EEJ 8 (3) (2018) 359 – 369 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej Students’ Speaking Assessment Used by English Teachers Based on the 2013 Curriculum Waritsatul Jannah1, Rudi Hartono2 1. MA Darul Mujahadah Prupuk, Tegal, Indonesia 2. Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 2 June 2018 Approved 16 August 2018 Published 15 September 2018 ________________ Keywords: Speaking, assessment, curriculum, perception, 2013 Curriculum ___________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ The present study was focused on the speaking assessment used by some English teachers in Margasari sub-district. The objectives of this study are to explain; 1) the Implementation of Speaking Assessment based on 2013 Curriculum, 2) the types of speaking assessment used by English teachers, 3) teachers’ perception on speaking assessment based on 2013 curriculum, and 4) teachers’ perception of speaking assessment based on 2013 compared to school based curriculum. This research was qualitative. The data were collected by implementing interview and questionnaires, observation, and document analysis. The samples of this study were eight English teachers who taught seventh grade in some schools in Margasari sub-district by using purposive sampling technique. The data of this study were classified and analyzed qualitatively. The result of the study showed that; 1) the English teachers of some Junior High Schools in Margasari sub- district have implemented the speaking assessment, yet it was not properly conducted and did not fulfil the standard 2) the usage of performance based assessment was used in assessing the students’ speaking skill with role play as its most frequently implemented assessing activity, 3) the teachers’ perception towards the speaking assessment was very good, considered the problems that could be addressed and the solutions to overcome them, and 4) most of teachers’ perceived that speaking assessment based on 2013 curriculum and school based curriculum is different from several points of view yet the same on the activity of speaking test. © 2018 Universitas Negeri Semarang Correspondence Address: Jl. Pesantren No. 01 Prupuk Utara Margasari - Tegal 52463 E-mail: ncha.el07@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 360 INTRODUCTION It is well known that language ability was viewed as knowledge of a set of certain elements such as grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation, which are then realized as four skills, namely: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Among those four skills speaking is considered to be a complex skill and most important part of teaching and learning second language (Bachman& Palmer, 2009). Among those four skills, speaking skill plays an important role of an EFL course (Knight, 1992, as cited in Aghdam & Farahani, 2012). It is an important part of the curriculum in language teaching, and it makes speaking an important object of assessment as well. In the second language learning and teaching, Zaremba (2006) argues that “speaking seems to be the most important skill required for communication” (as cited in Al- Eiadeh, Al.Sobh, Al-Zoubi & Al-Khasawneh, 2016). The goal of teaching speaking is improving students’ communicative skill in interacting with others. When learners acquire language, they do not only learn how to compose and comprehend correct sentences as isolated linguistic units of random occurrence; the learners also learn how to use sentences appropriately to achieve a communicative purpose. Syakur (1987) states that speaking competency is a complex skill because it deals with crucial components, such as: accuracy which consists of grammar and vocabulary, pronunciation, comprehension and fluency (as cited in Widiastuti, 2007). Since speaking is considered as a complex skill in learning and teaching a second language, the teacher then should apply the appropriate method for the students to gain more understanding. In any learning process, evaluation is needed to assess or measure the students’ understanding and the ability of learners to absorb the lessons. The evaluation can be realized in a test or assessment form. Assessment can be used to enhance learning, help students take control of their own learning and to provide a measurable barometer for the students’ progress. That is more likely to be accomplished when assessment is authentic and tied to the instructional goals of the program. Assessment in language learning process, of course, always pertains to prevailing curriculum in the local environment. Recently, Indonesian government, especially the Minister of Education and Culture officially launched the new curriculum called 2013 Curriculum in 2014. The application of 2013 curriculum is fostered by current global challenges, required competencies, and current negative phenomena especially among young people and discouraging perceptions among Indonesians regarding education. It is assumed that by shifting to the newest curriculum, Indonesian education will lead to a brighter future in facing the tighter competition in globalization era. This newest curriculum utilizes scientific approach in the learning process. It is expected that the students have skill, knowledge and good manners. Also in 2013 curriculum, teachers have to change paradigm to work in classroom, strengthening attitude toward skills and knowledge which are integrated with scientific approach. The 2013 Curriculum recommends practices of authentic assessment. It emphasizes the practical application of tasks in real-world settings (Fook & Sidhu, 2010, as cited in Wangid, Mustadi, Senen & Herianingtyas, 2017). The authentic assessment approach requires teachers to assess students’ attitude, knowledge and skills based on the learning process and learning results. Due to the process of learning, assessment and other matters which are considered to be more complex than previous curriculum, some teachers still have some problems in its implementation. Since speaking is categorized into skill, therefore the researcher uses the concept of authentic assessment of 2013 Curriculum in assessing the speaking. Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 361 The studies about implementation of authentic assessment of speaking and its types were previously conducted by Hidayah (2017), Idayani and Rugaiyah (2017), Rukmini and Saputri (2017), and Sahyoni and Zaim (2017). Hidayah (2017) did the research on the lecturers. Rukmini and Saputri (2017), Idayani and Rugaiyah (2017) and Sahroni and Zaim (2017) investigated the assessment in Junior High School. All of their researches were aimed to describe the implementation of the assessment of learners’ speaking skill with other elements. Their research showed similar to others which found that generally, teachers implement some strategies in conducting the speaking assessment. They implemented performance assessment in the form of types of speaking tasks. However, the implementation has not been conducted properly yet (Rukmini & Saputri, 2017). Those researches above are similar to the writer’s, which discussed the implementation of speaking assessment and the types of speaking assessment used. Yet the writer’s research also investigated the teachers perception towards the speaking assessment based on 2013 curriculum and the difference of the implementation of speaking assessment compared to the previous curriculum. Other studies discussed the implementation of general assessment in classroom, conducted by Saefurrohman and Balinas (2016) and Noormaliah (2016). Saefurrohman and Balinas (2016) and Noormaliah (2016) conducted the research on the English teachers. Their studies aimed to explore how the teachers practice their classroom assessment, whereas Noormaliah (2016) did it specifically related to 2013 Curriculum. Saefurrohman and Balinas’ (2016) study revealed that Internet and published textbooks became the source of Filipino and Indonesian Junior High School English teachers in making the assessments. Verbal feedback and conference with students were two most popular methods used in giving feedback for both Filipino and Indonesian English teachers. Furthermore, Noormaliah’s (2016) study showed that the English teachers at seventh grade of SMP Muhammadiyah Banjarbaru have applied observation assessment for attitude competence, written assessment and project assessment for knowledge competence, and product assessment for skill assessment. Here, the study did not find any implementation of speaking assessment for skill assessment. It also revealed that the teachers encountered some problems which came from internal and external problems. All of the above considerations forced the writer to arrange the purpose of the study. The main purposes of this study are, firstly, to investigate the implementation of speaking assessment in applying the of 2013 curriculum. Secondly, this study investigates the types of speaking assessment used by English teachers in applying the 2013 curriculum. Thirdly, this study attempts to describe English teachers’ perceptions of speaking assessment in applying the 2013 curriculum by considering the problems and the solutions. Finally, this study is aimed to investigate the implementation differences of speaking assessment used by English teachers in the application of 2013 curriculum compared to school based curriculum. This research is hopefully support the concept of speaking assessment. It is also can be beneficial for educators as additional knowledge in developing their technique of assessment. It also may improve their ability in assessing students’ speaking appropriately. METHODS In this study, the researcher used descriptive qualitative approach. Qualitative research is the collection, analysis and interpretation of comprehensive narrative and non-numerical data to gain insights into a particular phenomenon of interest (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2011). Sukmadinata (2011) stated that the goal of descriptive research is to describe or illustrate the existing phenomenon, either natural or human engineering (p.72). Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 362 The researcher chose the subjects by using purposive sampling method in which she used her judgment to select sample for a specific purpose (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009). The subjects of this study were eight teachers who taught English at the seventh grade of Junior High School in some schools in Margasari sub-district. In collecting the data, this study implemented interview, questionnaire, classroom observation, and document analysis as the instruments of this study. In this study, the writer distributed the questionnaire to the teachers. The questionnaire used in this research was an open ended questionnaire and close ended questionnaire. It was used to elicit in depth about teachers’ views and opinions regarding their perceptions of speaking assessment. In this research, the writer conducted eight individual interviews and the questions were scheduled in Bahasa Indonesia in order to get clear understanding of the content. The purpose of doing interview was to enhance the teachers’ answers about their perspective of speaking assessment and complete their explanation after doing the questionnaires. The documents analysis covered anything that supported the questions asked. In this case, the researcher used the teachers’ documents including the syllabus, the lesson plans, and the scoring rubrics as her data collection of the participants’ assessment practices. The classroom observation involved observing and recording through the use of notes, and teachers’ behavior in the observation place. In this research, the writer did the classroom observation when the process of speaking assessment was in progress. It was conducted in order to gain descriptions of teachers’ practices of speaking assessment. RESULTS AND DISCUSSSION Results The interview result revealed that the implementation of speaking assessment was conducted by teachers by asking the students to perform speaking in front of the class in the form of monolog, dialog, role play, short question and answer, and discussion. They implemented those assessments depending on the learning material. It is inferred that the most frequent assessment technique used is dialog, then role play. The implementation of dialog and role play in assessing the students is not done spontaneously. The teacher first gave the example of dialog which is taken from the text book and then asked the students to make another dialog as the example, after that they memorized it. The role play is done in the same way as dialog, which is done through memorization. The teachers assumed that although the memorization technique is not allowed in the learning process, they kept implementing it the way that they used to do it. It happened because of the condition of input of learning. As what teacher 3 said that if the students don’t memorize the dialog or vocabularies, they will not be able to produce sentence, they won’t be able to speak up. It is the reality that happened in the rural school area. In addition, the researcher did the observation to the teachers while they were assessing the students’ speaking skill. The result of teacher’s checklist on implementation of speaking assessment can be shown at the table below. Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 363 Table 1. Checklist on Teacher’s Implementation of Speaking Assessment based on 2013 Curriculum N o. Criteria T 1 T 2 T 3 T 4 T 5 T 6 T 7 T 8 1 Teacher prepares the scoring instrument √ √ √ √ √ 2 Teacher delivers the criteria of assessment √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 3 Teacher applies the assessment as it is stated in the lesson plan √ 4 Teacher delivers the clear instruction s on the assessment √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 5 Teacher assesses the students during the learning process √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 6 Teacher assesses the students at the end of material process √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 7 Teacher reviews the assessment /giving feedback √ √ √ √ √ √ The table above indicates that the criteria of “teacher applies the assessment as it is stated in the lesson plan” were checked for T1 since in his lesson plan he mentioned the speaking assessment task and he practiced it. In addition, the data from document analysis which include lesson plan and syllabus, indicated that all teachers have their own syllabus and lesson plan. They also have their scoring books of the assessment which is shown in the following table. The next finding is the types of speaking task used by teachers. In this case, the researcher found it from the questionnaire; all of the teachers utilized the performance-based assessment techniques which were done in several types of the speaking assessment test as presented in the table below. Table 2. The Types of Speaking Assessment used by English Teachers. N o. Types of Assessmen t T 1 T 2 T 3 T 4 T 5 T 6 T 7 T 8 Word repetition task √ √ Read aloud task √ Sentence/ completio n task √ Picture cued task √ Question and answer task √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Giving direction/i nstruction √ Role play √ √ √ √ √ Discussion √ √ √ Conversati on √ √ √ Table 2 indicates that the most frequently used technique in assessing students’ speaking is question and answer task, meanwhile only some teachers implemented others types of assessment. The question and Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 364 answer task is used by teachers to assess the students within the process of learning. The next frequently used technique is role play which implemented post the leaning material. The other types of speaking assessment which used by teachers are shown in the table below. The next finding is about the teachers’ views concerning the speaking assessment. Based on the interview with all participants, it could be inferred that all teachers have the same perception about the definition of authentic assessment implemented in 2013 curriculum. They stated that authentic assessment is the assessment which requires authentic instruction and authentic learning. It is the process of collecting information of students’ achievement about their learning outcomes in attitude, knowledge and skill competence. The assessment process cannot be separated from the learning process; it is done systematically during and after the learning process. The teachers also agreed that the assessment used for speaking is good since it does not only see the students’ result of assessment, but it also assessed the whole process of assessment during the learning activity. Although it is good, they argued that the assessment is complicated to be conducted. As teacher 2 said that assessing speaking is difficult since it has many scoring criteria to be assessed and the teachers must be intense in paying attention to students’ performance. Besides, there are many other assessments to be done. In assessing the students’ speaking ability, teachers faced many problems, such as: difficulty in gaining the students responses, the lack of students’ ability, repeating mistakes, low motivation, shy, afraid of making mistakes, feeling anxious and lack of vocabulary mastery. To overcome those problems, teachers tried many ways to solve them. Some of them admitted that they still implemented memorization in their teaching and learning process. Moreover, they always motivated the students and the use of dictionary is compulsory in English class. The last finding is about the teachers’ views about the comparison of speaking assessment in 2013 curriculum and that in school based curriculum. In this phase, the data were gained from questionnaires. It was inferred that two out of eight sample teachers viewed that the implementation of speaking assessment in 2013 curriculum has no difference from the speaking assessment in school based curriculum. Meanwhile six out of eight sample teachers viewed that the speaking assessment in 2013 curriculum is different from the school based curriculum from several points of view. Discussion Curriculum is one of the significant aspects in education. It is an instrument to point any kind of educational activities to achieve the goals of education. The goals of education will not be achieved maximally if the curriculum arranged is not implemented well. Curriculum 2013 requires the use of authentic assessment. In the paradigmatic, authentic assessment requires an authentic instruction and authentic learning. It is believed that authentic assessment is able to provide information about the ability of learners holistically and validly. Basically, the assessment mentioned in the document of the 2013 curriculum is formal assessment (Jamilah, 2013), since formative assessment is done in the process of forming students’ competence and skills with the goal of helping them to continue that growth process (Brown, 2004). Learning assessment that was conducted in some Junior High Schools of Margasari Sub-district includes knowledge, attitudes, and skills competence. In 2013 curriculum, there are many assessments that have to be conducted because they should cover all aspects of the individual learner. Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 365 The 2013 curriculum has been implemented in the four schools in Margasari sub-district since the beginning of the curriculum change. But it has a pause since they still have some problems of understanding it at that time. Then all schools implemented it again since the revised 2013 curriculum became obligatory for all schools. The result of this study is in line with Rukmini and Saputri (2017) which revealed that all of the teachers had implemented the authentic speaking assessment to assess the students’ skill. They did it based on 2013 curriculum guidance which depends on the learning materials. It could occur during the learning process or at the end of learning process after finishing the learning materials. Basically, there are two steps that have been done by teachers before conducting the assessment process. They are: a. Planning Before conducting the assessment, the teacher is required to make a good planning. It can be from the syllabus, considering the indicators of learning material. In planning the assessment, teachers made the instrument of assessment; including the kind of task that should be performed by students and the scoring rubrics. The assessment task must be relevant and in accordance with the competence that will be measured. b. Implementation In assessing the students, the teachers first explained to the students that they were going to do some tasks for their English speaking skill competence score. It was done to maintain a good communication between teacher and students and to ease them in the assessing process. Although the teachers conducted the assessment process, in assessing students’ speaking skill based on 2013 curriculum, only some participant teachers fully implemented it appropriately in accordance with the regulation of 2013 curriculum. The classroom observation and lesson plan analysis showed that the rubric made by teacher 1 and teacher 2, did not fulfill the standard of rubric. Before doing the assessment, teacher 1 did not prepare the scoring instrument in details. The teacher only provided the general scoring instrument. Besides, teacher 2 also did not mention the criteria before conducting the speaking assessment to students after the learning process. The rubric of performance assessment should involve indicators to assess the basic skill competence (Kunandar: 2013), so the rubric can measure the ability to be measured. The teachers then should make appropriate rubric in scoring the students’ speaking assessment. The rubric that is suitable to assess the performance of learners is analytic scoring rubrics, which consists of several aspects to be measured. It is more advantageous since it provides more insight for students and teachers about areas of strength and weakness, as it is argued by Mukminatien (2000), Metruk (2018) and Ulker (2017). Despite the incomplete implementation, another finding showed that after assessing the students, the teachers gave direct positive feedback (Mufanti, 2016) which consists of the error indication and corresponding the correct form (Rahmawati, 2017). Askew (2004) stated that feedback is like a gift from teachers to the students (as cited in Dewi, 2015). They evaluated, reviewed the students’ assessment and corrected their mistakes. The systemic feedback included evaluation as an important element in the process of teaching (Rahman, Babu & Ashrafuzzaman, 2011). Assessment and feedback help teachers to check the current status of their students’ language competence. Moreover, feedback also gives chances to students to participate in modifying or re-planning the upcoming classes (Bachman & Palmer, 2009). Furthermore, Han (2004) “claims that the absence of corrective feedback is one putative causal factor of fossilization among foreign language learners” (as cited in Liskinasih, 2016, p.60). The process of speaking assessment in some schools in Margasari sub-district particularly implement the performance based assessment. It is used because it is related to speech producing skill. Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 366 Related to the types of assessment used by teachers, the finding of this study is similar to Hidayah (2017), Idayani and Rugaiyah (2017), and Sahyoni and Zaim (2017). It showed that there are many kinds of assessment activities of performance based assessment used by teachers; such as: word repetition task, read aloud task, sentence/completion task, picture cued task, question and answer task, giving direction/instruction, role play, discussion, and conversation. It showed that all teachers implemented different types of assessment test activities. Those activities occurred during the learning process or at the end of learning process. Most of them tended to apply the role play in assessing the students’ speaking skill at the end of learning material. They argued it was the easiest technique of speaking assessment because the students’ played the role as if they experienced it in the real life. Moreover, it can reduce time of assessment process since it is done in pair of two students or more. According to Revell (1994) and Ur P (1981), role play is supposed to be conducted spontaneously by giving students a suitable topic without scripting the dialog (as cited in Milchatun et al., 2015), although the general idea about what they are going to say is prepared. But the reality showed that the implementation of role play, or even any other types of speaking assessment; mostly the teachers still did it through the memorization of script to make a good score and fulfill the needs of passing grade because of the problems experienced by students. Basically, there are many benefits of implementing role play to assess the students’ speaking. Livingstone (1983) & Ments (1992) argue that role play can “increase students’ motivation and involvement in the learning process” (as cited in Insani, 2014, p.2). Samsibar and Naro (2018) added that role play “gave students an opportunity to practice communicating in different social contexts and in different social roles. It also allows students to be creative and to put themselves in another person’s place for a while” (p.108). In conclusion, it must be able to develop the students’ communication skill and apply their English skill creatively. Hence the implementation of role play in this case is far from the expectation. In perceiving the assessment, the teachers argued that the 2013 curriculum assessment is very good, because it covers all aspects of students, including attitude, knowledge and skill. Since it is authentic, it could not be separated from the other elements of learning. The 2013 curriculum English assessment has already met the purpose of learning which uses English to communicate based on the real life, not just practicing the foreign language. It is in line with Nurgiyantoro (2010), which stated that in assessing the students, they are not only demanded to speak English, but also to consider the content of conversation which reflected the daily life communication (as cited in Rahmawati & Fatimah, 2014). In practicing the assessment, some teachers admitted that they still got some difficulties. They thought that the assessment is one of the standards of national education which is very complicated. Furthermore, the interview revealed that some of them also got the difficulties since they still did not get enough understanding of 2013 curriculum. They admitted they only got one workshop of implementation of this new curriculum. The workshop itself provided the limited information of the implementation of 2013 curriculum. It did not give the clear understanding of each element in the 2013 curriculum and the workshop was also held generally for all subjects at one time. Moreover, there is a common problem that occurred while assessing the students. All teachers stated that they got the difficulty of gaining the students’ responses. In the process of learning, the students were likely to suffer from the lack of motivation. The results of students’ assessment depend on their motivation since it is the second factor in building speaking English competence Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 367 (Apriliyanti, 2018). Therefore, the students must at least have a good intention in learning the lesson. Teachers have tried to encourage students’ to speak, but they still show low motivation in speaking. The students do not put much effort into their speaking tests, as it is what has been experienced by Putri (2016). The teachers also stated that the students had poor vocabulary mastery. In language learning, the mastery of vocabulary determines the quality of someone’s language skill (Tarigan, 2008, as cited in Uzer, 2017). Thus, teachers should improve their effort in teaching English and make the students employ many words. Besides, some teachers said that their students were shy, worried and afraid of making mistakes. They were unable to express themselves with confidence. As some characteristics mentioned, those problems indicate that some of the participants’ students had low self-esteem (Brown, 2000, as cited in Gustaman, 2015). Some teachers also conveyed that the students kept repeating the same mistakes over and over especially on their pronunciations and grammar, although the teachers had already reminded and corrected them. It is caused by the fossilization experienced by the students (Khunaifi, 2015). Therefore, to overcome the situations, teachers applied some strategies; such as making the learning process as interesting as possible, using any kind of supporting learning media, presenting the material so the students can be more interested in learning English and the assessment process will occur comprehensively. Relating to teachers’ views of the difference between the assessment of 2013 curriculum and that of school based curriculum, all teachers particularly viewed that the assessment of 2013 curriculum was very good to measure students’ ability. However, there are two teachers who viewed that 2013 curriculum is just the same as school based curriculum. The other six teachers thought that it is different from the previous curriculum. But in the practice of speaking assessment itself, the teachers were implementing the similar technique as the one used in the previous curriculum. In the 2013 curriculum, all of the subjects have the skills aspect as a continuation of knowledge aspects which the students have to master. So that, there are significant changes in the 2013 curriculum; in KTSP curriculum psychomotor domain was emphasized on certain subjects, such as physical education and health sports, arts and culture and some of the subjects, but in 2013 curriculum all of the subjects accommodates psychomotor domain which is an integral part of the cognitive aspect. In the previous curriculum, English subject used to be divided into four competences: listening, reading, speaking and writing. But in this newest curriculum, speaking and writing are integrated into the skill competence. One of the participants stated that the difference in assessment between the two curricula is that in creating the assessment based on 2013 curriculum the teachers are free to create any kind of assessment appropriate to the syllabus, they are also free to explore more about the assessment. CONCLUSION This study arrives at the conclusion that the activities of implementing the speaking assessment by teachers were not fully appropriate with the assessment standard of 2013 curriculum assessment which is the authentic assessment. The speaking assessment is conducted by teachers during and at the end of learning process. Meanwhile not all teachers implemented the regulation of assessment based on 2013 curriculum for the whole process. Moreover, there are several assessment techniques used by the teachers to assess the students’ speaking. According to the regulation of 2013 curriculum, the use of performance based assessment is needed to assess the students’ skill. The type of performance based Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 368 activities which is mostly used to test the speaking is role play. They thought that role play is the easiest and could minimize the time of assessment. This study also revealed that the teachers’ perception towards speaking assessment was very good, since it is integrated and inseparable from the process of learning. However, the fact indicated that several problems were identified as the teachers’ challenges. Their problem mainly involved the participants of learning, yet they tried hard to overcome the situation. In addition, two of the participant teachers admitted that they still suffered from the insufficient understanding related to the 2013 curriculum. Besides, the teachers got the difficulties in applying the assessment thoroughly because there are many assessment tasks to be done. Finally this study revealed that the teachers’ perception of speaking assessment based on 2013 curriculum and the school based curriculum are different from several points of view, yet the same on the activity of speaking test. REFERENCES Aghdam, Z. S. & Farahani, A, A. (2012). Speaking As an Indicator of General Proficiency in Placement Test. Journal of English and Literature, Vol. 3(6), 136-149. Al- Eiadeh, A. R., Al.Sobh, M. A., Al-Zoubi, S. M. & Al-Khasawneh, F. (2016). Improving English Language Speaking Skills of Ajloun National University Students. International Journal of English and Education. Volume:5, Issue:3. Apriliyanti, R., Warsono, & Mujiyanto, J. (2018). The Correlation between Interest, Motivation, English Self- Concept and English Speaking Performance in Nursing Students. English Educational Journal, 8 (3), 9 – 18. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (2009). Language Testing in Practice, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Assessment Principle and Classroom Practice, New York: Longman. Dewi, D. S. (2015). Corrective Feedback in Speaking Class. Journal Anglo-Saxon VI, 8, 03-09 Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research education, New York: McGraw-Hill. Gay, L. R., Mills, E. G., & Airasian, P. (2011). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications (10th Ed), USA: Pearson Education. Gustaman, W. W. (2015). The Correlation between Students’ Self-Esteem and Their English Speaking Competencies (A Study of Eleventh Grade Students at a Public Senior High School in Cimahi). Journal of English and Education, 3(2), 121-137. Hidayah, J. (2017). Speaking and Writing Assessment Applied by English Lecturers of State College for Islamic Studies (STAIN) at Curup-Bengkulu. English Franca. Vol 1 No 01. Idayani, A. & Rugaiyah. (2017). An Analysis of Teachers’ Strategies in Conducting Speaking Assessments at MTsN Andalan Pekanbaru. J-SHMIC (Journal of English for Academic), Vol 4, No 1. Insani, H. D. (2014). The Portrayal of the Role-Play Implementation in Teaching Speaking to the Students of Tourism Study Program. Journal of English and Education, 2(2), 1-13. Khunaifi, H & Hartono, R. (2015). Teacher’s And Student’s Perceptions of Corrective Feedback in Teaching Speaking. English Educational Journal, 5 (2), 14-20. Kunandar. (2013). Penilaian Autentik. Jakarta: PT. Rajagrafindo Persada. Liskinasih, A. (2016). Corrective Feedbacks in CLT-Adopted Classrooms’ Interactions. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 6 No. 1, Pp. 60-69. Metruk, R. (2018). Comparing Holistic and Analytic Ways of Scoring in the Assessment of Speaking Skills. The Waritsatul Jannah, Rudi Hartono/ EEJ 8 (3) 2018 359 - 369 369 Journal of Teaching English For Specific and Academic Purposes, Vol. 6, No 1, pp. 179189. Milchatun, Bharati, D. A. L., & Hartono, R. (2015). Improving Students’ Personal Self Concept through Role Play Technique in Teaching Speaking Skill. English Education Journal, 5 (1), 1-9. Mufanti, R. (2016). Highly Proficiency Learners on Noticing Strategy towards Corrective Feedback. Journal of English Educators Society (JEES), Volume 1, Page 19-30. Mukminatien, N. (2000). The Advantages Of Using An Analytic Scoring Procedure In Speaking Assessment. TEFLIN Journal, Volume XI Number I. Noormaliah. (2016). The Implementation of Authentic Assessment by English Teachers at Seventh Grade of Smp Muhammadiyah Banjarbaru. Proceeding at National Seminar of Current Trends on Research Methodology in English Language Teaching held in Banjarmasin, February 17th, 2016. Putri, A. (2016). Low Motivation in Learning Speaking. JOURNAL ANGLO-SAXON, VOL. 7 NO. 1. Rahman, F., Babu, R. & Ashrafuzzaman. (2011). Assessment and Feedback Practices in the English Language Classroom. Journal of Nepal English Language Teachers’ Association (NELTA), Vol. 16 No. 1-2, 97-106. Rahmawati, L. E. & Fatimah, N. (2014). Pengembangan model Penilaian autentik kompetensi berbicara. Varia Pendidikan, Vol. 26. no. 1. Rahmawati, S. M. (2017). Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback on EFL Students Writing Skill: A Case Study in a Junior High School in Bandung. Journal of English and Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 64 - 71 Rukmini, D. & Saputri, L. A. D. E. (2017). The Authentic Assessment to Measure Students’ English Productive Skills Based on 2013 Curriculum. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 7 No. 2, September 2017, pp. 263-273 Saefurrohman & Balinas, E. S. (2016). English Teachers Classroom Assessment Practices. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), Vol.5, No.1, pp. 82 ~ 92. Sahyoni & Zaim, M. (2017). Authentic Assessment of Speaking Skill for Grade I Junior High School. Samsibar & Naro, W. (2018). The Effectiveness of Role Play Method toward Students’ Motivation In English Conversation. English, Teaching, Learning And Research Journal, Volume 4, Number 01. Sukmadinata, N. S. (2011). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan, Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya. Ulker, V. (2017). The Design and Use of Speaking Assessment Rubrics. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.8, No.32. Uzer, Y. V. (2017). The Correlation between Vocabulary Mastery and English Speaking Ability of the Tenth Grade Students of Senior High School 12 Palembang. ANGLO-SAXON, VOL. 8, NO. 2:251-258 Wangid, M. N., Mustadi, A., Senen, A., & Herianingtyas, N. L. R. (2017). The Evaluation of Authentic Assessment Implementation of Curriculum 2013 in Elementary School. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan Volume 21, No 1, June 2017 (104-115). Widiastuti, R. (2007). Teaching Speaking Through Dialogue To The Eleventh Years Student: A Case Study at SMK Muhammadiyah 1 Jatinom. Thesis. Surakarta: Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta.