






































  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

98 
 

Show and Tell Technique in Teaching Speaking Skills 
at SMAN 2 Palopo 

1,2.3Institut Agama Islam Negeri Palopo (IAIN Palopo), Palopo, Indonesia 

ABSTRACT 
This research focused on using Show and Tell techniques to develop students’ speaking 
skills at Eleventh class of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo. The researcher used pre-experimental 
method. The population of this research is 157 students of XI class. The research sample 
is chosen purposively and got the XI IPA1 consisting of 35 students. In collecting the data, 
the researcher used speaking observations, divided into pre-survey and post-survey. 
After giving pre-survey and post-survey, this research provides pre-survey and post-
survey to students. Data were analyzed using SPSS program version 20. The results of the 
study indicated that the use of Show and Tell Technique is effective for improving 
students’ speaking skills. It can be seen calculation results that the scores of students in 
the control class. Based on the analysis of the data it can be concluded that the teaching 
skills of speaking using Show and Tell Techniques at Eleventh class of SMA Negeri 2 
Palopo. The implementation of this research for those who are interested in conducting 
research on problem statements, it is recommended to apply it to students who have 
basic speaking language skills and researchers hope that the results of this study can be 
beneficial to readers. 
 
Keywords: English Language Teaching, Show and Tell technique, Teaching Speaking Skills 

 
INTRODUCTION 

Speaking is one of the communication main elements. In EFL, instruction it was 
requires that particular attitude and distraction. Interaction effectively comes from 
analysis carefully of this place along adequately language usage and promotional some 
interest it that will with gradual help students speak English with fluent and correctly 
(Richard: 2002). Kang Sumin said that speaking language is particularly difficult for 
students to use language correctly in social interactions. To learn a second language or 
foreign languages difficult as we learned our native language as a child (Clasrk: 1997).  

In addition to factors in students, teacher teaching methods and styles also greatly 
affect students’ speaking abilities. The lack of teacher knowledge about learning methods 
to stimulate students’ speaking abilities is also one of the causes (Irvy, 2020). Teachers 
usually only use the lecture method (teacher centered) and rarely provide opportunities 
for students to talk about their experiences or express their opinions in front of the class. 
Learning methods that only use one-way methods namely the teacher explains or 
lectures make students become very minimal. This makes the development of students’ 
speaking abilities less optimal so that students are less motivated and stimulated by their 
speaking abilities and vocabulary addition. With the importance of the ability to speak, it 
is necessary to have a stimulus given both from parents and teachers and the 

anis.anisahfitriani.bakri@gmail.com  
  

 
Anisah Fitriani

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
mailto:anis.anisahfitriani.bakri@gmail.com
mailto:*rustan_santaria@iainpalopo.ac.id
mailto:amalia_yahya@iainpalopo.ac.id


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

99 
 

environment to develop students’ speaking abilities. As an educator should be creative 
and innovative in providing learning methods and media to students to stimulate and 
motivate students’ speaking abilities (Anwar et al., 2020). Motivation or stimulus given 
to students should be given outside or the environment and from within students 
themselves. 

It is the problem faced by students was very difficult in speaking and not mastered 
speaking, not confident especially in asking questions or answer a question given by the 
teacher, the student was less motivated and who has not mastered speaking because of 
lack of vocabulary. And the use of English was very difficult to master by students because 
in addition to using the English language is also able to know the purpose of the sentence. 
So that, in the learning process students was not creative in talking and making sentences 
in daily activity. 

Numbers of study have been conducted related to the Show and Tell Metohod, 
including Wulandari (2014) doing a research about improving the children confidence 
through Show and Tell Method found that students’ confidence in the A PAUD Miana V 
group increased after adopting a method of Show and Tell technique. It can make students 
more confidents as learning English and also more courageous and more organized 
children to tell stories to their teachers or friend, they can do their own duty. On the other 
hand, Nurvitasyari (2017), studying about the use of show and tell method in teaching 
vocabulary at SMP Negeri 4 Galesong Selatan Kabupaten Takalar” found that the use of 
show and tell method can increase students’ vocabulary mastery. The method 
contributes to student control in the vocabulary. It can increase students’ understanding 
of words. This method can enhance student vocabulary control. This is evidenced with 
value of t-test 14.12 greater than the value of t-table 2.042.  

In 2015, Eka Trislijayanti also had research about the use of Show and Tell Method 
in teaching Bahasa Indonesia SMP Negeri 1 Seririt. She concluded that: a) of students’ 
speaking skills get increased applying Show and Tell methods; b) The learning steps to 
speak properly by applying performance methods and informing with media pictures are 
divided into three stages, namely introduction, core activity, and closure(Iksan, 2017). In 
the preliminary stage, the teacher gives apperception related to the material being taught. 
At the core activity stage, the teacher assigns students to describe pictures. In the closing 
stages, the teacher reflects on and evaluates the activities that have already taken place 
and provides reinforcement to students because they are already active when learning 
takes place; c) Students gave very positive responses to the application of the Show and 
Tell method with picture media in speaking learning. The studies above show positive 
findings about the use of the method in language teaching and learning. While, based on 
the fact found on preliminary investigation, generally, students’ ability at SMA Negeri 2 
Palopo speaking skill were still low. Therefore, the writer was interested in conducting a 
research to find out whether Show and Tell Technique improves students’ speaking skill 
at Eleventh class of Senior High School Negeri 2 Palopo.  

METHODS 
Research Method and Design 

In this research, author employed before-experimental system. This system was 
applied to know effectiveness of Show and Tell technique in instruction saying ability at 
Eleventh class of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo. Formula of research design is illustrated below: 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

100 
 

 

 

Where: 
O1 : Pre-survey 
X : Treatment 
O2 : Post-survey (Sugiyono: 2008) 

 
Location and Time of Research 
1. Location 

Researcher delivered editing at Eleventh of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo. 
2. Time of the Research 

The researcher conducted research at Eleventh grade of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo start 
from on February 20th to March 11th, 2020. 
 
Variable 

The variable of this research, the researcher was consisting of two variables so-
called self-sufficient variable and depend variable: 
1. Show and Tell technique as independent variable 

Show and Tell technique was a technique that plays about describing thing. 
2. Students’ speaking skill as dependent variable 

The ability of students in English is different, especially, in vocabulary and listening. 
If the students have not speaking, the students will be difficult to understand to learn 
about English. To improve students speaking skill can used the Show and Tell technique 
to teach students and to improve their speaking. 
 
Population and Sample 
1. Population 

Population of this editing is entire Eleventh class of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo in 
2019/2020 academic year that consisted of 157 students, there were five classes, class XI 
IPA1 consisted 35 students, class XI IPA2 consisted 34 students, XI IPA3 consisted 26 
students, XI IPS1 consisted 32 students and XI IPS2 consisted 30 students. 
2. Sample 

Author applied which was used sampling technique. In this case, author will select 
room XI IPA1 as sample. The students consisted 35 students.  There were boys and girls. 
They were around seventeen-years old. They had the same level of proficiency, because 
they are taught by the same teacher.  
 
Instrument of the Research 

In this research, author applied show and tell technique. The test consisted of pre-
survey and post-survey. The show and tell technique of survey was describing noun or 
thing which consisted of 8 parts of speech, 3 tenses, and descriptive text. The researcher 
used show and tell method which has 5E in the learning process that is having an 
engagement, exploration, explanation, elaboration, and then evaluation. 
 

Pre-survey     Treatment    Post-survey 

O1                   X                O2 

 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

101 
 

Procedure of Collecting Data 
The procedure of collecting data held with the sequence as follows: 

1. Giving Pre-survey 
The Pre-survey applied to find out the students’ ability of speaking that uses Show 

and Tell technique. A pre-survey was used to know the previous mastery of students in 
mastering speaking skills before giving treatment. The Show and Tell technique will be 
given the students to describe about things every meeting. For the things that had 
described, the students made a sentence by linking the things. 
2. Giving Treatment 

The researcher conducted treatments done four meetings. Processes are as follows: 
a. Second meeting on February 20th, 2020. The researcher had given the treatment 

in class the material gave were what is Show and Tell technique? And what is Noun? 
Example words of Noun such Things. In treatment, author described delineation 
about Noun to learners with applying Images. Then, research would provide 10 
vocabulary words for each meeting. 

b. The Third meeting on February 26th, 2020. The material gave parts of Speech. The 
researcher asked students to mention what is part of speech. Then, the researcher 
gives an understanding of the part of speech along with an example. The parts of 
speech are noun, pronoun, verb, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunction, and 
interjection. Then, the researcher will provide 10 vocabulary words. 

c. The Forth meeting on March 04th, 2020. The material gave Tenses. The researcher 
asked students to mention what are tenses. Then, the researcher gave an 
understanding of the tenses along with an example. The tenses were simple past 
tense, simple present tense, and simple future tense. Then, the researcher would 
provide 10 vocabulary words. 

d. The Fifth meeting on March 11th, 2020. The material gave what is descriptive text? 
Example about descriptive text by using pictures and show and tell technique. 

3. Giving Post-survey 
Since allocating treatments to four meetings, author allocated the post-test. In 

post-survey, researcher gave the test the same test as in the pre-survey to the students. 
This survey was to know whether the students. This exam was to know whether 
students have a different result after giving treatment or not. 
 
Technique of Analyzing Data 

The researcher was use quantitative analysis with incoming point and standard 
deviation of data and t-test paired sample with used SPSS 20.0. The author surveyed it 
with used assessment score accuracy, fluency, and comprehension from Heaton (1990). 

To analyze learner’s speaking test, there would be some identity applied by the 
author for learner’ point by scoring the students speaking test result. Those assessment 
criteria as follows: 

Table 1. Accuracy criteria 
Rating 

 
Accuracy 

6 
Articulation is only very with slight governed with mother tongue. Two or three 
small grammatical or lexical wrongs. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

102 
 

5 
Articulation is with slight governed with mother tongue. A few small grammatical 
and lexical wrongs but most facial experiences were true. 

4 

Articulation was still with moderate governed with mother tongue but no solemn 
phonological wrongs. Handful grammatical and lexical wrongs but only one or 
two major wrongs raising disorder. 

3 
Articulation is governed with mother tongue but only handful solemn 
phonological and lexical wrongs, several of which raise disorder. 

2 
Articulation with solemn governed with mother by wrongs raising a snap in 
communications. Many elementary and grammatical wrongs. 

1 

Solemn articulation wrongs as good as many elementary grammatical and lexical 
wrongs. No proof of telling dominated several of language abilities and places 
does in purpose. 

 
Table 2. Fluency criteria 

Rating Fluency 

6 Says without overly amazing and venture by fair extensive way of idiom. Quests 
for words with occasional but not only one or two no natural halt. 

5 Has to create an attempt at periods to seek for words. Soft dispatch on all and 
only handful no natural paused. 

4 He is created an attempt and seeks for paragraphs, they are not overly many no 
natural paused. With fair smooth delivery with most. With occasional 
incomplete but successful in bringing public purpose. Just range distance. 

3 Is creates an attempt for many of periods. Often is seeks for desirable purpose. 
Better hesitate dispatch and incomplete. Distance of idiom often finite. 

2 Lengthy rest while he/she author for desirable purpose. With frequent 
incomplete and hesitate dispatch. Almost give up creating attempts at period. 
Finite distance of idiom. 

1 Full of lengthy and no natural rest. Very hesitate and incomplete dispatch. At 
periods gives up creating attempt. Very finite distance of idiom. 

 
Table 3. The Comprehensibility criteria 

Rating Comprehensibility 

6 
Simple of hearer comprehend speaker’s intention and public purpose. Very 
handful interferences or clarification that is need. 

5 
Speaker’s purpose and public purpose are with fair pure. Handful interference 
with hearer for towards for illustration was necessity. 

4 
Most of what sayer speaks in simple to obey. His/her mention is always 
understood but some distractions were necessity to assist him/her to speak 
letter to asked explanation. 

3 
Hearer can to comprehend a lot of what is spoken, but he/she must with 
constant asked explanation. Cannot comprehend many of speaker’s more 
involved or longer sentences. 

2 
Only little handful (generally low sentence and phrase) can be realized and then 
with considerable attempt with someone who is applyed to hearing to sayer. 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

103 
 

Rating Comprehensibility 

1 
With hard anything of what is spoken can be realized. Even when hearers create 
a great attempt suppress, sayers is incapable to clarity anything he/she seems 
to has spoken. 

(Heaton: 1990) 
Result of students’ speaking tests will be determined by classification students. It 

could be seen in the table below. The score of three tables above was converted into a 
score in the next table by using formula below:  
 
A student’s score =        The gain score      x 100 
                                       The maximun score 
(Brown: 2004) 

Beside technique for pointing through six balance above, author also makes 
evaluation classification to survey student’s saying aptitude. Obeying was evaluation 
balance classification: 

 
Table 4. Evaluation balance classification 

Classification Scale Evaluation 

Excellent 
Very good 
Good 
Fairly good 
Poor 
Very poor 

86-100 
71-85 
56-70 
41-55 
26-40 
1-25 

6 
5 
4 
3 
2 
1 

Daryanto: 2007) 
Data collection analyzed with applying quantitative with applying Statistical 

Procedure and Service solution (SPSS) ver. 20 for windows. SPSS 20 is computer 
software/Program for stepping, evaluating or analysis data of statistics. 
 
RESULTS 

Findings of research showed result of data that have been analyzed with statistical. 
It comprised students’ score of pre-test and post-test. 
Students’ score of Pre-survey 

 
Table 5. Point of Students’ Pre-test Result 

Students 
Aspects of Speaking Skill 

Mean 
Accuracy Fluency Comprehensibility 

S1 2 1 2 5 
S2 2 2 1 5 
S3 1 2 2 5 
S4 3 3 3 9 
S5 1 2 1 4 
S6 2 2 1 5 
S7 3 3 3 9 
S8 1 1 1 3 
S9 3 3 3 9 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

104 
 

Students 
Aspects of Speaking Skill 

Mean 
Accuracy Fluency Comprehensibility 

S10 2 1 1 4 
S11 1 2 2 5 
S12 2 2 1 5 
S13 1 2 1  4 
S14 2 2 1 5 
S15 3 2 2 7 
S16 2 1 2 5 
S17 1 1 1 3 
S18 2 1 2 5 
S19 2 3 3 8 
S20 3 3 3 9 
S21 3 3 3 9 
S22 2 2 1 5 
S23 2 2 2 6 
S24 2 2 2 6 
S25 2 2 2 6 
S26 2 1 2 5 
S27 2 2 1 5 
S28 3 3 3 9 
S29 2 2 1 5 
S30 2 1 2 5 
S31 3 2 1 6 
S32 2 2 1 5 
S33 2 2 2 6 
S34 2 1 2 5 
S35 3 3 3 9 

Speaking ability composed of three aspects; namely accuracy, fluency, and 
comprehensibility. Author would allocate and pack intend point of learners saying ability 
one with one. All of those would describe with attending lists: 

 
Table 6. Rate percentage point of students’ accuracy in pre-test result 

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 - - 

Very good 5 - - 

Good 4 - - 

Fairly good 3 8 23% 

Poor 2 17 51% 

Very poor 1 10 26% 

Total 35 100% 

Table 6 shows that, there were 8 students (23%) got fairly good score. There were 
17 students (51%) who got poor score. There were 10 learners (26%) who got very poor 
score. 

 
Table 7. Rate Percentage Point of Students’ Accuracy in Pre-test result 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

105 
 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 

Accuracy pre-
survey 

35 2 1 3 69 1.97 .119 

Valid N (list-
wise) 

35 
      

Table 7 explains intend point of accuracy got with learners in pre-test. It can be 
regarded with clear from these lists intend point is 1.97 and it represents these saying 
aptitude of the students. 

 
Table 8. Rate Percentage Point of Learners’ Fluency in Pre-test result 

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 - - 

Very good 5 - - 

Good 4 - - 
Fairly good 3 11 29% 

Poor 2 19 54% 

Very poor 1 5 17% 

Total 35 100% 

Table 8 shows that there were 11 students (29%) got fairly good score. There were 
19 learners (54%) who got poor score. There were 5 learners (17%) who got very poor 
score. 

 
Table 9. Mean Point of Students’ Fluency Pre-test result 

Descriptive Statistics 
 N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 
Fluency pre-

survey 
35 2 1 3 73 2.09 .111 

Valid N (list-
wise) 

35 
      

In table 9, it can be seen that highest point of learners is 3 and the lowest point 
was 1. It also indicates that mean point of learners’ accuracy 1.97 and standard 
deviation error was 111. 

 
Table 10. Rate Percentage Point of Learners’ Comprehensibility in Pre-test Result 

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 - - 

Very good 5 - - 

Good 4 - - 

Fairly good 3 8 23% 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

106 
 

Poor 2 13 37% 

Very poor 1 14 40% 

Total 35 100% 

Table 10 shows that, there were 8 students (23%) got fairly good score. There were 
13 learners (37%) who got poor score. There were 14 learners (40%) who got very poor 
score. 

 
Table 11. Mean Point of Learners’ Comprehensibility Pre-survey result 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 

Comprehensibility 
pre-survey 

35 2 1 3 64 1.83 .133 

Valid N (list-wise) 35       

In table 11, it can be seen that highest point of learners was 3 and lowest 1. It also 
indicates that mean point of learners’ comprehensibility in pre-survey was 1.83 and 
standard deviation error is 133. 
 
Students’ score of Post-survey 

After knowing learners’ point in pre-test, author to take them treatment with 
applying Show and Tell technique. The result of learners’ point in post-test gave in 
attending list with dividing them into three aspect, they were accuracy, fluency, and 
comprehensibility. 

 
Table 12. Learners’ Score 

Students 
The Aspects of Speaking Skill 

Mean 
Accuracy Fluency Comprehensibility 

S1 4 2 3 9 

S2 3 3 2 8 

S3 2 3 3 8 

S4 5 5 6 16 

S5 2 2 2 6 

S6 3 3 2 8 

S7 6 5 4 15 

S8 4 3 2 9 

S9 6 5 6 17 

S10 3 2 4 9 

S11 5 4 5 14 

S12 5 3 4 12 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

107 
 

S13 3 2 3 8 

S14 4 3 2 9 

S15 5 5 4 14 

S16 3 4 2 9 

S17 3 3 2 8 

S18 3 3 4 10 

S19 3 5 5 13 

S20 5 5 4 14 

S21 6 5 4 15 

S22 5 4 3 12 

S23 4 4 4 12 

S24 4 4 5 13 

S25 5 3 4 12 

S26 4 4 3 11 

S27 4 3 4 11 

S28 5 5 5 15 

S29 4 3 2 9 

S30 4 4 3 11 

S31 5 4 4 13 

S32 5 4 5 14 

S33 5 3 4 12 

S34 3 3 2 8 

S35 6 5 5 16 

 
In other side, author had classified based on English saying assessments that 

composed of accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility and it is presented through list 
distribution frequency and percentage. 

 
Table 13. rate percentage point of learners’  

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 - - 

Very good 5  9 26% 

Good 4 9 26% 

Fairly good 3 13 37% 

Poor 2 4 11% 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

108 
 

Very poor 1 - - 

Total 35 100% 

Table 13 shows that, there were 9 learners (26%) got very good score. There were 
9 learners (26%) who got good score. There were 13 learners (37%) who got fairly good 
score. There were 4 learners (11%) who got poor score. 

 
Table 14. Mean Point of Learners’ Accuracy  

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 

Accuracy post-
survey 

35 2 5 128 3.66 .169 

Valid N (list-
wise) 

35 
     

In table 14,  it can be seen that highest score of learners’ accuracy were 5 and lowest 
score were 2. It also represents that mean point of learners’ accuracy in post-survey were 
3.66 and standard error .169. 

 
Table 15. the rate percentage score of students’ fluency  

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 4 11% 
Very good 5 11 31% 

Good 4 9 26% 
Fairly good 3 9 26% 

Poor 2 2 6% 
Very poor 1 - - 

Total 35 100% 

Table 15 shows that, there were 4 learners (11%) got excellent point. There were 
11 learners (31%) who got very good point. There were 9 learners (26%) who got good 
point. There were 9 learners (26%) who got fairly good score. There were 2 students 
(6%) who got poor score. 

 
Table 16. Mean Point of Learners’ Fluency  

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 

Fluency post-
survey 

35 2 6 146 4.17 .190 

Valid N (list-
wise) 

35 
     

In table 16, it can be seen that highest point of learners were 6 and lowest point 
were 2. It also indicates that mean point of learners’ fluency in post-survey is 4.17 and 
standard error .190. 

 
 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

109 
 

Table 17. Rate percentage point of learners’ comprehensibility  

Classification Score Frequency Percentage 

Excellent 6 2 6% 

Very good 5 6 17% 
Good 4 12 34% 

Fairly good 3 6 17% 

Poor 2 9 26% 

Very poor 1 - - 

Total 35 100% 

Table 17 shows that, there were 2 students (6%) got excellent score. There were 6 
learners (17%) who got very good point. There were 12 learners (34%) who got good 
point. There were 6 learners (17%) who got fairly good point. There were 9 learners 
(26%) who got poor score. 

 
Table 18. Mean Point of Learners’ Comprehensibility  

Descriptive Statistics 

 
N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error 

Comprehensibility 
post-survey 

35 2 6 126 3.60 .206 

Valid N (list-wise) 35      

In table 18, it can be seen that highest point of learners’ were 6 and lowest point 
were 2. It also indicates that mean point of learners’ comprehensibility in post-survey is 
3.60 and standard error .206. 
 
The Mean Score of Students’ Pre-survey and Post-survey result. 

 
Table 19. Mean Point of Learners’ Pre-test result 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Deviation 

Pre-survey 35 3 9 206 5.89 1.827 
Valid N (list-

wise) 
35 

     

Table 19 shows that highest point of learners in pre-survey was 9 and the lowest 
score were 3. Besides, it also indicated that mean point of learners in pre-test was 5.89 
and standard deviation was 1.827. 

 
Table 20. Mean Point of Learners’ Post-survey result 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Deviation 

Post-survey 35 6 17 400 11.43 2.893 

Valid N (list-wise) 35      

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

110 
 

Table 20 shows that highest point of learners in post-survey was 17 and lowest 
points are 6. Besides, it also indicated that mean point of learners in post-survey was 
11.43 and standard deviation is 2.893. 
 
The calculation of t-test Pre-survey and Post-survey result 

 
Table 21. Students’ Result of t-test from Pre-survey and Post-survey result 

One-Sample Statistics 

 N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 

Pre-survey 35 5.89 1.827 .309 
Post-survey 35 11.43 2.893 .489 

Table 21 shows that survey mean of pre-test is 5.89 and survey mean of post-test is 
11.43, the N (number of the case) was 35 students. The standard deviation for pre-survey 
was 1.827 and the standard deviation for post-survey was 2.893. The standard error 
mean for pre-survey was .309 and standard error mean for post-test is .489. The 
description of t-test was described by the following table. 

 
Table 22. probability Value of T-Test of Pre-survey and Post-survey 

Table 22 shows that Probability Value is lower than alpha (α) (0.000 < 0.05) and 
degree of freedom 94 which means that there is significant difference in post-survey. It 
indicated that the null hypothesis (H1) was accepted and, of course, the alternative 
hypothesis (H0) was rejected. It showed that the use of Show and Tell technique as an 
authentic material significantly improve the students’ speaking and give significantly 
greater contribution to the students’ speaking skill. 

Based on research findings. The data analysis above shows that applying Show and 
Tell techniques is effective in improving students’ speaking skills. In the post-survey, it 
can be seen in the table before after giving continuous treatment using show and tell 
technique. 
 
DISCUSSIONS 

In this section, researchers take 3 students as representations that have different 
abilities, namely students S8, S9, and S24. From these three students, there are 
differences in the comparison of speaking skills in Show and Tell technique, namely high, 
medium and low in the class. The first student is the student (S9), the study found that 
students could explain the topic in the pre-survey, because he is fluent and 
comprehensive in explaining the topic. In addition, after researchers provide treatment 
about Show and Tell technique, students are increasingly eager to put out the words 

Paired Samples Test 

 

Paired Differences 

t df 
Sig. (2-
tailed) Mean 

Std. 
Deviation 

Std. 
Error 
Mean 

95% Confidence 
Interval of the 

Difference 

Lower Upper 

Pair 
1 

Pre-survey – 
post-survey 

-
5.543 

1.704 .288 -6.128 -4.958 
-

19.248 
34 .000 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

111 
 

spoken. Before the researcher gave treatment, he got a score of 9 in the pre-survey and 
after giving treatment, students got 16 scores in the post-survey. 

The second student is a student (R24) got a moderate ability to describe a topic. 
After research provides treatment about Show and Tell technique, these students have 
the motivation to learn to speak, especially in terms of confidence to appear in public. 
After that, before the researcher gave treatment, she got a score 6 of pre-survey and after 
giving treatment the student got 13 scores on the post-survey. The third student is a 
student (R8). This student has a different comparison between the two students above, 
because he has a very low level of student R9 and student R24. After the researcher gives 
treatment about Show and Tell students are lazy to put out words and are ashamed to 
appear in front. Before the researcher gave treatment, he got 3 scores on the pre-survey 
and after giving the treatment, students got 9 scores on the post-survey. 

The difference between Wulandari, in her thesis entitled “Meningkatkan rasa 
percaya diri anak usia dini melalui metode Show and Tell”. The result of her research 
indicates the self-confidence of the students in group A PAUD Miana V increased after 
implementing the Show and Tell method.  

The second research is Nurvitasyari, in her thesis entitled “The Use of Show and Tell 
(S&T) method in Teaching Vocabulary at the Second year Students of Junior High School 
(SMP) Negeri 4 Galesong Selatan Kabupaten Takalar”. The differences between research 
Nurvitasyari uses Show and Tell. Similarities between research Nurvitasyari teaching 
students’ vocabulary. 

The third study was Eka Trislijayanti (2015) had research “Penggunaan Metode 
Show and Tell Dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia Untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan 
Berbicara Siswa Kelas VII.C di SMP Negeri 1 Seririt Tahun Ajaran 2014/2015”. The 
difference between Eka Trislijayanti concluded that an increase in the average score of 
students’ speaking skills by applying the Show and Tell method with picture media 
occurred in cycle I and cycle II in CAR (Classroom Action Research). 

Based on the explanation, speaking teaching skills using Show and Tell technique at 
SMA Negeri 2 Palopo, the students got a significant improvement in their speaking skills 
scores. Therefore, it can be stated that Show and Tell technique in teaching speaking 
learning have solved students’ speaking skills for Eleventh grade students of SMA Negeri 
2 Palopo. So, the hypothesis put forward in this study that says “the effective Show and 
Tell technique to teach speaking skills” is accepted. 
 
CONCLUSIONS 

Based on the research findings it can be concluded that the use of Show and Tell 
technique is effective to improve students’ speaking skill at Eleventh grade of SMA Negeri 
2 Palopo. In other words, it can be proven that there are significant differences in the 
learning outcomes of students who learn to speak through Show and Tell technique with 
students who take learning without Show and Tell technique. Based on data analysis in 
the class, the pre-survey average score is 5.8900. While in the post-survey average score 
is 18.4300. Based on the analysis of the data it can be concluded that the teaching skills 
of speaking using effective Show and Tell technique at Eleventh grade of SMA Negeri 2 
Palopo. It can be proven that the scores of students in the post-survey are higher than in 
the pre-survey. 
SUGGESTIONS 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

112 
 

Based on conclusion of study, the author suggests to attending parties: 
1. For teachers, it is recommended to other teachers to use Show and Tell technique in 

teaching speaking as an effective way to improve students' speaking skills. 
2. For students, they can use Show and Tell technique to improve their speaking skills 
3. For researchers, in this thesis researchers hope that results of this study can be useful 

for readers. It is hoped that readers will get more information about the use of Show 
and Tell technique. In this study, future researchers are expected to conduct research 
to find other significance of Show and Tell technique in other English skills. 

 
BIBLIOGRAPGHY 

Ag. Bambang Setiyadi, Teaching English as Foreign Language, Jakarta: Terpadu 2006 

Anonym, http://www.buzzle.com/articles/oral-communication-skills.html, accessed on 
January 16th 2014 at 10.42 am. 

