267

JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY

Vol. 01 No. 04, January 2021, pp. 267 - 290

Available online at:

http://jeet.fkdp.or.id/index.php/jeet/issue/current

ISSN: 2721-3811 (media online)

Improving Speaking Skills Through Pro-Voc Method by Students’ Self-Efficacy at

Pesantren Mambaus Sholihin

Saadatuddaroini

Institut Keislaman Abdullah Faqih Gresik

Saadatuddaroini306@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
This study aims to increase students' feeling of being able to speak English. So the researcher tries to build

students' confidence about their ability in speaking English by forming knowledge of pronunciation and

vocabulary. The researcher used classroom action research with three instruments: observation,

questionnaire and speaking assignment. The results showed that The PRO-VOC Method can improve

students' self-efficacy in terms of speaking. There was a significant improvement in the results of the primary

and final tests in the first and second cycles. The students' mean score of the primaty test was 41.36, in the first

cycle it was 50.30 and 73.64 in the second cycle. Based on students' improvement in their achievement, it

corresponds to their increase in feeling capable. It is proven by the results of the questionnaire that the average

percentage of the student self-efficacy scale in the previous study was 46.36%, 64.55% in the first cycle and

73.37% in the second cycle.

Keywords: The PRO-VOC Method, Self-Efficacy, Speaking

I. INTRODUCTION

I always feel nervous when speaking English.

I wonder why I can’t speak English very well.

I feel that English is so difficult to study.

Both its written and sound is so different.

I feel bad in my mind.

My English appears not good enough; I can’t

express it very well.

But I know that I need to be able to speak

English.

(Quoted from the transcripts of this

study)

Such statements usually come from foreign

language learners and are too familiar to the

foreign language teachers. It indicates an

essential problem that the majority of students

face in learning a foreign language, especially in

http://jeet.fkdp.or.id/index.php/jeet/issue/current
http://u.lipi.go.id/1580741566
mailto:Saadatuddaroini306@gmail.com

268

speaking a foreign language. Many learners

express their inability to speak a foreign language

because they don’t know how to face this

problem. These learners are good at learning.

People tend to have a different way to be

able to speak English. There are not only

encouragements but also barriers that make

people want to express their ideas in English.

Particularly in Indonesia, although English is

learned since Elementary school, people do not

commonly communicate with English in a

community. Some people may feel hesitant to

talk English ahead of people who do not use it.

On the opposite hand, some others have their

encouragement, so that they are willing to speak

English (Anggia, 2013). Almost half of the

students are in medium to very low self-efficacy

in speaking English. Other research explained

that the level of self-efficacy is two; they are high

self-efficacy and low self-efficacy (Bandura,

1997). Rahil states there is 51.1 per cent of the

students have high self-efficacy, and 48.9 per cent

were of low self-efficacy in the English language

(Mahyuddin et al., 2006).

According to Bandura, efficacy beliefs

will vary reckoning on the subsequent seven

factors: (a) assessment of subsisting capabilities,

(b) perceived difficulty of the task, (c) amount of

effort required, (d) amount of external aid

required, (e) circumstance in which the tasks are

performed, (f) temporal patterns of successes and

failures, (g) the way experiences are organized

and reconstructed (Bandura, 1925). It is different

from Anggia’s finding in her research that the

most influential factors are the environment.

Both parent and peers are having an essential role

in influencing student self-efficacy. “It was found

that families and peers became influential factors

to improve students’ self-efficacy in speaking

English (Anggia, 2013). Parents’ support such

gives the students verbal compliments on their

ability in speaking English become more

proposed to motivate them in learning a foreign

language.

In line with parents, peers also have an

essential role in improving students’ self-efficacy.

Four students with very high and high self-

efficacy showed that they were more confident to

speak English since they often communicated in

English with their friends (Bandura, 1997). It

means that student of EFL (English as a foreign

language) need a partner or rival to practice their

English. Social strategies mainly concern

interaction with other people, so these strategies

were found more popular with ESL learners, who

had much more opportunity to use the language

or have access to the native speakers than EFL

learners (Li, 2010). As EFL learner, peers become

more influence in language learning achievement.

In their daily, they spend time to talk with their

peers more than others. Their opportunity to

practice English is based on how large their

environment supports them (Aziz & Dewi,

2019).

As in Mamba’us Sholihin, which is a

bilingual environment, students have more

opportunity to practice speaking English. In

their daily, the role forces them from

269

communicating with each other in English. The

environment supports them to use their English.

Properly, all the students are capable of speaking

English. Not all students speak English. Some

students are hesitant in speaking English. There

are some barriers or problems they encounter in

speaking English. They are lousy pronunciation

and lack of vocabularies. It belongs to internal

factors that influence students’ self-efficacy. Both

pronunciation and vocabulary are sub-skill that

constructs students’ speaking skill. Gilakjani

states in his journal that Pronunciation has a

positive effect on language learning and learners

can gain the skills for effective communication in

English (Gilakjani & Ahmadi, 2011). As children

learn, their first language needs to know letter by

letter to construct a word and word by name to

build a sentence. So do learners of EFL, they need

to know how to spell letter by letter to

pronounce complete words.

Vocabularies are central to English

language teaching because, without sufficient

dictionary, students cannot understand and

express their ideas (Aziz & Dewi, 2019). It is a

reason why students should construct their

vocabulary knowledge. Teaching-learning

pronunciation in Mambaus Sholihin Course is

usually separated from other sub-skill, so does

teaching learning vocabulary which is taught

separately in out of course time. For teaching-

learning pronunciation, it is being shown in

about three meetings. It seems that teaching-

learning pronunciation is lesson practising. As a

result, the students sometimes are challenging to

read these phonetic symbols in a word. While in

vocabulary, the students are being drilled every

night before going to sleep. There is no

requirement or punishment to memorise the

vocabulary. This activity makes sure that the

student recalls the vocabulary well. It is less on

giving an effect on enriching students’ vocabulary

mastery. This research is purposed to solve the

problem faced by the students in MA Mamba’us

Sholihin Female Gresik. This research focuses on

constructing a working class in overcoming

students’ difficulty in speaking, which is

expected can help the students to get the

problem-solving in improving self-efficacy.

Therefore, making the right solution by using the

Pro-Voc Method to overcome students’ low self-

efficacy in speaking English will be appropriate

with the students need.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Understanding of Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the judgments of

the personal capability to organise and

execute the courses of action that required to

attain designated types of performances

(Bandura, 1997). Bandura states that self-

efficacy is beliefs in one's capacity to perform

towards a given goal (Bandura, 1997) , namely,

the individual’s perception plays a crucial

role in how they can achieve in certain tasks.

To be more specific, self-efficacy saves as

influential actions in learning motivation and

performance. Besides, learner’s self-efficacy

270

influences their motivation and learning

performance. Self-efficacy beliefs the

foundation of human motivation, well-being,

and personal accomplishment. Unless people

believe that their actions can produce the

outcomes their desire, they need little

incentive to act or to persevere within the

face of difficulties (Bandura, 2010).

A strong sense of efficacy increase

human accomplishment and well-being in

many ways. People with high self-assurance

in their capabilities approach the difficult

task as challenges to be mastered rather than

a threat to be avoided (Bandura, 2010). People

who have high self-efficacy face failure with

sustained effort. Individuals who feel

efficacious are encouraged to work harder

when they encounter difficulties than those

who doubt their capabilities.

In contrast, people who doubt their

capabilities back from difficult tasks which

they view as personal threats. They have low

aspirations and little motivation to pursue

the goals they choose. People who have a

weak sense of efficacy may avoid for

accomplishing a task.

1. The Sources of Self-Efficacy

People’s beliefs are about their efficacy

which develops by four sources that

influence the level of self-efficacy. The case

for the contextual and meditational role of

self-efficacy beliefs in human behaviour can

be made by mastery experience, vicarious

experience, social persuasions, and

psychological state and indexes (Pajares,

1996).

a. Mastery Experience

The most important source is the

interpreted result of one’s past performance.

Individuals join in some activities,

understand the consequences of their

actions. They use their responses to develop

self-beliefs about their capability to engage

in the next events and act in concert with the

views created. Bandura states that the most

effective ways of creating a strong sense of

efficacy are through mastery experience

(Bandura, 1925).

b. Vicarious Experience

Besides, to interpret the results of their

actions, people form their self-efficacy beliefs

through the vicarious experience provided

by social models. Seeing people similar to one

succeed by sustained efforts raises observers’

self-beliefs that they possess the capabilities

to master comparable activities required to

achieve (Bandura, 1925).

c. Social Persuasions

Individuals are also creating and develop

self-efficacy beliefs as a result of the social

persuasions they receive from others. People

who persuade verbally that they have

capabilities to master given task are likely to

have more significant effort than who have

271

self-doubt about their abilities. Persuaders

play an essential role in the development of

an individual’s self-belief.

d. Psychological State

The fourth way of modifying self-beliefs

of efficacy is to reduce people stress reactions

and alter their negative emotional

proclivities and is interpretations of their

physical state (Bandura, 1925). People can

measure their degree of confidence by the

emotional state they experience as they

contemplate an action.

2. