STUDENTS’ ORAL SKILL IMPROVEMENT AS REVEALED ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE STUDENTS’ ORAL SKILL IMPROVEMENT AS REVEALED IN LEARNING-BASED PERFORMANCE Didik Rinan Sumekto Department of English Education, Widya Dharma University, Klaten, Indonesia E-mail: didikrinan@unwidha.ac.id APA Citation: Sumekto, D. R. (2014). Students’ oral skill improvement as revealed in learning- based performance. EnglishReview: Journal ofEnglish Education, 3(1), 91-102 Received: 5-10-2014 Accepted: 23-10-2014 Published: 01-12-2014 Abstract: This classroom-based research investigates how interaction and individual performance by means of classroom learning participation has contributed the undergraduate students’ oral skill improvement. This study observes six speaking course meetings which involves 27 sophomore undergraduate English education. Data collected through classroom activities involving students’ performance analysis, observation and oral test technique. Data analyzed through Carr and Kemmis’ classroom action research model examination in two phases. The findings prove that during the interaction and individual-based performance investigation, some students’ oral skill performance increase in the point level. The improvement gains from .25 to .50 points as shown in the second phase. The average score gained in the first phase is 68.30 and 71.12 in the second phase, which indicate that the average achievement is 9.7%. Overall, out of 27 participants, there are 74% or 20 participants gaining an improvement in speaking course IV, whilst other 7 participants do not increase their oral skill performance. Keywords: Adult and independent learners, individual participation, oral skill achievement INTRODUCTION Speaking instruction approach is concerned with the user(s) apply it in multiple purposes, refers to individual possession and its most important aspect is the speakers’ knowledge of using it, whereas linguistic approach is concerned with the world outside the speakers and people’s relations with each other (Brumfit and Mitchell, 1990). From the instruction performance, a lecturer’s responsibility is initially to ensure that students must learn. Somehow, the lecturer’s role is diverse and challenging when instructing and developing the curriculum in terms of subject teaching, session planning, setting and marking of assignments, assessing students’ progress in a variety of ways including marking end-of- module assignments and examination papers, writing reports for a variety of audiences including exam boards and external examiners, recording students’ achievement, working as part of a subject team, curriculum development and planning, undertaking visits and field courses when appropriate, feedback to students, and evaluating the programme and teaching scheme (Nicholls, 2002). Participating in oral skill competence will be widely accommodating for many different purposes, and each purpose involves different skills required (Richards and Renandya, 2002). Kumpulainen and Wray (2002) point out that how exploratory and argumentative talk can be more effective in cultivating students’ mailto:didikrinan@unwidha.ac.id DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance critical thinking than procedural or reutilized interactions. An important element in the learning situations is about the possibility of communicating ideas and thinking through versatile tools. According to Lumsden (1994) students’ motivation increase when learning is linked to their background knowledge. If students can relate learning to prior knowledge, they will be more inclined to engage in the learning process. Students learn when they are able to make sense of their environment and when they are engaged. Some studies confirmed that motivation and interaction were identified as important factors in the development of students’ oral skill proficiency within a potential role for explicit instruction in speaking strategies and approaches (Hernandez, 2010), where fluency came first and followed by accuracy (Zhang and Wang, 2012). Yet, communication competence emphasized interactional knowledge which consisted of social conventions and regulated the use of language and other communication devices in particular settings (Yueqin, 2013). Other studies proved that participative instruction could be integrated into regular English language teaching, not only would higher education students’ speaking proficiency improve, but their attitudes towards class would also become more positive. It was especially important to those who come from a passive group participation background and provided an opportunity for lecturer and students to talk about the differences in their classroom expectations and also directed students towards expected classroom participation behaviors, which they feel more comfortable and confident in classroom participation as well (Wenli, 2005). Herein, the proficiency in the speaking domain was dependently attributed to the supportive lecturer who maintained open lines of communication which eventually catered to the students’ needs in learning. Lecturer who was at the warm, approachable, friendly, helpful and supportive, and strict yet with compassion was mostly regarded to create a positive classroom climate (Narzoles, 2013). Realizing the reality, however, some difficulties might still occur amongst internal college or university students and between lecturer and students relationship in the learning engagement. Consciously or not, sooner this condition would be contributing towards learning ineffectiveness. The ineffectiveness contributes a desire to improve student learning, to improve curriculum, to adapt instructional or assessment strategies, a desire for one’s own professional development or to search for connections and meaning in one’s work, and issues in the larger class or community context in learning (Ary, Jacobs, and Sorensen, 2010). The interaction is mostly lecturer- dominated, and learners are called upon primarily to provide factual responses, which is not genuine and authentic. This critical issue relates with the lack of lecturers’ understanding on how to design speaking activities during practice and production (Bilasha and Kwangsawad, 2004) and the lecturer has difficulty in selecting materials and activities that would match the learners’ oral skill competence individually and content (Kanoksilapatham, 2007). Furthermore, Khamkhien (2010) outlines three major problems faced in English speaking instruction: (1) pronunciation; (2) authentic or natural communication; (3) communication breaks down; and (4) ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE conceptual and pedagogical orientations to the teaching of speaking. Through these empirical facts above, this study attempts at investigating sophomore undergraduate students among their interaction and individual-based performance as part of its oral skill contribution. As Gibbons’ (2002) thinking highlights that students will involve learning perspective, the relative importance of things, and how forces interplay to create dynamic situations, that show the major subsystems of a situation and how the subsystems interact with each other to create force fields of influence (Gibbons, 2002). Teaching styles will vary from group to group and from individual to individual that require creative thinking and problem solving (Nicholls, 2002). Various independent learning models have been developed with the intention of facilitating, self-directed, reflective and critical learning on the part of individual learners (Wallace, 2007). Herein, there are eleven frequently and empirically deployed the students-centred group methods discussed in strengthening an adult learning mechanism, namely: brainstorming, buzz-groups, debate, fishbowl, group discussion, interview, listening and observing, problem-based learning, projects and case studies, role play, simulation and gaming, and therapy groups (Jarvis, 2004). This study investigates how interaction and individual-based performance through the classroom learning participation has contributed the sophomore undergraduate students’ oral skill. To comprehend the objectives, this study attempts to reveal the Carr and Kemmis’ model with the research questions in the following: (1) how do the students gain their interaction and individual-based performance in oral skill; and (2) can interaction and individual-based performance among the students trigger their learning interest? METHOD This classroom-based research was conducted in collaboration with two senior students as peer observers in July 2012. The participants were 27 sophomore undergraduate students focusing on their speaking interaction analysis through observation on physical, interactional and program setting (Morrison, 1993; Cooper and Schindler, 2001) to view situations unfold and connections, causes and correlations that could be an experience over time (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2007), and individual-based performance technique which compared different types of data on participants’ perceptions and documents or works analysis (Arhar, Holly, and Kasten, 2001; Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegtle, 2010) participating during the existing semester in speaking course IV, weighted as two credits with 1 hour and 40 minutes weekly within 6 meetings at English education department, Widya Dharma University, Klaten, Central Java. Data analysis defined as a descriptive form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in order to improve the rationality of their own learning practices. Their progress upon these practices were carried out by Carr and Kemmis’ action research spiral model (1986) as shown in figure 1 and also comprised to another a-four-step on planning, acting, observing and reflecting which incorporated the improvements (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988). The evaluation results would be considerably brought about the further action. DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance Figure 1. Carr and Kemmis’ Action Research Model (1986) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This part described and analyzed the activity phases of the empirical interaction and individual-based performance conducted within six topics on speaking course in the classroom. Generally, the meetings began and drilled with the apperception step regularly, for instance what the previous topic had been discussed together through the reflective evaluation. Overall, the interaction and individual-based drilling scheme was to investigate the sophomore undergraduate students’ speaking performance conducted during six meetings within six different topics. The study adopted Carr and Kemmis’ action research model which consisted of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting phase. Both first and second phase were applied to analyze the participants’ oral skill competence. Action impact upon students’ improvement The findings would describe some empirical experience on first and second phase that had been found. In general, the oral skill competence of sophomore students of English education had reached the moderate academic requirements as prescribed in the syllabus and or lesson plan. The concepts of analyzing the case study, applying the concept, and creating specific case initially categorized as moderate level; but after having more particular drilling session during the meetings within 100 minutes in each meeting conducted in the first and second phase, there were 20 participants out of 27 participants showed their increase in oral proficiency better or the increase percentage reached 0.74%. Subsequent to the drilling and acts by increasing the frequency of opportunities to talk, especially by revealing the personal opinion and responded to ideas of other participants, the student's ability to understand the ongoing theme of the lecture became improved. The participants’ ability of applying the concepts was to increase after researchers sometime provided examples of a concept application. By comparing between first and second phase results, thus, they could be explained that there were some improvements on students’ oral proficiency revealed in both phases. Overall, the speaking score in the second phase is 0.74% higher than in the first phase. In particular achievement there was 0.67% increase at the level of .25 point and 0.04% increase at the level of .50 point, whilst 0.26% or 7 participants did not show an increase in students’ oral ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE proficiency. The achievement indicators specifically referred to the individuals’ learning performance, since this study merely emphasized on students’ individual-based performance method. However, the results cluster might be also ranked into its categorization. Acting The first meeting was conducted on Tuesday, 6th March 2012 with the discussion session about ‘Using IT in education and learning’. The exploration was engaged in-depth understanding how they learning process then attempted to obtain an advanced and cooperative understanding and competence of relevant materials delivered during the presentation and discussion amongst the undergraduate students of semester IV. Good presentation and discussion were highly desirable to support and improve the natural study towards students’ learning experience and style. On the other hand, the lecturer briefly explained about the rationale of the topic to participants in order to give a collectively desired understanding and active participation during the discussion. Regularly the standard procedure upon this discussion began with the questions: ‘what’ and ‘how’ do the students accommodate their learning by using some IT devices or facilities? These standard questions upon the participants’ awareness were also broadened by the problems that might arise among the learners and how the solutions might follow their learning problems in particular circumstances as well as the parental roles in children learning participation at home. Then, this study implemented the first phase into the instruction activity. Next, the second meeting conducted on Thursday, 8th March 2012 exploring about the professional career planning which took tasks and responsibilities and excellent integrity. The topic focused on introduction, somebody’s dream, personal strengths, professional skills, career information, and present plan. The topic illustrated the participants about what they would like to do with their great ideas entirely the life, what kind of passion did they have, and concerned about how participants had modified the career direction, based on what turned them on, or something they had found success in doing. Eventually, the third meeting the discussion focused on parents involvement in their children education which had been conducted on Thursday, 13th March 2012. This topic bridged and reminded parents how they took responsibility within children education issues at schools. The mainstream underlined that parents could participate in their children's schools by joining parent teacher associations (PTAs) or parent teacher organizations (PTOs) and getting involved in decision-making about the educational services received by their children at schools in appropriate roles. Another kind of involvement was home-based and focused on activities that parents could greatly do with their children or on the teacher's visits to the pupils’ home. They were all conducted within the similar instruction method as implemented before as well. However, the action stage had involved three meetings for different themes in every session as scheduled in table 1. The action was carried out in (1) giving apperception in the beginning and explaining the topic to the students; (2) stimulating students to share their experience and ideas by arguing and discussion; (3) dividing the students into group works. Participants in a group consisted of 4-5 members and they worked collaboratively; and (4) facilitating the participants to discuss with the relevant supporting and relevant issues. DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance Table 1. First phase meeting schedule Day and Date Duration Topic discussed Tuesday, 6th March 2012 07:30 - 09:10 AM Using IT in education and learning Thursday, 8th March 2012 07:30 - 09:10 AM Professional career planning Tuesday, 13th March 2012 07:30 - 09:10 AM Involving parents in their children education After implementing the first activities done in the first acting, this study was attempted to continue and to improve the next phase in the second acting by effectuating the instruction method and technique in order to increase the participation amongst the participants effectively. The first meeting was conducted on Tuesday, 20th March 2012 within 100 minutes allocation, either the second or the third meeting conducted in the second phase as well. The session began with discussion on ‘Misunderstanding between Generations’. The theme issue explored and understood ideas comprehensively through a good presentation and discussion relating with the influencing factors badly between the older and younger generations, any matters which involved them, and better solutions. The learning scheme or illustration was about a generation gap or a conflict between the old and the youth was often heard today. The dispute commonly appeared when elders advise them, young generations felt annoyed, murmur and complain. Youth were sensitive by nature, whilst old order had lost its charm for them. However, they are today living in the age of enquiry and experiment. When the elder dictated to them and imposed their will upon them, the youth became sometimes defiant and rebellious. They felt frustrated and discontented, when their wishes were not fulfilled. Therefore, this condition faced a new problem and a new challenge. Again, in the meeting, the lecturer briefly explained about the rationale of the topic and study to participants in order to give a standard understanding and active participation during the discussion. The regularly standard procedure upon this discussion during the instruction began with the questions: ‘what’ and ‘how’ did the students accommodate their learning activity by understanding some differences, similarities, and gaps or barriers among younger and older generations if they gave an experience with this condition? These standard questions upon the participants’ awareness were also broadened by the problems that might arise among the learners and how the solutions might follow their learning problems in particular circumstances as well as the parental roles in children learning participation. Then, the second meeting was conducted on Thursday, 22nd March 2012. It talked about ‘What is wrong with our education system’, which explored on education is what is retained in your mind after you finish writing or conducting the examinations and why should be the spoon feeding, on the long run teaches nothing but the shape of the spoon ironically. In this phase, the discussion began with an educational system which ought to test the understanding of the relevant subject, and this did not regard how much students were able to reproduce from the text books or even otherwise from either the lesson plan or the syllabus. During the primary and immediately after, it was used to even mug-up questions and answers, in fact. If students had memorized the text book or the questions, they would have surely failed. Other leading sub-topics also emphasized on ‘we can buy education, but not wisdom’ and ‘your mind is like a parachute, it works when you open it’. However, the ‘Impact of free trade in ASEAN countries’, conducted on Thursday, 27th March 2012 engaged as the ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE third meeting. This topic was mainly explored and hopefully understood through the students’ good presentation and discussion relating with the opportunities, benefits, and positive and negative impacts. It was understandable that free trade in ASEAN, or called by AFTA, could enhance the process of economic integration in East Asia, which was primarily being driven by trends. AFTA's impact on investment flows was likely to be positive for ASEAN, particularly if it encouraged corporations to replace country-specific strategies with regional plans. AFTA's success would also be enhanced by extending its product coverage to include other sectors in addition to the current list of manufactures, embarking on reduction of non-tariff barriers in accordance with the Mutual Agreement, and welcoming additional participants, particularly those with a high degree of complementarities in terms of production output and trade. They were also conducted within the similar instruction method as implemented before. This learning scheme (discussion-based) was definitely designed with the adult learners concepts. One of them was how to maximize their individual competence in the oral skills (speaking IV for pre-service teachers). However, the action stage had involved three meetings for different themes in every session as scheduled in table 2. The action was carried out in (1) giving apperception in the beginning and explaining the topic to the students; (2) stimulating students to share their experience and ideas by arguing and discussion; (3) dividing the students into group works, but the current group works were different from the previous ones. This condition attempted to verify a new learning situation and to increase their performance; where the learners in a group would be randomly selected upon new members initially. Participants in a group consisted of 4-5 members and they worked either individually or collaboratively; and (4) facilitating and observing the participants within discussion session during the meetings with the relevant themes. Table 2. Second phase meeting schedule Day and Date Duration Topic discussed Tuesday, 20th March 2012 07:30 - 09:10 AM Misunderstanding between generations Thursday, 22nd March 2012 Tuesday, 27th March 2012 07:30 - 09:10 AM 07:30 - 09:10 AM What’s wrong with our education system The impact of free trade in ASEAN countries Observing Either the first or the second phase in observation had empirically observed, recorded, and analyzed towards all major learning activities that had been conducted during the classroom session with pre-, whilst-, and post-teaching and learning activity. Activity was normally begun with any apperception to review the previous meetings in order to gain the lesson-learnt refreshment. Again, the activity continued with the core teaching and learning process due to its three different topics presented in upcoming meetings. In whilst-teaching and learning or core activity, there were three main approaches of learning applied– exploration, elaboration, and confirmation. All participants were given opportunities to share their opinion regarding the topics, active participants were mainly expected to show their high thinking skills stimulate and support others’ ideas, keep control upon conducive and active learning, and emphasize problem-based solving rather than show excessive competition amongst the participants. Thus, to deepen the results-oriented, classroom observation consisted of collecting information, observing activities, discussing theme(s), analyzing the problem, considering DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance students’ thinking skills level, making inferences, and presenting the results of the discussion aspects were designed into mature interaction within 100 minutes and nevertheless, the final results still determined to students’ individual-based performance. In this stage, the same activity was still done repeatedly through the recordings and observation. The action implementation on the second phase was based on the reflection results that had been conducted in the first phase. Three different topics had been under precise consideration, since they achieved unsatisfied enough applied in the first phase. The results of the observation and recordings were to determine as the final output how far the first and second phase significantly contributed to English education undergraduate students’ speaking performance, and students’ involvement and motivation in teaching and learning process as well. Reflecting This stage was aimed at examining the strengths and weaknesses experienced in the first phase. This report organization included the strengths inventory and remedial weaknesses of speaking competence by accommodating individual-based performance approach amongst participants; and recommendation emphasis after the learning session was successfully done. Table 3 showed students’ oral proficiency performance obtained within the first phase (e.g.: plan, act, observe, and reflect) implementation. Table 3. First phase of students’ oral skill performance Participant (N = 27) Aspect Evaluated Score ConvertedScore1 2 3 4 5 Student 1 65 63 70 67 68 66.6 2.50/ C+ Student 2 68 68 70 68 68 68 2.50/ C+ Student 3 68 67 68 69 67 67.8 2.50/ C+ Student 4 67 68.5 68 67 67 67.5 2.50/ C+ Student 5 60 60 63 62 60 61 2.0/ C Student 6 73.5 73 73.5 73 73 73 3.0/ B Student 7 84 83 85 87 86 85 3.75/ A- Student 8 68.5 67 68 67 67 67.5 2.50/ C+ Student 9 62 62 63.5 63 62 62.5 2.0/ C Student 10 63 63 63 63 63 63 2.0/ C Student 11 71 69.5 69.5 69 68.5 69.5 2.75/ B- Student 12 62 62 63.5 63 62 62.5 2.0/ C Student 13 74 72.5 72.5 72 71.5 72.5 3.0/ B Student 14 63 63 63 63 63 63 2.0/ C Student 15 84 84 83.5 83 83 83.5 3.50/ B+ Student 16 60 60.5 61 61 60 60.5 2.0/ C Student 17 68 67.5 68.5 67.5 66 67.5 2.50/ C+ Student 18 68 68 69 68 68 68 2.50/ C+ Student 19 82.5 82 84 82 80 82 3.50/ B+ Student 20 64 64 64 64 64 64 2.0/ C Student 21 73 73 73 73 73 73 3.0/ B Student 22 65 65 60 58 59 61 2.0/ C Student 23 67 67 67 67 67 67 2.50/ C+ Student 24 79 78 81.5 78 75 78 3.25/ B+ Student 25 63 63 70 60 60 63 2.0/ C Student 26 63 63 63 63 63 63 2.0/ C Student 27 65 63 63 67 62 64 2.0/ C Average Score 68.30 Key to Grading: 3.86 to 4.0 means A; 3.75 to 3.85 means A-; 3.25 to 3.74 means B+; 3.0 to 3.24 means B; 2.75 to 2.94 means B-; 2.25 to 2.74 means C+; and 2.0 to 2.24 means C Remarks: 1–Pronunciation; 2–Grammar; 3–Vocabulary; 4–Fluency; and 5–Comprehension ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE Based on the descriptive analysis result presented on the table 3, there was noted that 0.04% or only 1 respondent reached 3.75/ A- as the highest score; 0.11% or 3 respondents gained 3.25 to 3.50/ B+; 0.11% or 3 respondents also gained 3.0/ B; only 0.04% or only 1 respondent achieved 2.75/ B-; 0.30% or 8 respondents showed their performance with the score achievement of 2.50/ C+; and 0.40% or 11 respondents performed their oral skill with the score achievement of 2.0/ C in the first phase of oral skill performance. The average score achieved in the first phase of the performance was 68.30. Table 4. First phase result towards participants’ oral skill summary Category Frequency (F) Percentage (%) Excellent (A- to A) 1 0.04 Good (B- to B+) 5 0.26 Moderate (C- to C+) 19 0.70 This stage was aimed at examining the strengths and weaknesses which experienced in the first phase. The second phase also gave a reflection towards report organization that included the strengths inventory and remedial weaknesses of oral skill by adopting individual-based performance; and recommendation emphasis after the learning session was successfully done as revealed in table 5 through plan, act, observe, and reflect implementation. Table 5. Second phase of students’ oral skill performance Participant (N = 27) Aspect Evaluated Score ConvertedScore1 2 3 4 5 Student 1 72 27 74 72 70 72 2.75/ B- Student 2 71 71 71 73 69 71 2.75/ B- Student 3 72 72 75 78 68 73 2.75/ B- Student 4 72 727 72 72 72 72 2.75/ B- Student 5 70 67 70 61 67 67 2.25/ C+ Student 6 72 72 75 78 68 73 3.25/ B+ Student 7 92 92 96 90 90 92 4.0/ A Student 8 70 70 72.5 70 70 70.5 2.75/ B- Student 9 62 64.5 62 62 62 62.5 2.0/ C Student 10 70 67 70 61 67 67 2.25/ C+ Student 11 78 77 77.5 73 72 75.5 3.0/ B Student 12 62 64.5 62 62 62 62.5 2.25/ C+ Student 13 72 78 77 75 73 75 3.25/ B+ Student 14 63 63 63 63 63 63 2.25/ C+ Student 15 85.5 83 83 85 81 83.5 3.75/ A- Student 16 60 60 62 60.5 60 60.5 2.0/ C Student 17 71 70 72 71 71.5 71.5 2.75/ B- Student 18 72 27 74 72 70 72 2.75/ B- Student 19 84 84 90 82 80 84 3.75/ A- Student 20 64 66 67 62 61 64 2.0/ C Student 21 72 72 75 78 68 73 3.25/ B+ Student 22 61 61 61 61 61 61 2.0/ C Student 23 71 71 71 73 69 71 2.75/ B- Student 24 84 84 88.5 83 83 84.5 3.75/ A- Student 25 62 66 69 64 59 64 2.0/ C Student 26 65 65 70.5 65 62 65.5 2.0/ C Student 27 70.5 67.5 71.5 61 67 67.5 2.0/ C Average Score 71.04 DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance Based on the descriptive analysis result presented on the table 5, there was described that 0.04% or only 1 respondent reached 4.0/ A- as the highest score; 0.11% or 3 respondents gained 3.75/ A-; 0.11% or 3 respondents also gained 3.25/ B+; only 0.04% or only 1 respondent achieved 3.0/ B; 0.30% or 8 respondents showed their performance with the score achievement of 2.75/ B-; and 0.15% or 4 respondents performed their oral skill performance with the score achievement of 2.25/ C+; and 0.26% or 7 respondents proved their academic achievement in oral proficiency with the gained score of 2.0/ C in the second phase of speaking performance. The average score achieved in the second phase of students’ oral skill performance was 71.04. Table 6. Second phase result towards participants’ oral skill summary Category Frequency (F) Percentage (%) Excellent (A- to A) 7 0.15 Good (B- to B+) 16 0.45 Moderate (C- to C+) 11 0.41 In terms of legibility of teaching materials, the use of short sentences were preferred and more easily assimilated by participants compared to the readability in the form of long sentences and other forms of legibility. Meanwhile, learning techniques used in this study included: (1) lecturing: discussion between lecturer– students, and students–students by sharing information usually, ideas development and problem solution; (2) demonstration or drilling with some thematic themes; and (3) providing experiments and/or empirical experience amongst participants. The topics should be shared, discussed, academically argued/ debated amongst individuals, groups (inter and intra). Meanwhile, the use of demonstration and experimental approach had made more participants’ interest in arguing and discussion rather than applying tutorial-based approach. However, the use of these approaches required more time than the use of the classical lecture method initiated by lecturer. The time consuming was getting increased for the discussion opportunity when the experimental and demonstration approach used amongst individuals and groups, but, on the other hand, the gradual development of oral proficiency amongst participants certainly increased and be effective when they were willing to realize and maximize the concept of implementing oral proficiency and accuracy in relating to pronunciation, grammar/structure, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. CONCLUSIONS Interaction and individual-based performance engaged in speaking IV is 1 hour and 40 minutes weekly within six meetings among sophomore English education have concluded two main aspects. First, the natural way used in students’ interaction and individual-based performance approach may, in variance results contribute their oral skill. After conducting a series of assessment process–planning, acting, observing, and reflecting in each phase, the speaking competence results are empirically identified to improve better as recorded in the second phase. Out of twenty seven participants, there are 0.74% or 20 participants obtaining an improvement while participating within six meetings in speaking course, whereas other seven participants did not show their performance improve. Second, interaction and individual-based performance approach as the learning culture can also trigger a though competition amongst ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education ISSN 2301-7554 Vol. 3, Issue 1, December 2014 http://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE adult learners. They individually achieve the multiple benefits in their learning experience and consciousness since the learning approach used fits to upgrade some supporting activities. Facilitating sophomore students to improve legibility of instruction materials, teaching methods, and obtaining equal and frequent opportunities during the meetings, particularly when the lectures focus on the interaction and individual-based performance approach, will open an opportunity to prove their competence since the oral skill needs the supporting contribution in the domain of asking and answering dialogue, situational dialogue, communicative dialogue, discussion and debate, retelling, storytelling, free talk style, short play and speech contest, and English corner possibly. REFERENCES Arhar, J. M., Holly, M. L., & Kasten, W. C. (2001). Action research for teachers: Travelling the yellow brick road. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. K. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Bilasha, O & Kwangsawad, T. (2004). Factors influencing Thai teachers’ abilities to adapt CLT in their classrooms: A collaborative action research study. ThaiTESOL Bulletin, 17, 1-10. Brumfit, C & Mitchell, R. (1990). Research in the language classroom. In Brumfit, C & Mitchell, R, The language classroom as a focus for research, Pp. 3-15. Hong Kong: Modern English Publications and The British Council. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: Deakin University Press. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Marrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York: Routledge. Cooper, D. C. & Schindler, P. S. (2001). Business research methods (7th). New York: McGraw-Hill. Gibbons, M. (2002). The self-directed learning handbook: Challenging adolescent students to excel. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hernandez, T. A. (2010). Promoting speaking proficiency through motivation and interaction: The study abroad and classroom learning contexts. Foreign Language Annals, 43(4), 650-670. Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). London: Routledgefalmer. Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Navigating pathways to success in ELT. Journal of English Studies, 3, 6-25. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Geelong: Deakin University Press. Khamkhien, A. (2010). Teaching English speaking and English speaking tests in the Thai context: A reflection from Thai perspective. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 184-190. Kumpulainen, K., & Wray, D. (2002). Classroom interaction and social learning: From theory to practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student motivation to learn (ERIC Digest No. 92). Eugene: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 200). Morrison, K. R. B. (1993). Planning and accomplishing school-centred evaluation. Dereham: Peter Francis. Narzoles, D. T. G. (2013). Classroom communication climate and communicative linguistic competence of EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(3), 404-410. Nicholls, G. (2002). Developing teaching and learning in higher education: London: RoutledgeFalmer. Richards J, C., & Renandya W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. In Shumin, K, Teaching Speaking, Pp. 201. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wallace, S. (2007). Teaching, tutoring and training in lifelong learning sector (3rd ed.). Exeter: Learning Matters Ltd. DIDIK RINAN SUMEKTO Students’ Oral Skill Improvement as Revealed in Learning-Based Performance Wenli, T. (2005). Improving speaking skills through instruction in oral classroom participation. Foreign Language Annals, 38(1), 46-55. Yueqin, H. (2013). Research on fostering intercultural communication competence of foreign language learners. Cross- Cultural Communication, 9(1), 5-12. Zhang, Y., & Wang, J. (2012). The elaboration of cultivating learners’ English communicative competence in China. English Language Teaching, 9(12), 111-120. DidikRinanSumekto