The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code Copyright © 2021 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 9, Number 1, June 2021 pp. 120 – 129 The Effect of Group Work Activities to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill Rospinah, Andi Tenri Ampa, Syamsiarna Nappu Vinahany@yahoo.co.id Magister English Language Education Study Program Makassar Muhammadiyah University Received: 31 October 2020 Accepted: 21 November 2020 DOI: 10.24256/ideas.v8i2.1660 Abstract This research aimed to improve students’ speaking skill for the 8th grade students of MTs Syekh Yusuf Sungguminasa by applying group work activities (Think Pair Share, Snowball and Jigsaw) in teaching English and to find out whether Group Work Activities is more effective than the conventional method in improving students speaking skills. A quasi-experimental research method was used and a number of 40 students participated in this research. These students were divided into the Experimental Group (EG) and Control Group (CG), with each group consisted of 20 students. The instrument used for this study was speaking test and recording which were conducted as a pretest before the application of group work activities and a posttest after it. The students’ scores, as data of this research were analyzed by using SPSS 24. This research indicated significant improving of the students speaking skill by using group works activities than using conventional method. The posttest mean score: pronunciation EC (6.490) > CC (3.070), grammar EC (6.830) > CC (3.905), vocabulary EC (7.075) > CC (3.740) and fluency EC (6.670) > CC (3.915). The results of this research by using group work activities showed that the students speaking accuracy consisting of vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar and fluency was effectively improving students speaking skill than conventional method. Keywords: Group work activities: Think Pair Share, Snowball and Jigsaw. 1 http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 Rospinah, Andi Tenri Ampa, Syamsiarna Nappu The Effect of Group Work Activities to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill Introduction Table 1: The Students’ Mean Score on Pronunciation Class Pretest Posttest Improvement (%) Experimental 3.825 6.490 69.67 Control 2,340 3.070 58.12 Table 1 after calculating the students’ mean score between pretest and posttest for both experimental and control class, the students’ mean score in EC which is pretest is 3.825 and posttest is 6.490 and the students’ improvement is 69.67%. While, the students’ mean score in CC shows pretest is 2.340 and posttest is 3.070 and the improvement of students’ speaking skill in term using pronunciation is 58.12%. The findings proved that there was significant difference between students’ score in experimental and control class after using Group work activities in teaching and learning process. Table 2: The Students’ Mean Score on Grammar Class Pretest Posttest Improvement (%) Experimental 4.495 6.830 51.95 Control 2.585 3.905 51.06 Table 2 After calculating the students’ mean score between pretest and posttest for both class experimental and control, the students’ mean score in experimental class which is pretest is 4.495 and posttest is 6.830 and the students’ improvement is 51.95%. While, the students’ mean score in control class shows pretest is 2.585 and posttest is 3.905 and the improvement of students’ speaking skill in term using grammar is 51.06%. Comparing those classes, the findings prove that there is no significant difference between students’ score in experimental and control class after using Group work activities in teaching and learning process. Table 3: The Students’ Mean Score on Vocabulary Class Pretest Posttest Improvement (%) Experimental 4.410 7.075 60.43 Control 2.500 3.740 49.60 Table 3 After calculating the students’ mean score between pretest and posttest for both class experimental and control, the students’ mean score in experimental class which is pretest is 4.410 and posttest is 7.075 and the students’ improvement is 60.43%. While, the students’ mean score in control class shows pretest is 2.500 and posttest is 3.740 and the improvement of students’ speaking skill in term using 2 IDEAS, Vol. 9, No. 1, June 2021 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) grammar is 49.60%. Comparing those classes, the findings proved that there was significant difference between students’ score in experimental and control class after using Group work activities in teaching and learning process. Table 4: The Students’ Mean Score on Fluency Class Pretest Posttest Improvement (%) Experimental 4.070 6.670 63.88 Control 2.665 3.915 46.90 Table 4 After calculating the students’ mean score between pretest and posttest for both class experimental and control, the students’ mean score in experimental class which is pretest is 4.070 and posttest is 6.670 and the students’ improvement is 63.88%. While, the students’ mean score in control class shows pretest is 2.665 and posttest is 3.915 and the improvement of students’ speaking skill in term using grammar is 46.90%. Comparing those classes, the findings proved that there was significant difference between students’ score in experimental and control class after using Group work activities in teaching and learning process. From the findings above, it could be concluded that the students’ speaking accuracy and fluency improved by using group work activities and it is more effective. Discussion In this section discussed about the result of the data collected and analysis through a testing explained in the previous section showed about the improvement students’ speaking accuracy and fluency. Also in this research used the same material but different strategy; experimental class used group work activities while control class used conventional method. Group work activities like think-pair-share, snowball groups, and jigsaw strategy, the students could gain a significant progress in improvement their speaking accuracy covering vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar; and fluency. And the results showed that the use of think pair, snowball groups and jigsaw in learning integrated skills improved significantly the students’ speaking skill. This means that there is a good applicable strategy in teaching speaking skills. Most of the students do active participation in applying group work activities because it can develop the students’ speaking accuracy, and fluency. It was supported what Frank Lyman said. According to Frank lyman (1981) think- pair-share is a group work that takes three steps of activities, namely to think individually, to discuss in pair, and to share ideas in a large class discussion. So, this type of group forces all