student who could achieve only up to 590 point in post-test and the 39    lowest grade is 87. The mean average for the post-test data was 294.03 and 143.43 for pre-test data. From the data that has already been gathered it can be concluded that what Mancera et al (2009) suggested that role-play method could help students in language acquisition was true and can be implemented in teaching language especially interactive speaking for junior high school students. Since there is a significant difference in improving students’ interactive speaking achievement it can be concluded that oral drills and role-play method is a suitable method to use in teaching interactive speaking to the students, especially students in the first year of junior high school. Summary The title of this study is “Study on the Use of Oral Drills and Role-Play Method in Improving Students’ Interactive Speaking Achievement” in which the researcher aimed to find answer for the question: Is there any significant difference in students’ interactive speaking achievement after using oral drills and role-play method?” This study was conducted based on some theories and ideas of linguistics and another writer who have done their previous study. This research was done in SMP Advent II Setia Budi, Bandung where the sample is taken from the first year junior high school students as the experimental group. The sample consisted of 30 students and the sample was given a treatment using oral drills and role-play method. A pre-test was conducted to the sample group at the beginning of the meeting using some questions in the form of essay that need explanation and the students were asked to answer all the questions orally one by one and the data will be collected in the form of recording that were going to be transcribed in order to grade the result. After that the post-test was done after 1 month giving treatments. The result shows that: For the sample group consisting of 30 students, the mean of pre-test is 143.43 and the mean of post-test is 294.03. The total of gain score is 0.3250. From the result above, it is shown that there is an increase of score after the experiment was given to sample group. To answer the research question, the researcher focused on the result of the hypothesis testing which is shown that there is a significant difference on students’ interactive speaking ability. Conclusion   From this research the conclusion that can be drawn are the following: The oral drills and role-play method is good in improving students’ interactive speaking achievement it was known from the result of the hypothesis testing that show there was a significant difference on students’ interactive speaking achievement. From the writers’ point of views, it is found that learners especially who are still in the first year of junior high school likes to do oral drills and role- play because most of them want to be active and enjoy doing an activity rather than being silent in the class. Cabaroglu, et. Al. (2010) stated Oral drills could help students use new language many times in real communicative situation 40    especially in doing interactive speaking activity. Role-play method also can help the learners pay attention to what their partner say, ask for and clarify; furthermore, it may help repair a communication breakdown, or express themselves explicitly (Pinter, 2006). 41    References Aisah (2008). Perkembangan dan Konsep Dasar Perkembangan Anak. UPI: Unpublished Mini-thesis Aleksandrzak, M. (2011). Problems and Challenges in Teaching and Learning Speaking at Advance Level. Uniwersytet:im.Adama Ariani, D. (2009). Senior High School students’ anxiety in English Speaking Class (A descriptive study of language anxiety at SMA Laboratorium Percontohan UPI Bandung). UPI:Unpublished Baleghizadeh, S and Derakhshesh, A. (2012). The Effect of Task Repetition and Noticing on EFL Learner’s Oral Output. International Journal of Instruction Vol. 5, No. 1 Barbara, J., Hoekje., Sara M., & Tipton (2011). English Language and the Medical Profesion: Instructing and Assessing the Communication Skills of International Physicians Innovation and Leadership in English Language Teaching. Teaching the Communication of Emphaty in Patient- Centered Medicine. Volume 5, 43-47 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited Bashir, M.,Azeem, M., & Dogar, A.H (2011). Factors effecting students’ English speaking skills. British journal of arts and social sciences, 2 (1), 34-50. Bradbury, D.L (2013). Dialogue exchange: interactive listening and speaking for beginners. Planet B Publishing. Broughton, G., Brumfit, C., Flavell, R., Hill,P., & Pincas, A. (2003). Teaching English as a foreign language second edition. New York:Routledge Cabaroglu, N., Basaran, S., and Roberts, J. (2010). A Comparison Between The Occurence of Pauses, Repetitions and Recasts Under Conditions of Face- to-Face and Computermediated Communication: A Preliminary Study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 9 Issue 2. Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael. (2007). Exploring Spoken English. United Kingdom:Cambridge University Press Collins Learning Dictionary. Collins English Dictionary (2003). Scotland: Colins Publisher Ltd Dougill, John, 2009). Drama Activities for Language Learning, London: Macmillan. Dow, AR & Ryan, J, (2002) Interactive Language Teaching. New York:Cambridge University Press. 42    Harmer J, (2011). How to teach English new edition. Cambridge:Cambridge Univerity Press Harmer, J. (2003). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Cambridge:Cambridge Univerity Press Hoge, A.J. (2014). Effortless English Learn to Speak English Like a Native. Georgia:Effortless English LLC. Huang, I. Y. (2008). Role Play for EFL/ESL Children in the English Classroom. Taiwan: National Cheng Chi University. Huda, N. (1997). A National Strategy in Achieving English Communication Ability: Globalization Perspectives. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 4 (Special Edition), 281-292. Hui, L. (2011). Improving Students’ English Speaking Skill Through Content- Based Instruction. (A Classroom Action Research in the Second Grade Students of Business English Department of CsV & TC, China in the Academic Year of 2010/2011) Surakarta: Unpublished. Jarvis, L. (2002, Marert). Role Playing as a Teaching Strategy. Retrieved November 18, 2015, from imet.csus: www. imet.csus Johnson, D. J. (2013). Videogames and Wellbeing, Young and Well Cooperative Research. Melbourne: Cooperative Research Centre. Kaplan, Robert B. (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press Kartikasari, E. (2014). Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Repetition Drill. Tanjungpura University, Pontianak:Unpublished Katemba, C (2016). Small Talk Among the Indonesians in Three Different Countries: Amereica, Indonesia, Philippines. Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature and Culture, Vol 1 No.1. 2016. Katz, A. (1996). Teaching Style: A Way to Understand Instruction in Language Classroom. Voices from the Language Classroom.New York:Cambridge University Kayi, H. (2008). Teaching Speaking:Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language. Retrieved on November 18, 2015, from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Kayi-TeachingSpeaking.html. Koneru. (2011). English Language Skills. India: McGraw-Hill Education Pvt Limited. Krashen, S. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. New York:Pergamon Press 43    Ladefoged, P. & Johnson, Keith (2014). A Course in Phonetics. International Journal. Cencage Learning. Linse, C.T. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching: Young Learners. New York: McGraw-Hill ESL/ELT Lynne, T & Rico, Diaz. (2008). Strategies for Teaching English Learners. San Bernardino: Pearson Mancera, L., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., and Huerva, D., (2009). Modelling Role- Playing Game as a Unit of Learning to Encourage Cooperative Learning.Institute of Informatics and Applications (IiiA), University of Girona, Spain Mckay, W.F. (2006). Language Teaching Analysis. London: Longman. Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. (2003). Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary Eleventh Edition. U.S.A: Merriam-Webster.Inc. Meriam-Webster Disctionary. Encyclopedia Britannica Online (2015). Retrieved on November 21, 2015 Natalia, R. (2008). The EFL Students’ Strategies in Learning English Speaking Skills. (A Descriptive Study at the Tertiary Level). UPI: Unpublished Nation, I.S.P., & Hamilton-Jenkins, A. (2000). Using communicative task to teach vocabulary. Guidelines, 22(2), 15-19. Nur, C. (2004). English Language Teaching in Indonesia: Changing policies and practical constraints. Singapore: Eastern University Press. Nurani, F. (2012). Students’ Strategies in Overcoming Difficulties Encountered in Speaking English. (A Case Study at a Vocational High School in Bandung). UPI: Unpublished. Paul, D. (2003). Teaching English to Children in Asia. Hongkong:Longman Phakiti, Aek (2014) Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning. London:Bloomsbury Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learner. China:Oxford University Press Rani, S. (2009). A Manual for English Language Laboratory. India:Pearson Education Renandya, W.A.(2004). Indonesia. In. H.W. Kam. Language Policies and Language Education: The Impact in East Asian Countries in the Next Decade. Singapore:Eastern University Press 44    Rivers, W. M. (2002). Interactive Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press. Saputro, Daniel T. (2008). Membangun Server dengan Mikrotik OS. Bandung:Gava Media Schneidereit, Gaby. (2004). Legal language as a Special Language: Structural Features of English Legal Language. LA: GRIN Verlag Sianipar, B. (2014). Peningkatan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa SMP Melalui Model Pembelajaran Group Investigation. Skripsi UNAI. Sitinjak, P. (2007). The Use of Role-Play Technique in Improving Students’ Speaking Ability at the First Year SMAN 1 Parongpong. UNAI:Unpublished Sugiyono (2008). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif & RND. Bandung:Alfabeta Sutedi, D. (2009). Penelitian Pendidikan Bahasa Jepang. Bandung:Humaniora Sutiyono, (2012) Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung:ALFABETA Tauran, S. F. (2013). Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemahaman dan Penalaran Matematis Siswa Sekolah Menengah Pertama Melalui Model Pembelajaran ARIAS. S2 Thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung. Thesaurus. Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus (2016). Philip Lief Group Tice, D.M, Bratslavsky, E & Baumeister, R.F. (2004). Emotional Distress Regulation Takes Precedence Over Impulse Control: If you feel bad, Do it!. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol.80, 53-67 Thornbury, S. (2007). How to Teach Speaking. Harlow:Pearson Education Limited Triani, S. (2013). Model Pembelajaran Bilangan dan Kata Bantu Bilangan Bahasa Jepang Menggunakan Permainan Tradisional Congklak. Bandung:repository upi Tsou, W. (2005). Improving Speaking Skills Through Instruction in Oral Classroom Participation.Taiwan: National University of Taiwan Ur, P., (2009). A Course in Language Teaching. Practice and Theory (17th Printing).Cambridge: Cambridge University press. Vilagran, M. (2008). 4 Skills:Speaking. Cambridge: Unpublished Mini-thesis Wood, William L. (2006). Foreign and Second Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 45    Yastutik, Yuli. (2007). Students’ Strategies to Overcome Speaking Problems in the Conversation Class as an Intracurricular Program at SMA Negeri 8 Malang. Retrieved on November 18, 2015