192 EEJ 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej The Effectiveness of Role-Play and Task-Based-Strategy to Teach Speaking to Students with Different Learning Styles Nugroho Dimastoro, Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 10 February 2022 Approved 27 May 2022 Published 20 June 2022 ________________ Keywords: Speaking skills, Role- play, Task-Based Language Teaching, and Learning styles. ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ Many students feel difficult to study English, especially in speaking skills because the teaching process cannot stimulate students' interest. Less interaction in the teaching process forces the teachers to adjust to this condition by implementing a creative strategy to improve the student’s motivation and achievement. Using an appropriate strategy will help to solve the problem. This study aims to explain whether Role-play and Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is effective to teach speaking to students with different learning styles. The learning styles we use are auditory and visual. This study used a 2x2 factorial design in the experimental study. It was used to collect the data from 60 students divided into two groups; they were experimental group 1 and experimental group 2. They were treated with different strategies: Role-play and TBLT. The type of data analysis in this experimental study is quantitative analysis to analyze speaking tests, questionnaires, and observation sheets. In this study, the researchers employ two analysis techniques to analyze the data. The techniques of data analysis used descriptive and inferential statistics. The result shows a significant difference between Role-play and TBLT strategies to teach speaking to students with different learning styles. The Role-play was more effective than the TBLT strategy to teach speaking to auditory and visual learning styles. Based on the analysis, there was no interaction among the strategies, learning styles, and speaking skills. The researchers also briefly recommend the use of Role-play and TBLT to be applied in various ways and at different levels. Correspondence Address : Kampus Pascasarjana UNNES Kelud Utara 3 Sampangan, Indonesia E-mail: nudi.islam@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 193 INTRODUCTION In an international relationship, English speaking ability is the most important skill. Ur (2009) states that language is a means of communication of all the four skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and speaking seems intuitively the most important. Language is used to communicate with others as if speaking includes all other kinds of knowledge so those students are primarily interested in learning to speak. It means that using language is to use it for transferring and getting information from the speaker and listener. It means that the learning activity given by the teacher to the listener has to purpose to make students can speak English fluently. English speaking is a skill, which is good to be learned by people since they are young or kids that is one of the most vital years in a child’s development (Scoot, 2008). We need to give knowledge more about English speaking. In recent years, English language teaching (ELT) has focused on teaching the English language rather than teaching the communicative language. The emphasis is not only on the linguistic competence of the language learners but also on the development of their communicative ability. To develop the learner’s communicative ability, the teacher needs to create a learning material to increase students’ speaking ability. Teaching speaking depends on being a classroom culture of speaking and that classroom needs to become a “talking classroom” (Harmer, 2007). The successful teaching of speaking depends on the effectiveness of speaking in their classroom activities. The students will be much more confident speakers if they have a chance to practice speaking in the classroom and their speaking ability will improve. The teachers need to focus on the core sequence of the learning targets. The teacher can introduce more natural language in the teaching-learning process so that there is balance for all of the skills, especially speaking. They can practice their pronunciation, grammar, fluency, and their mastery of vocabulary. The students often find some problems. The problem frequently found is that their native language causes them difficulty to use the foreign language. Another reason is the lack of motivation to practice the second language in daily conversation. They are also too shy and afraid to take part in the conversation. Many factors can cause a problem for the students. According to Ur (2009), factors causing difficulty in speaking are inhibition, nothing to say, low or uneven participation, and mother-tongue use. Inhibition means students are worried about making mistakes, fearful of criticism, or simply shy. The second is nothing to say. Students have no motive to express themselves. The next factor is low or uneven participation. Only one participant can talk at a time because of large classes and the tendency of some learners to dominate, while others speak very little or not at all. The last one is mother- tongue use. Learners who share the same mother tongue tend to use it because it is easier. In addition, other factors are related to the learners themselves, the teaching strategies, the curriculum, and the environment. Some previous studies have been conducted to know the improvement of teaching techniques or strategies used for speaking skills. The study from Agus (2011) shows that students were getting advantages of using simulation and role-play techniques to teach speaking. According to Waluyo (2019), task-based language teaching and theme-based role-play develop EFL learners’ communicative competence. The study from Saraswati (2012), Samsibar (2018), and Murniyanti (2020) show the implementation of role-play in the first and secondary grades of Junior High school for teaching speaking. The findings confirm the hypothesis that students ‘performances in theme-based role-play predict the development of their communicative competence. It can be concluded that there are so many techniques, strategies, and materials used to improve students’ speaking skills. The idea that people learn better when taught in a way that matches their specific “learning style” auditory, kinesthetic, visual or some combination of the three is widely considered a myth. Research has variously suggested that learners do not benefit from their preferred style, that teachers and pupils have different ideas about what learning styles work for them, and that we Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 194 have very little insight into how much we’re learning from various methods. This myth of learning styles is still in a debatable context because some researchers prove by using certain strategies with the combination of the learning styles of the students can increase students learning achievement. According to Cuaresma cited in Gilakjani (2012), students study in many different ways and learning styles. Some students are visual learners, while others are auditory or kinesthetic learners. Visual learners learn visually using charts, graphs, and pictures. Auditory learners learn by listening to lectures and reading. Kinesthetic learners learn by doing. Students can prefer one, two, or three learning styles. Teachers need to incorporate into their curriculum activities related to each of these learning styles so that all students can succeed in their classes. Based on those situations, it can be inferred that the most important and difficult skill to be mastered by students is speaking. In the Indonesian context, ELT was implemented in the curriculum of 2013. One of the approaches used is Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) with the target to develop students’ 4C skills in the 21st- century era (Communication, Cooperation, Creativity, and Critical Thinking). Some of the communicative language teaching (CLT) used are role-play and task-based strategies. In delivering ideas and meanings of a certain situation, a speaker has to use an accurate pattern and choose the correct words that fit into it. As Ur (1996, p. 121) stated, “people who know a language are referred to as “speakers” of that language as if speaking included all other kinds of knowing; and many if not most foreign language learners are primarily interested in learning to speak”. Another expert Murcia (2001, p. 103) also stated, “the ability to speak a language is synonymous with knowing that language since speech is the basic means of human communication”. As a result, a speaker should know well about a language that he or she uses for communicating with the interlocutor to get a good understanding and interest in what he or she said. Task-Based Language Teaching has a close relation to the task. Task-Based Instruction or TBI is another method regarded as developing from a focus on classroom processes (Richard, 2006). Ellis explained in Branden (2006), that a work plan requires learners to process language pragmatically to achieve an outcome that can be evaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositional content has been conveyed. According to Snow (2017, p. 112), “role plays are a form of pair practice that allows students the freedom to play, improvise, and create.” In this case, students can come to the real situation although they are not in that situation. For example, students pretend to be travel agents and customers in a conversation about how to book an airplane ticket. Besides, according to Diane (2000, p. 134) “role plays are very important in CLT because they allow students to practice communicating in different social contexts and different social roles, and role-plays can be set up so that they are very structured or in less a less structured way”. It means the teacher tells the students who they are and what they should do. The teacher also tells the students what the situation is, and what they are talking about, but the students determine what they will say. Students also receive feedback on whether or not they have effectively communicated. Auditory students are the ones who learn the best information through hearing things. The more students can hear information, the easier they learn. Therefore, oral presentations are crucial for understanding the subject. According to Mortensen (2008) as cited in Fauziati (2015) auditory learners get a better understanding in the classroom by doing some of the activities, namely: recording lectures, using word associations, listening to audiotapes, and reading notes aloud. Auditory students favor sitting in the front of the class where the teacher can easily be seen and heard and studying and discussing the subject with other students. Gilakjani (2011) explains that these individuals gain knowledge from reading aloud in the classroom. Visual students are the ones who learn effectively and efficiently through seeing things. The more the students can see the information, the easier they learn. They tend to learn by using textbooks, worksheets, written notes, etc. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 195 According to Mortensen (2008) in Fauziati (2015), learning activities that suit the visual learners are drawing a map, making outlines of everything, copying what’s on the board, asking the teacher for diagrams, etc. Furthermore, visual learners commonly have some characteristics: good at spelling but forgetting names, need quite a study time, have to think awhile before the understanding lecture, like colors & fashion, understand charts, etc. Sometimes, visual students favor sitting in the front of the classroom. They also take descriptive notes over the materials being presented to be easier to understand. Referring to the topic and problems above it is important to consider some notions, which certainly become the focus of a proposed solution in this study. I propose to conduct role-play and task-based language teaching (TBLT) to assess the effectiveness of those strategies in teaching speaking to students with different learning styles. To clarify the problem, the research question is how effective is the use of role-playing and TBLT in teaching speaking to students with different learning styles while this study aims to explain the effectiveness of using role-play and TBLT in teaching speaking to students with different learning styles. METHODS In this research, we used quantitative research as the research methodology. In line with the research methodology, we use numerical data because this research aims to analyze students’ speaking abilities. Quantitative data were analyzed by using numerical comparisons and statistical inferences and then reported through statistical analyses in Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS) computer program formed tabulation. The quantitative data in this study take from pre-test and post-test This research used 2x2 Factorial designs. It is chosen because the study employs more than one independent variable those are role-play and task- based and one dependent variable which is speaking. There is also a moderator variable that is classified into auditory and visual learning styles. In the 2x2 factorial designs, there are two groups those are experimental group one and experimental group two. Each group received a different treatment. Experimental group one was taught by using Role-play. Whereas, experimental group two were taught by using TBLT. Students’ learning styles represented students with auditory and visual. The pre-test and post-test with experimental group one and experimental group two designs were employed in this study. There were two groups involved in this study. We used purposive sampling to choose the sample of the research. In this study, the independent variable (Y) is role-play and task- based. The moderator variable is a variable that influences the strength of a relationship between two other variables (independent and dependent). It changes the strength of an effect or relationship between two variables. The moderator variable (Z) is students learning styles, which are divided into auditory and visual. In this research, we used some instruments for collecting the data: test, questionnaire, and observation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In this research there are two hypotheses, alternative and null hypotheses, those are: Hypothesis 1 (Ha): Role-play is effective to teach speaking to students with auditory learning styles. Table 1. Mean score of role-play to the student with auditory learning style Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviatio n Std. Error Mean Pair 1 Pretest ARP 67.733 3 15 3.69298 .95352 Posttest ARP 80.266 7 15 4.71270 1.21681 Table 1 shows that the mean score of the pretest was 67.73 and the post-test mean score was 80.27. In other words, the score of students with auditory learning styles that were taught through role-play increased. It raised 12.54. Furthermore, Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 196 the standard deviation of the pretest was 3.692 with a standard error mean was 0.953 while, the standard deviation of the post-test was 4.713 with a standard error mean was 1.217. However, to measure whether the difference is significant, it was then measured by using the paired t-test. Table 2 shows the result. Table 2. Paired sample test of role-play to students with auditory learning style Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t d f Sig . (2- tail ed) Mean Std. Devi ation Std. Erro r Mea n 95% Confidenc e Interval of the Difference Low er Upp er P ai r 1 Pret est AR P Post test AR P - 1.253 33E1 4.373 08 1.12 912 - 14.9 5506 - 10.1 1160 - 11. 100 1 4 .00 0 Related to table 2, it could be depicted that the significant value of the test is 0.000 which is lower than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05). So that there is a significant difference between the score of pre-test and post-test for students with auditory learning styles in role-play class. Therefore, Ha1 is accepted and Ho1 is rejected, which means that there was a significant effect of role-play to teach speaking to auditory learning style. Hypothesis 2 (Ho): Role-play is not effective to teach speaking to students with a visual learning style. Table 3. Mean score of Role play with visual learning style Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair 1 Pretest VRP 67.73 15 4.464 1.152 Posttest VRP 77.73 15 4.267 1.102 Table 3 shows that the mean score of the pretest was 67.73 and the post-test mean score was 77.73. It can be said that the students’ scores with visual learning styles that were taught through role- play increased. It raised 10 points. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the pretest was 4.464 with a standard error mean was 1.152 while the standard deviation of the posttest was 4.267 with a standard error mean was 1.102, however, to measure whether the difference is significant, it was then measured by using the paired t-test. Table 4 shows the result. Table 4. Paired sample test of Role-play to the students with visual learning style Paired Differences t d f Sig. (2- taile d) Mea n Std. Deviat ion Std. Err or Me an 95% Confiden ce Interval of the Differenc e Lo wer Up per Pa ir 1 Prete st VRP Postt est VRP - 10.0 00 3.207 .82 8 - 11.7 76 - 8.22 4 - 12.0 76 1 4 .000 Table 4 describes that the significant value was 0.000 which is lower than the α sig 0.05 (sig. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 197 value α sig 0.05). So that there is a significant difference between the score of pretest and post-test for students with visual learning styles in role-play class. Therefore, Ha2 is accepted and Ho2 is rejected, which means that there was a significant effect of role-play to teaching speaking to visual learning style. Hypothesis 3 (Ha): TBLT is effective to teach speaking to students with auditory learning styles. Table 5. Mean score TBLT to students with auditory learning style Mean N Std. Deviati on Std. Error Mean Pair 1 Pretest Auditory TBLT 67.73 15 4.464 1.152 Posttest Auditory TBLT 78.93 15 4.399 1.136 Table 5 shows that the mean score of the pretest was 67.73 and the post-test mean score was 78.93. It can be concluded that the score of students with auditory learning styles that were taught through TBLT increased. It raised 11.02 Points. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the pretest was 4.464 with a standard error mean was 1.152 while the standard deviation of the post-test was 4.399 with a standard error mean was 1.136, however, to measure whether the difference is significant, it was then measured by using the paired t-test. Table 6 shows the result. Table 6. Paired sample test of TBLT to students with Auditory learning style Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t d f Sig. (2- tail ed) Me an Std. Devia tion Std . Err or Me an 95% Confiden ce Interval of the Differenc e Lo wer Up per Pa ir 1 Pretes t Audit ory TBL T – Postt est Audit ory TBL T - 11.2 00 3.098 .80 0 - 12.9 16 - 9.4 84 - 14.0 00 1 4 .00 0 Table 6 shows that the standard deviation of the test was 3.098 and the significant value was 0.000. which is lower than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05) so there was a significant difference between the score of pretest and post-test for students with auditory learning styles taught by TBLT. Therefore, Ha3 is accepted and Ho3 is rejected, which means that there was a significant effect of TBLT to teach speaking to auditory learning style. Hypothesis 4 (Ho): TBLT is not effective to teach speaking to students with a visual learning style. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 198 Table 7. Mean score of TBLT to the students with visual learning style Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair 1 Pretest Visual TBLT 67.73 15 3.770 .973 Posttest Visual TBLT 76.13 15 2.973 .768 Table 7 shows that the mean score of the pretest was 67.73 and the post-test mean score was 76.13. It can be said that the score of students with visual learning styles taught through TBLT has increased. It raised 8.40 points. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the pretest was 3.770 with a standard error mean was 0.973 while the standard deviation of the post-test was 2.973 with a standard error mean was 0.786. To analyze whether there was a significant between the pretest and post-test scores, a paired sample test was used. Table 8 presents the result. Table 8. Paired sample test of TBLT to students with visual learning style Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t d f Sig. (2- taile d) Me an Std. Deviat ion Std. Err or Me an 95% Confiden ce Interval of the Differenc e Low er Upp er Pa ir 1 Prete st Visu al TBL T - Postt est Visu al TBL T - 8.4 00 3.397 .87 7 - 10.2 81 - 6.51 9 - 9.5 76 1 4 .000 Related to table 8 it could be concluded that the standard deviation of the test was 3.397 and the significant value was 0.000 which is lower than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05) so there was a significant difference between the score of pretest and posttest for students with visual learning style was taught by TBLT. Therefore, Ha4 is accepted and Ho4 is rejected, which means that there was a significant effect of TBLT to teach speaking to auditory learning style. Hypothesis 5 (Ho): There is no significant difference between role-play and TBLT to teach speaking to students with auditory learning styles. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 199 Table 9. Mean score of Role Play and TBLT to the students with auditory learning style Group Statistics Strategy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Score Auditory role play 15 80.27 4.713 1.217 Auditory TBLT 15 78.93 4.399 1.136 Table 9 shows that the mean score for post- test in auditorial role play class was 80.27 and the post-test mean score in auditorial TBLT was 78.93. It can be concluded that the score of students who were taught by using role-play got a higher score than those who were taught by using TBLT. Furthermore, in role-play class the standard deviation of the test was 4.713 with a standard error mean was 1.217 while in TBLT standard deviation of the post-test was 4.399 With a standard error mean was 1.136. To measure the significant difference between role play and TBLT with auditory learning style. I presented the data of students' scores of role-play compared to TBLT in teaching speaking for students with auditory learning styles. Table 10 displays the result. Table 10. Differential Test of Role-play and TBLT with auditory learning style Independent Samples Test Levene' s Test for Equalit y of Varianc es t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2- taile d) Mean Differe nce Std. Error Differe nce 95% Confiden ce Interval of the Differenc e Low er Upp er Scor e Equal varianc es assume d .083 .776 .80 1 28 .430 1.333 1.665 - 2.076 4.74 3 Equal varianc es not assume d .80 1 27.86 8 .430 1.333 1.665 - 2.077 4.74 4 Table 10 explains the significant difference between students with auditory learning styles taught by role-play and TBLT was 0.430. The differences between those results were significant if the sig. (2-tailed) value was less than 0.05. Based on the data, it was more than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05). Therefore, Ha5 is rejected and Ho5 is accepted, which means that there was no significant difference to teach speaking between students with auditory learning styles taught by role-play and TBLT. Thus, both strategies were effective in teaching speaking to students with auditory learning styles. However, the improvement was different between both strategies in which the score of role play class was more significant. In short, we conclude that role play was more effective than TBLT material for teaching speaking to students with auditory learning style Hypothesis 6 Ho: There is no significant difference between role-play and TBLT to teach speaking to students with a visual learning style. Table 11 shows the result. Table 11. Mean score of role-play and TBLT to students with visual learning style Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 200 Group Statistics Strategy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Score Visual Role Play 15 77.60 4.222 1.090 Visual TBLT 15 76.13 2.973 .768 Table 11 shows that the mean score for post- test visual role play was 77.60 and the post-test mean score in Visual TBLT was 76.13. It can be concluded that the score of students who were taught by using role-play got a higher score than those who were taught by TBLT. Furthermore, in visual role-play the standard deviation of the pretest was 4.222 with a standard error mean was 1.090 while in visual TBLT standard deviation of the post-test was 2.973 with a standard error mean was 0.768. To measure the significant difference between role play and TBLT with auditory learning styles, we presented the data of students' scores of role-play compared to TBLT for teaching speaking to students with auditory learning styles. Table 12 depicts the result. Table 12. Differential Test of Role-play and TBLT with auditory learning style Independent Samples Test Leven e's Test for Equal ity of Varia nces t-test for Equality of Means F Sig . t df Sig . (2- tail ed) Mean Diffe rence Std. Error Diffe rence 95% Confid ence Interval of the Differe nce Lo we r Up per Sc or e Equ al varia nces assu med .0 8 3 .77 6 .8 0 1 28 .43 0 1.333 1.665 - 2.0 76 4.7 43 Equ al varia nces not assu med .8 0 1 27. 868 .43 0 1.333 1.665 - 2.0 77 4.7 44 Table 12 shows the significant difference between students with auditory learning styles taught by role-play and TBLT was 0.430. The differences between those results were significant if the sig. (2-tailed) value was less than 0.05. Based on the data, it was more than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05) Therefore, Ha6 is rejected and Ho6 is accepted, which means that there was no significant difference to teach speaking between students with auditory learning styles taught by role-play and TBLT Thus, both strategies were effective in teaching speaking to students with visual learning styles. However, the improvement was different between both strategies in which the score of role Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 201 play class was more significant. In short, we conclude that role play was more effective than TBLT material for teaching speaking to students with auditory learning style Hypothesis 9 (Ha): There is significant interaction between role-play and TBLT for students with different learning styles to increase students’ speaking achievement. Table 13. Interaction among teaching strategies (Role play-TBLT), students’ learning style (Auditory-Visual), and students’ speaking ability Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig . Corrected Model 139.200a 3 46.400 2.705 .05 4 Intercept 367540.2 67 1 367540.2 67 2.143E 4 .00 0 Strategies 32.267 1 32.267 1.881 .17 6 Learning style 106.667 1 106.667 6.219 .01 6 Strategies * Learning_st yle .267 1 .267 .016 .90 1 Error 960.533 5 6 17.152 Total 368640.0 00 6 0 Corrected Total 1099.733 5 9 a. R Squared = .127 Adjusted R Squared =.080) Table 13 shows the data consisting of strategies, learning style, and strategies-learning style. The first data is strategies. The sig. value of the result was significant if the sig. value was less than 0.05. Based on the data, the sig value is 0.176; it was more than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05). It means the strategies have no significant difference in students’ speaking skills. The second data is the learning style. The sig. value of the result was significant if the sig. value was less than 0.05. Based on the data, the sig value is 0.016; it was less than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05). It means the learning styles have significant differences in students’ speaking skills. The last is strategies & learning style. The conclusion based on this data, the sig value is 0.901; it was more than the α sig 0.05 (sig. value α sig 0.05). Therefore, Ha9 is rejected and Ho9 is accepted, which means that there was no interaction between the strategies, learning styles, and speaking skills. These findings are approved by Juvrianto’s (2018) and Hernayah et al.’s (2019) studies, who state that there is a significant improvement in speaking ability between the term of the four aspects of speaking (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and fluency). Role-play was very helpful for the students in improving their speaking ability. Role-play helps the back students by providing a chance, wherever students with problems in oral communication. These findings are propped by Aziz (2018). TBLT is a strategy that can improve students’ participation, perception, and motivation in language teaching. TBLT strategy gave a positive effect on students’ speaking ability in demonstrative speech. The students’ speech production showed improvement in the rhythm, segmental, and speech rate aspects, they showed positive responses and strongly positive attitudes during the learning process. In addition, the studies by Mauriar (2013) and Hijratur (2017) show that teaching speaking by using TBLT has many advantages. For example, it can enrich students’ speaking skills, make the teaching-learning process becomes more comfortable, and help the students to speak English correctly. The use of task-based language gives a significant contribution to the learning process of speaking accuracy and fluency and the alternative to solve the teacher's problem. The findings are also similar to Agustrianita’s (2019) study. If the teachers understand the students’ different learning styles, they can adapt their students’ learning styles to their teaching. Teachers who know their students’ learning styles will help the students to get their maximum achievement. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 202 In addition, the present study is in line with the study by Waluyo (2019). It indicates that the implementation of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach through role-play and TBLT whether in the classroom or outside the classroom is highly recommended by encouraging students to participate actively in each activity. The students ‘performances in theme-based role-play can develop their communicative competence. In addition, the studies by Dorathy (2011) show that the use of role-play and TBLT give positive effects on the students. Those strategies can stimulate students' participation and motivation during the teaching-learning process. This is also in line with the research finding by Ding (2018) that incorporating role-play into the classroom adds variety, a change of pace, and opportunities for a lot of language production and also a lot of fun. Those strategies give a positive effect both on TBLT and role-play technique on speaking skills. Differently, An and Carr (2017) argue that the learning styles theory fails to explain learning and achievement. That is a failure of linking the learning styles to students' achievement. People held similar beliefs about their own and others’ dominant learning styles, with people believing that only two learning styles are predominant (visual and kinesthetic). They generally agreed that those with different learning styles use different brain regions to learn. In addition, Shaylene et al. (2020) studied the understanding o f t h e Learning Style Myth. A final related concern is that participants might have reasoned about learning style preferences without believing that those preferences have effects on learning or life outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Speaking is the way to express ideas, opinions, or feelings to others by using words or sounds in delivering the message. This study investigates whether Role-play and TBLT strategies w e r e effective to teach reading comprehension to students with different learning styles. Some conclusions can be drawn. First, auditory and visual learning styles influence teaching speaking through using role-play and TBLT. Second, in role-play and TBLT strategies, both auditory and visual learning styles improve their speaking ability. Then, there was no significant difference between both strategies in students’ achievement. Third, the role-play strategy is more slightly effective than the TBLT strategy. The last, there was no interaction between the strategies, learning styles, and speaking skills. This concludes that both techniques are effective to teach speaking without considering their learning styles. This study implies that both strategies were effective to teach speaking. However, role play can perform better than TBLT as a strategy to enhance students’ speaking skills. Students can learn to speak actively using those strategies. Therefore, these can be a valuable input to teaching speaking. The use of role-play and TBLT strategies can encourage students to practice speaking during the teaching-learning process. By applying those strategies, the students get more opportunities in interacting with their friends using English and they are also able to enjoy the strategies in the learning process. It helps the students to formulate what they want to say. As a result, they can explore themselves in expressing their opinion in English. Moreover, it is effective in improving the students’ confidence in their opinion of English. At the beginning of the academic year, the English teacher can also collaborate with the counseling teacher in the school to get the data on students’ learning styles. Based on this data the teacher make a lesson plan that uses appropriate strategy in the teaching-learning process, especially teaching speaking to the student with auditory and visual learning style. The teacher recommended using role-play and TBLT because these strategies will give a significant effect to improve students’ speaking achievement. It is needed to conduct further study related to other techniques or strategies in helping the students to improve their speaking achievement. It is important because there are still many students who are not brave to speak English. The result of this study can be used as an additional reference or for further research with different foci. Although the research has reached its aims, there were some unavoidable limitations. First, the Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 203 research was conducted in ten meetings that lasted for ten weeks. Ideally, the meetings were done in a long time. It will make the formula of the improvement clear. Finally, the techniques used were limited to drama, dialog, or presentation. This is because the material is about expression, and the teacher claims that using role-play and TBLT is not easy and more complicated. Maybe the other appropriate material can be considered so that the strategy used will be more interesting and various. REFERENCES Agus, A, L., Sutopo, D., & Rukmini, D. (2018). The effectiveness of simulation and role- play in teaching speaking for students with different levels of motivation, English Educational Journal, 8 (4), 489-498. Agustrianita., Suherdi, D., & Purpaparman, P., (2019). Teachers’ perception of students’ learning style and their teaching. Indonesian Journal of Curriculum and Educational Technology Studies, 7 (1), 11-19. An, D., & Carr, M. (2017). Learning styles theory fails to explain learning and achievement: Recommendations for alternative approaches. Personality and Individual Differences. Elsevier Journal, 116 (1), 410- 416. Aziz, A. (2018). The effect of task-based language teaching (tblt) strategy on students’ speaking ability in demonstrative speech. Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 4 (2), 53-71. Branden, Kris V den. (2006). Task-based language education from theory to practice. U.K: Cambridge University Press. Diane L, M. (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Ding, L., (2018). Engaging in english speaking teaching based on a task-based approach: “role-play” with an adult syrian in an experiential learning. The Morning Watch: Educational and Social Analysis, 46 (1-21). Fauziati, E. (2015). Teaching english as a foreign language: principle and practice. Surakarta: Era Pustaka Utama. Dorathy, A, A., (2011). Second language acquisition through task-based approach – role-play in english language teaching, 33 (11). Gilakjani, A. P., & Branch, L. (2012). Visual, auditory, kinaesthetic learning styles and their impacts on english language teaching, Journal of Studies in Education, 2(1), 104-113. Harmer, J.(2007). The practice of english language teaching third edition. Essex : Pearson Education Limited. Hernayah., Syaubari, R, F., & Haryudin, A. (2019). The effectiveness of role play in teaching speaking at the eighth grade students of mts nurul falah kota cimahi. Professional Jurnal of English Education, 2 (5), 650-655. Hijratur, R, T. (2017). The effectiveness of task- based language teaching in developing speaking skills at smkn 2 malang. Paradigma: Jurnal Filsafat, Sains, Teknologi, dan Sosial Budaya, 23 (1), 54-56. Juvrianto, C, J. (2018). Improving the students’ speaking ability through role-play method. International Journal of English Teaching (IJET), 8 (1), 332-340. Marianne C, M. (2001) Teaching english as a second or foreign language, Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Mauriar, D. (2013). The effectiveness of task-based instruction to improve speaking skill of the eleventh grade students’ of smk texmaco semarang. English Teaching Journal, 4 (2), 205- Murniviyanti, L., Shaikh, M., & Syandri, G. (2020). The effectiveness of role playing model on upgrading students’ skill of appreciation. International Journal of Educational Review Penny, Ur. (2009). A Course in Language Teaching (Practice and Theory). Great Britain: Cambridge University Press. Rahmatillah, K. (2019). Communicative language teaching (clt) through role play and task- based instruction. Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 4 (2), 162-177. Nugroho Dimastoro & Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 192-204 204 Richard, Jack C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York: Cambridge University Press. Samsibar., & Naro, W. (2018). The effectiveness of role play method toward students’ motivation in english conversation. English Teaching Learning and Research Journal, 4 (1), 107-116. Saraswati, G, P, D. (2012). Debate role-play as a technique to teach spoken exposition text at rsbi junior secondary school. Shaylene E.et al. (2020). Maybe they’re born with it, or maybe it’s eexperience: Toward a deeper understanding of the learning style myth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112 (2), 221–235. Snow, D. (2007). From Language Learner to Language Teacher: An Introduction to Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Michigan: McNaughton & Gunn. Waluyo, B. (2019). Task-based language teaching and theme-based role-play: developing efl learners’ communicative competence. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 16 (1), 154-168.