International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 27 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 Increasing Speaking Achievement by Using Pow-Tega Teachnique Sri Wahyuni sriwahyunipga86@gmail.com STKIP Muhammadiyah Pagar Alam ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to find out whether or not Pow-Tega Technique could increase the students’ speaking achievement. The population of the study covered all of the tenth graders of SMA Negeri 1 Pagaralam in academic year 2015/2016. The sample was selected purposively from the population, they were sixty students. Quasi – Experimental design was used in this study. To find whether the Pow-Tega Technique could improve students’ speaking achievement, the instruction tests were used to collect the data. The data were analyzed by using paired sample t-test and independent sample t-test. The result of paired sample t-test showed that t-obtained was 3.971, t-value 2.045 (p < 0.05). Moreover, based on the result of independent sample t-test, t- obtained was 3.082, t-value was 2.002 (p < 0.05). The result showed that the students who were taught by using Pow-Tega Technique had a better improvement in their speaking achievement. In other words, Pow-Tega technique is a good way to be used by the teachers as a teaching technique especially in increasing students’ speaking achievement. Key words : Pow-Tega Technique, Speaking Achievement Background As a social creature, we will interact or communicate with another person as long as we live. Communication is an esential need for human being. According to Wood (2004, p.3), “communication is a systematic process in which individuals interact with and through symbols to create and interpret meanings.” In communicating with others we need a language as a tool or media for communication. Hornby (1986) states that language is human and non instinctive method of communicating ideas, feelings, and desires by means of a system of sounds and sound symbols. That is why, language, communication and life can not be separated. One of the ways in communication is through speaking. “Speaking is the process of building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non verbal symbols in a variety of contexts” (Chaney,1998, p.13). As we have known that speaking is one of the basic skills that should be had by the students in the learning process. But, to master in speaking we need a learning process and make a lot of drills or practice and forming a good habit in speaking. As we know that today’s world requires that the goal of teaching speaking should improve students’ communicative skills not just as a repitition of drills or memorization of dialogues as we have done for many years. And it will be the responsibility for the teachers to help the students in mastering speaking. Speaking is very important skill. By having a good active English, it will give us a lot of advantages especially in this modern era. There are some reasons why we should teach speaking to our students. First, as motivation. Many students equate being able to speak a language as learning process result. As Nunan (1991) stated that success in mailto:sriwahyunipga86@gmail.com International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 28 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 learning a second or foreign language is measured in terms of the ability to carry out a conversation in the (target) language. Therefore, if the students do not learn or do not get an opportunity to speak in the classroom, they may get de-motivated and lose interest in learning. If the activites are taught in the right way, speaking in the classroom may be a fun activity and give more motivation to the students. Second, speaking is fundamental to human communication. As Venditti and McLean (2012) said that communication is a key to our success. It can be defined as the process of understanding and sharing meaning. We share meaning in what we say and how we say it both in oral (through speaking) and written forms. If the goal of our language learning is truly to enable our students to communicate in English, then speaking skill should be taught and practised in the language classroom. However, it is difficult to master speaking. Based on the research that had been done by Wandika (2014), there were some problems that caused students feel reluctant to speak. The first factor was psychological factor. Psychological factor that caused of students’ reluctance to speak in English classroom interaction came from students themselves such as they prefer to be silent and felt speechless in classroom interaction. They felt anxiety and shy. They did not prepare the material. Thus, they did not know what they want to say. It made them unconfidence to speak. The second factor is Linguistic factor, the students did not know how to pronounce a certain word well. They have incorrect of pronounciation and get worried about their pronounciation when they speak in the class. Besides that, they also felt difficult to express their ideas through speaking because they don’t have enough vocabulary, felt nervous and got difficult to construct any sentences. The last factor was socio-cultural factor. Most of students who reluctant to speak in English class felt that the classroom environment did not support them to participate in classroom interaction. They felt that speaking class is an embrassing situation and made them afraid of making mistakes because sometimes the teachers gave them an over correction during speaking time. Those problems were also found in SMA Negeri 1 Pagaralam based on the interview from one of the English teacher there. Most of the students still felt reluctant to speak, they felt anxiety and difficult to express their ideas in a conversation. They thought about the pronunciation, felt doubt and afraid of making mistakes. Therefore, it reminds the researcher about our responsibilty to be a good fasilitator to help the students to solve their problem. Some speaking problems can be overcome by using the suitable technique based on the students’ condition. Using the suitable technique which is fun will be very useful for the students. That is why we have to create a fun and interesting situation so that the students can speak freely in the classroom. As stated by Dunlosky, Marsh, Nathan & Willingham (2013), one of part of situation to help students to get a better regulation in their learning is through the use of effective learning techniques. It is hoped that the effective technique will be able to help the students to achieve their learning goals. One of technique that can be applied in the speaking class is Pow-Tega Technique. It is a technique that combines Power Teaching Technique and Games Technique. By using this technique, it creates a good atmosphere for speaking class. Power teaching is a technique which is used to engage students to speak actively and become more creative in the classroom activity. In the other hand, the Game technique makes students feel fun and easier to follow the teacher’s instruction. So that, they can International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 29 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 speak freely as their daily life. Pow-Tega technique is a technique which had been used by Bunyamin (2011) in following an inovative scientific paper competition in Central Java. He got the first champion and showed that the Pow-tega technique is effective to engage students’ speaking achievement. Because by using this technique the teacher creates a classroom environment that supports all the students to participate in classroom interaction enjoyably. The use of Pow-Tega Technique As stated by Bunyamin (2011), Pow-Tega technique is the combination of Power Teaching technique and Games techniques. Power teaching technique is Whole brain teaching method that is used by many countries to teach speaking. According to Biffle (2013, p. 2), “Whole Brain Teaching, produces classrooms that are full of orderly fun. Students folow the rules because it makes the rules fun to follow.” While Game Technique is a game designed to teach human about a specific subject and to teach them a skill. As educators, governments, and parents realize the psychological need and benefits of gaming have on learning, this educational tool has become mainstream. Games are interactive play that teaches us goals, rules, adaptation, problem solving, interaction, all represented as a story. They give us the fundamental needs of learning by providing - enjoyment, passionate involvement, structure, motivation, ego gratification, adrenaline, creativity, social interaction and emotion. "Play has a deep biological, evolutionarily important, function, which has to do specifically with learning." (Prensky, 2001, p. 6). Power Teaching Technique Power Teaching technique is also called as a Whole Brain Teaching. According to Buzan (1976) as cited in Palasigue (2009, p. 5), “Whole Brain Teaching is an instructional approach derived from neurolinguistic descriptions of the functions of the brain’s left and right hemispheres.” Whole Brain Teaching is an interesting method that can be adopted by any teachers to create a good atmosphere in the speaking class. By using this method, it means that we learn in the way the brain is designed. In addition, Biffle (2013) said that the longer we talk, the more students we lose. But by using the principles of Whole Brain Teaching, we will give more opportunity to the students to enhance their ability in speaking. As cited in Biffle (2013), the principles are : 1. Class-Yes principle is used by the teacher to get students’ full attention before or during teaching process. In this principle the teacher opens the class by saying “class” and the students should reply it by saying “yes” with the same intonation and gestures with the teacher. The teacher can use “Class-Yes” principle to keep students focus on the teaching and learning process. Therefore, if the teacher says, “classy, class, class, class!” the class must respond it with “yessy, yes, yes, yes!” 2. Five Classroom Rules. There are five rules in Whole Brain Teaching. It is used to ensure that the students understand the rules, but it will also help the teacher if the students do not follow the rules. The rules and gestures are as follow:  Follow directions quickly!  Raise your hand for permission to speak!  Raise your hand to leave your seat! http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Game-Based%20Learning-Ch5.pdf International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 30 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017  Make a smart choices!  Keep your dear teacher happy! 3. Teach-Okay- It is the most powerful of Whole Brain Teaching’s learning activities. After the teacher gives the explanation for about one minute. The students will work in pair to share their knowledge. Then when the teacher says “teach”, the students will respond it with “okay”, and find their partner directly to teach each other and it can be done for many times in order to get a good result in the end of learning process. 4. The Scoreboard. Scoreboard is used to motivate the students after doing “teach-ok”. In this principle, the teacher will give a good emotican if they do a good working. In the other hand, if they do a bad working they will also get a bad emoticon. 5. Hands and Eyes. It focuses all mental activity on seeing and hearing the teacher’s lesson. 6. Mirror. In this principle, the teacher will incorporate their own gestures, songs or chants in this portion of the lesson and the students are expected to “mirror” the teacher after the teacher says “teach” and he class responds “Okay” 7. Switch. All the students have to involve themselves in teaching learning proces. In this part, they will not teach with the same student in a time. Therefore, in order to get every student involved in the lesson, the teacher will direct the students to “Switch!” the students will answer “switch!” and the teacher of the group will rotate. Game Technique We considered games as the best motivation to help students speak in an appropriate atmosphere. The games also provided them with opportunities for free expression. According to Mora & Lopera (2001) as cited in William Urritia Leon and Esperanza Vega Celly (2009, p. 16) states “games and fun activities have always been one of everybody’s favorite things to do in a class, both for teachers and students”. In addition, a game can be defined as an enjoyable activity with a set of rules or terms against each other (Webster’s New Dictionary, 1994). In this research, the researcher will use three kinds of game, namely scrabble, talking chips and make a match. Teaching Speaking by Using Pow-Tega Technique In applying Pow-Tega Technique as stated by Bunyamin (2011) in the speaking class, there are some important activities. It integrates Power Teaching Technique and Game where the game can be modified by the teacher based on the condition and necessity of speaking activity in the classroom. The first activity is Scrabble Game for BKOF (Building Knowledge of the Field). It is an activity where the teacher asks the students to build the vocabularies which will be need for modelling activity. In this activity, the teacher will prepare some jumbled letters. Then, the students are asked to guest or answer the jumbled letters become the right word to fill the jumbled sentence. The students who know the answer should raise their hand and mention the right word aloud. Then the teacher gives appreciation to the students that has answered correctly and facilitate the students to pronounce the words correctly. The second activity starts when the teacher applies 6 steps in Power Teaching Technique to give a model of speaking of describing picture based on the theme which has been decided. The first step is Class-Yes. In this activity the teacher gain the International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 31 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 stdents’ attention by saying “Clas” with different intonation. Then, the students answer by saying “Yes” with the same intonation with the teacher. The second step is “Micro- Lecture”. In this step, the teacher gives the material for about 1 minute. The students should keep attention to the teacher. After that, the third step is “Teach-Okay”. After the teacher did the micro-lecture, the teacher says “Teach”, if it is possible the teacher can use a hand-clapping or other interesting gesture, while the students answer “Okay” while imitate the teacher’s gesture and voice. After saying “Okay”, the students repeat the teacher’s explanation in pair. It can be done for many times to get a good result. Then, the fourth step is “Score-Board”. In this step, the teacher gives an evaluation to the students by making two labels/coloumns in the board. The first coloumn uses the “smile/happy” icon, and the second coloumn uses the “sad” icon. The “smile/happy” icon will be given to the students if their work is good but the “sad” icon will be given if their work is not good enough. After the teacher gives the evaluation, the students will respond their score. If they get “sad” icon, they will pretend crying. But if they get “smile/happy” icon, they will say “oh yeah or bingo!” The next step is “Hands and Eyes”. This step is a technique to keep the students’ attention to the teacher’s explantion. They sit quietly and their hands are on the table. It is the step before doing comprehension check. And the last step is “Comprehension Check”. The students are asked to repeat the explanation orally. While the student repeats the explanation, the teacher goes around the classroom to do checking for the students’ activity. The third activity of speaking by using Pow-Tega Technique is Talking Chips Game. In this activity, the students are divided into some groups. The students practice to express or tell the topic by using their own words. After the teacher divide the students into some groups, she starts to apply Talking Chips Game Tecnique. The students will get some cards. It is going to be their ticket to speak or start describing the picture which is given by the teacher. And it will not end until all the students use all the cards of theirs. Then, the last activity is Make a Match Game. This activity is designed to make the students really comprehend the topic during the learning process. Beside that, in this activity the students are also asked to read aloud with the right intonation and pronunciation. This activity starts when the teacher gives some Make a Match cards. The students get an opportunity to find their partner. And the students that had found their partner can explain the cards. Then, the teacher will give an appreciation to the students who find their partner earlier. Method of the Research In this study, the researcher used the quasi-experimental research design. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2009), Quasi-experimental do not include the use of random assignment. One of the most commonly used quasi-experimental designs in educational research. In doing this study, the researcher taught at SMA Negeri 1 Pagaralam. Before doing the experiment the researcher gave a pre-test to the sample students. The sample students were divided into two groups, as the experimental group and control group. Both of experimental and control group had different teaching procedure. Where in the experimental group, they got a treatment of the implementation of Pow-Tega technique in their speaking activity, while for the control group the treatment of Pow-Tega technique was not given. International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 32 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 Technique for Collecting the Data In this study, the researcher used Test for collecting the data. According to Brown (2000, p. 384), “ a test is a method of measuring a persons’ ability or knowledge in given domain.” The kind of test which was used in this research was an oral test. According to Richards and Smith (2002), oral is a term used to stress that a spoken form of a language is used as opposed to a written form, as in an oral test or oral examination. There were two types of test that was used, they were Pre-Test (before treatment) and Post-Test (after treatment). In the oral test, the students should present the material about describing pictures in the descriptive text based on the theme which had been decided by the researcher for about three minutes. In the pre-test the researcher gave the test to the students in form of instruction in describing pictures based on the topic given by the researcher. Meanwhile, in post-test, the students were asked to present the same presentation as the pre-test but with different object, the post-test was used to measure the effect of certain treatments, in this case improving students’ speaking achievement by using Pow-Tega technique. In the Pre-Test and Post-Test, the researcher used Public Figure as the topic. The students’ speaking achievement in the pre-test and post-test would be analyzed by using Brown’s scoring system for speaking test. Data Analyses The data in this study were analyzed by using Paired Sample t-test and Independent Sample t-test. Paired sample t-test was used to find out whether or not there was significant difference in speaking achievement of descriptive text of the students in the experimental and control groups before and after treatment. In the other side, Independent sample t-test was used to know whether or not there was significant difference in speaking achievement of descriptive text between students’ post-test in the experimental and control group. The data of this study were analyzed by using SPSS 23. Result of Descriptive Statistics The result of the students’ speaking achievement showed that there was significant difference in students’ speaking achievement in the experimental group and control group. In the experimental group, there were 19 students ( 64 % ) who were in the poor level with the mean 48.53, there were 7 students ( 23% ) who were in the enough level with the mean 59.00, and also there were 4 students ( 13% ) in the good level with the mean 71.50. Based on the result above, it showed that the students’ speaking achievement were better after got the treatment. The percentage of level of achievement in the experimental group was higher than the control group. On the other hand, for the control group, the result of the speaking achievement showed that there were 26 students ( 87 % ) who were in the poor level with the mean 43.54, there were 3 students ( 10 %) who were in the enough level with the mean 59.33, and there was 1 student ( 3 %) who was in the good level with the mean 70.00. Based on the level presented in the table 6, it showed that most of students were in the poor level. International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 33 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 It can be concluded that the score of experimental group and control group in the speaking achievement were different. The experimental group who were taught by using Pow-Tega Technique had a better improvement than the control group who were not taught by using Pow-Tega Technique. Table 6 Frequency and Mean Score of Students’ Speaking Achievement Variable Level Of achievem ent Experimental Group Control Group Mean SD Freq Mean SD Freq Speaking Achieve ment Very Good - - - - - - Good 71.50 1.73 2 4 (13%) 70.00 - 1 (3%) Enough 59.00 1.91 5 7 (23%) 59.33 1.155 3 (10%) Poor 48.53 4.56 3 19 (64%) 43.54 3.101 26 (87%) Failed - - - - - - Total 179.0 3 8.21 30 (100%) 172.87 4.256 30 (100%) From the table above, it showed that there was significant difference in students’ speaking achievement in the experimental group and control group. In the experimental group, there were 19 students ( 64 % ) who were in the poor level with the mean 48.53, there were 7 students ( 23% ) who were in the enough level with the mean 59.00, and also there were 4 students ( 13% ) in the good level with the mean 71.50. Based on the International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 34 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 result above, it showed that the students’ speaking achievement were better after got the treatment. The percentage of level of achievement in the experimental group was higher than the control group. On the other hand, for the control group, the result of the speaking achievement showed that there were 26 students ( 87 % ) who were in the poor level with the mean 43.54, there were 3 students ( 10 %) who were in the enough level with the mean 59.33, and there was 1 student ( 3 %) who was in the good level with the mean 70.00. Based on the level presented in the table 6, it showed that most of students were in the poor level. It can be concluded that the score of experimental group and control group in the speaking achievement were different. The experimental group who were taught by using Pow-Tega Technique had a better improvement than the control group who were not taught by using Pow-Tega Technique. Chart 1 : The Result of Students’ Speaking Achievement The Result of Paired Sample t-test for Speaking Aspect in Experimental Group and Control Group Variable Experimental Group Control Group Mean Pre- test Mean Post- test Mean Diff t- obtained & Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Pre- test Mean Post- test Mean Diff t- obtained & Sig. (2- tailed) Speaking Achievement (Total) 51.33 54.20 2.87 3.971 .000 45.33 46.23 0.9 1.125 .000 Fluency 1.93 2.93 1 (39%) 6.361 .000 1.23 1.80 0.57 (63%) 6.158 .000 Vocabulary 2.58 3.30 0.72 (25%) 6.143 .000 1.43 1.53 0.1 (11%) 1.795 0.83 Grammar 2.87 3.35 0.48 4.160 1.90 2.00 0.5 0.722 International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 35 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 The Result of the Independent Sample t-test of Speaking Achievement In order to find out whether there was significant difference in the students’ speaking achievement between two groups, the result of the speaking post-test in both groups were compared by the researcher by using Independent sample t-test. It was found that the value of t-obtained was 3.802 at the significant level of 0.000. The significant level 0.000 was less than 0.005 with degree of freedom (df) 58, and the value of t-obtained was higher than critical values of t-table, in which 3.802 > 2.002, it confirms that the students in experimental group made a better achievement in speaking if compared with students in the control group. It was also strengthened by the difference of the mean scores. The mean scores of the post-test of the experimental group was 54.20 while the mean scores of the control group was 46.23. The post-test score of experimental group was better than the control group. Interpretations The result of this study showed that there were significant difference for students’ speaking achievement after got a treatment from Pow-Tega Technique. It means that this technique gave the students more motivation to be involved in the clasroom interaction. It can be showed from their achievement in the speaking performance. After got a treatment from Pow-Tega Technique the students in the experimental group made a better improvement for their speaking achievement. It can be showed from the mean score, the mean score of pre-test was 51.33 while for the post test the mean score was 54.20. In addition, based on the level of achievement, there were 19 students ( 64 % ) who were in the poor level with the mean 48.53, there were 7 students ( 23% ) who were in the enough level with the mean 59.00 and there were 4 students ( 13% ) in the good level with the mean 71.50. Before did the treatment there was no student who were in the good level. It was also supported by Bunyamin (2011), his action research showed that Pow-Tega technique was effective enough to improve students’ speaking achievement. Because by using this technique, the teacher will give more opportunity to the students to perform their speaking performance. Furthermore, the treatment which was given by the teacher could increase the students’ achievement. It can be concluded that new technique enhance students’ interest to be more active in their learning activity. In the other hand, the students also need more time to practice before they were ready for the test. And it is also supported by Biffle (2013), he said that the longer we talk as a teacher, the more students we lose. From that statement, it can be concluded that as a teacher we should give our students enough time to practice their speaking permormance in order to help them feel enjoy in the speaking activity. Moreover, the students’ speaking achievement also improved from all aspects of speaking in which fluency (39%), vocabulary (25%), grammar (16%), and pronunciation (16%) .000 (12%) 0.475 Pronunciation 2.52 3.12 0.6 (20%) 4.966 .000 1.27 1.40 0.13 (14%) 1.439 0.161 International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 36 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 (20%). It means that all aspects of speaking were significantly difference after got the treatment of Pow-Tega technique. The improvement of fluency (39%) may indicate that students more focus to their speaking than their pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary. It can be caused by their pretension to enhance their confidence during speaking time in front of the classroom with the expression or gesture so they did not think too much of their error in grammatical. As stated by Gawi (2015), the process of speaking involved not only verbal communication but also paralinguistic elements such as gestures, body language, facial expressions, etc to convey a message directly without any accompanying speech. In the other words, the students focused to their spontaneity in speaking to speak fluently in order to be understood by others. Conclusions Based on the findings and interpretation, it was found that the students in the experimental group who got the treatment of Pow-Tega Technique could improve their speaking achievement. Beside that they also got a better achievement than the control group from all aspects of speaking. In the other words, Pow-Tega Technique could significantly improve students’ speaking achievement. In addition, from the result of this study, it was found that there was possible reason that influenced the students’ speaking achievement. It could be concluded that by using Pow-Tega Technique, students felt more interested in classroom interaction. They could follow the learning process of speaking easily so their speaking achievement could improve. References Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian : Suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta : Rineka Cipta. Biffle, C. (2013). Whole brain teaching for chalenging kids: Grades K-6. California : Lucinda Geist. Brown, H. D (2000). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York, NY: Longmann. Bunyamin. (2011). Peningkatan kompetensi speaking materi teks deskriptif melalui teknik Pow-tega dengan media Pic-Pow pada peserta didik kelas VII 6 SMP Negeri Slawi (Penelitian Tindakan Kelas). Slawi. Cohen, L., Manion, L., Marrisson, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed). London : Routledge Falmer. Chaney, A. L. (1998). Teaching oral communication N : Grades K-8. Boston : Allyn and Bacon. Dunlosky, J., Katherine, R., Elizabeth, J., Mitchel, N & Daniel, T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques : Promising directions from cognitive & education psychology. University of Virginia. Estiningrum, D. (2015). Using talking chips to improve students’ speaking skill at SMP Negeri 1 Trucuk in the academic year 2013/2014 (Unpublished thesis). Yogyakarta : Yogyakarta State University. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, E. N. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, NY : McGraw-Hill International Journal of English Language and Teaching https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/IJoLTE 37 Volume 1 Issue 1, September 2017 Gawi, E. M. K. (2015). Towards better fluency in English as a foreign langauge : a case study of Sudanese students at Sub Rural secondary schools. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature ( IJSELL). 3 (4), 63-71. Hornby, A.S. (1986). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English. London : Oxford University Press. Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching speaking : activities to promote speaking in a second language. The Internet TESL Journal, 12(11), Retrived from http://itesli.Org/techniques/Kayi-TeachingSpeaking.Html. Leon, W.U., & Esperanza, V.C. (2006). Encouraging teenagers to improve speaking skills through games in a Columbian public school. Colombia : Federico Garcia Lorca School. Nawaz, S., Umer, A., Tabasum, M., Zaman, M., Batool, A., & Aslam, S. (2015). Difficulties facing by students of L1 in adopting L2. European Journal of English Language, Linguistics and Literature, 2 (2), 1-6. Nunan. D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. Sydney : Macquarie University. Palasigue, J. T.(2009). Integrating whole brain teaching strategies to create a more engaged learning environment. Retrived from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED507407.pdf Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game based learning. New York, NY : McGraw-Hill. Purnamasari, A. (2015). The use of whole brain teaching method in improving the speaking achievement of the tenth grade students of SMA negeri 1 Pagaralam (Unpublished thesis). STKIP Muhammadiyah, Pagaralam, Indonesia. Rahman, F., Khalil, J. K., Jumani, N. B., Ajmal, M., Malik, S., & Sharif, M. (2011). Impact of discussion method on students’ performance. International Journal of Bussiness and Social Science, 2(7), 84-89. Rahmatika, R. M (2015). The use of whole brain teaching method to improve students’ reading ability. (A classroom action research on the eight grade students of MTS Miftahul Falah Betalawang, Bonang, Demak in academic year 2014/2015 Undergraduate Thesis). Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN), Salatiga, Indonesia Richards, J., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press. Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Longman. Tuckman, S. (2009). Conducting educational Research. Cichago : Rutgers University. Venditti, P., & Scott, M. (2012). An introduction to group communication. Washington. Creative Commons. Wandika, F. A. (2014). Students’ reluctance to speak in English classroom interaction. A Study at SMA Pertiwi 2 Padang (Unpublished thesis). STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat. Wang. (2010). Using communicative language games in teaching and learning English in Taiwanese Primary School. Kainan University. Journal of Engineering Technology and Education, 7 (1). Wood, J. (2004). Communication in our lives. Boston : Wadsworth Cengage Learning. http://itesli.org/techniques/Kayi-TeachingSpeaking.Html http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED507407.pdf