students to attempt an initial response to a given question, which they can clarify and expand as they collaborate. It also gives them a chance to validate their ideas in a small group before mentioning them to the 3 Rospinah, Andi Tenri Ampa, Syamsiarna Nappu The Effect of Group Work Activities to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill large group, which may help shy students feel more confident to participate in the learning activities. So, the purpose of this group is to increase students’ confidence in their answers and to encourage broad participation in plenary session. After applying group work activities, the researcher had assumption that these activities are a way to assist the students to practice language skills, as the researcher explained at the previous chapter that there are some advantages of this strategy (Brown,2001: 177) gives some advantages of group work activities as follows: a) Group work generates interactive language. b) Group work offers an embracing affective climate. c) Group work promotes learners’ responsibility and autonomy. Group work is a step toward individualized instructions. Conclusion Students’ speaking accuracy and fluency improved after being thought by using group work with think-pair-share, snowball, and jigsaw it proved that the mean score on pronunciation in EC, pretest was 3.825, posttest was 6.490 while in CC pretest was 2.340, posttest was 3.070, the mean score on grammar in EC was 4.495, posttest was 6.830 while in CC pretest was 2.585, posttest was 3.905, and the mean score on fluency in EC, pretest was 4.070, posttest was 6.670 while in CC pretest was 2.665, posttest was 3.915. Group work with think pair share, snowball and jigsaw improvedmore students’ speaking accuracy (pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary) and fluency in MTs Syeh Yusuf Sungguminasa, than applied conventional strategy. This result appeared in the means score analysis. References Abdullah. 2016. “Group Work Activities for Improving Speaking Skill”. English Education Journal. 7(3), 389-401 Achmad, D., & Yusuf, Y. Q, 2014. Observing pair-work task in an English speaking class. International Journal of Instruction, 7(1). Afiska 2019 The Influence of Snowball Throwing Method towards Students’ Speaking Ability at The First Semester of Ninth Grade of SMP Yasmida 4 IDEAS, Vol. 9, No. 1, June 2021 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Ambarawa in The Academic Year 2018/2019. Tarbiyah and Teaching Training Faculty Raden Instan State Islamic University Lampung Alamri HRH 2018. “The Effect of Using the Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Technique on Saudi EFL Students’ Speaking Skills”. Journal of Education and Practice Al-Tamimi, Nasser Omer M. & Attamimi, Rais Ahmed. 2014. “Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Speaking Skills and Attitudes towards Learning English”. International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2014, Vol. 6, No. 4. pp. 27-45. Anggraini, Dian. 2017. “Think Pair Share as An Effective Strategy to Enhance the Students’ Achievement on Speaking Skill”. Majalah Ilmiah, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2017, Hal. 216-220 E-ISSN 2502-8774 P-ISSN 1412-5854 Baleghizadeh, S., & Farhesh, S, 2014. “The Impact of Pair Work on EFL Learners’ Motivation”. MEXTESOL Journal, 38(3), 1-11. Brame, C.J. and Biel, R. (2015). “Setting up and facilitating group work: Using cooperative learning groups effectively”. Retrieved [todaysdate] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating- group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively Brown, H, D, 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive approach to Language pedagogy.New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Chaney, A. L., & Burk, T. L, 1998. Teaching Oral Communication in Grades K-8. Allyn and Bacon, Order Processing, PO Box 11071, Des Moines, IA 50336-1071. Febrina N.,Mukhaiyar and M.Zaim. 2013 “The Study of Using Group Work in Teaching Speaking Activity". Journal English Language Teaching (ELT) Vol 1. Hamzah, Mohd Hafiz. 2010. “Teaching Speaking Skills Through Group Work Activities”: article A Case Study in SMK Damai Jaya. Heaton, J.B. 1988. Writing English Language Test.New York: Longman Group UK limited Hosseini, Seyed Hossein. et. al. 2013. “A Comparative Study on the Effect ofIndividual,Pair and Team work on Speaking Fluency of Iranian Elementary EFL Learners”. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) · May 2013.pp. 2180-2196. Kayi H 2006 “Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language” The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11, November 2006 Lyman, F. T, 1981. The responsive classroom discussion: The inclusion of all students. Mainstreaming digest, 109, 113. Nunan, David. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill 5 http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively Rospinah, Andi Tenri Ampa, Syamsiarna Nappu The Effect of Group Work Activities to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill Pratiwi I 2013.,Improving the Speaking Skill through Communicative Activities of the Eight Grade Students of MTs N 1 Mlati in the Academic Year 2012/2013, Universitas Neg Yoyakarta Raba AAA 2017. The Influence of Think-Pair-Share on Improving Students’ Oral Communication Skill in EFL Classrooms. Scientific Research Publish Rahman, Abd, 2015. Improving Speaking Skill by Using Jigsaw Technique, STAIN Sorong Raja, Najma. 2012. “The Effectiveness of Group Work and Pair Work for Students of English at Undergraduate Level in Public and Private Sector Colleges” . Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business. Vol. 4, No. 5. 2012. Richards, J. C. 2008. Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Saiful M. 2014 “The Application of Communicative Approach in Improving the Students Speaking Ability” Jurnal KIP Vol II No. 3, Februari 2014 Susanti H. 2016 “Use of the Snowball Throwing Technique for Teaching better ESL Speaking” English Education Journal (EEJ) 7(1), 117-129, University of Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh Taqi, Hanan A. &. Al-Nouh, Nowreyah A. 2014. Effect of Group Work on EFL Students’ Attitudes and Learning in Higher Education. Journal of education and Learning; Vol. 3, No. 2; 2014 ISSN 1927-5250 E-ISSN 1927-5269. pp. 52- 65. Ubaedillah 2019. Improving Students’ English Speaking Ability through Jigsaw. Research and Innovation in Language Learning Vol. 2(3) Usman A 2015. Using the Think-Pair-Share Strategy to Improve Students’ Speaking Ability at STAIN Ternate. Journal of Education and Practice 6 Kayi H 2006 “Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language” The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11, November 2006