Artono Wadirma, et Al, English in Focus: For Grade VII Junior High School (SMP/MTS), 
(Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan, DEPDIKNAS, 2008) 

Anwar, L., Furwana, D., & Iksan, M. (2020). Developing Reading Worksheet for Tenth 
Grade Students of SMA Negeri 4 Palopo. FOSTER: Journal of English Language 
Teaching, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v1i1.2 

Christine C. M. Goh, Teaching Speaking in the Language Classroom, RELC Porthfolio series 
15 

Daryanto, Evaluasi Pendidikan (Jakarta PT. Rineka Cipta, 2007) 

Djalius Syah, International English Conversation 

Eka Ningsih, Improving Speaking Skill by Using Classroom Observation Technique at the 
Eight Year in SMP PMDS Putra Palopo, (Palopo: STAIN Palopo, 2013, ) 

Eka Trislijayanti, Penggunaan Metode Show And Tell Dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa 
Indonesia Untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Berbicara Siswa Kelas VII.C di SMP 
Negeri 1 Seririt Tahun Ajaran 2014/2015 

Foley J. A., New Dimension in the Teaching of Oral Communication, (Singapore: SEAMEO, 
Regional Language Centre, 2005)  

H. Dougles Brown, Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. 
(Ed II; San Fransisco: Addison Wesley Longman Inc., 2001), p. 268 

H. Martin Manser, Oxford Learners Pocket Dictionary, (New Edition ; 1995) 

Hebert H. Clark, Psychology and Language. (United State of America: Harcoun Brace 
Joranovicz, ich., 1997) 

Hebert H. Clark and Eve V Clark, Psychology and Language, (United State of America: 
Harcount Brace Joranovich, ich., 1997), p. 223  

Iksan, M. (2017). EMPOWERING BUSINESS GROUP PEANUT TENTENG. Proceeding 
International Conference on Natural and Social Science (ICONSS) 2017, 1(1). 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/oral-communication-skills.html


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 
Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 

e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

113 
 

Irvy, I. I. (2020). Understanding the Learning Models Design for Indonesian Teacher. 
International Journal of Asian Education, 1(2), 95–106. 
https://doi.org/10.46966/ijae.v1i2.40 

Imelda Wardi, Haan Basri, Abdul Waris, Improving The Ability in Writing Descriptive Text 
Trought Guided Question Technique, Jurnal of English Language Teaching Society 
(ELTS) Vol. 2, No 1, 2014 

J.B Heaton, Writing English Language Test (Ed. I: New York Inc, 1998) 

Jack C. Richards, Teaching Listening and Speaking from Theory to Practice (New York: 
Cambridge University Press, 2008) 

Jack C. Richard and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology In Language Teaching (Ed. I: New 
York Cambridge University Press, 2002) 

Leni Widia, I Nengah Astawa, Improving Speaking Skill Through Task Based Learning 
Strategy  (Jurnal Santiaji Pendidikan, Vol. 4 , Nomor I, at Seventh Grade Students 
of SMP Negeri 3 Baturiti in Academy year 2014) 

M. Basri Wello and Hafsah Amin J. Nur, An Introduction to ESP. (Ujung Pandang: Sunu 
Baraya, 1999) 

Muhammad Rasyid and Hafsah Amin J. Nur, Teaching English and Foreign Language 

Nasikhatun Listya Atika Farah, Improving the Student’s English Speaking Skills Through 
Show and Tell method, (Universitas Madura: Madura 2016) 

Nurvitasyari, The Use of Show and Tell (S&T) Method in Teaching Vocabulary at the Second 
Year Students of Junior High School (SMP) Negeri 4 Galesong Selatan Kabupaten 
Takalar, 2017 

Penny Ur, A., Course in Learning Teaching, Practice and Theory, (Great Britain: Cambridge 
University Press, 1996) 

Siti Nurbaya, dkk, Improving Students Speaking Ability Through Role Play, (Tanjung Pura 
University: Pontianak 2015) 

Siti Sadatul Fajriah, the Effect of  Mind Mapping Technique on Students’ Writing of 
Descriptive Text, A Thesis, (Jakarta: Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University 
2017) 

Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian Pendidikan: Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, Dan R&D 
(Bandung:Alfabeta)  P. 2015 

Wilga M. Rivers, Teaching Foreign Language Skill, (Ed. II. London: The University of Chicago 
Press, 1981) 

Willy A Renandya and Jack C Richards, Teaching Speakingin the Language Classroom, 
RELC portopolio series 

Wulandari, Indarti A, Meningkatkan rasa percaya diri anak usia dini melalui metode Show 
and Tell, Subdistrict Sukasari, Bandung City School Year 2014/2015 

 

 

http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689
http://u.lipi.go.id/1593190689

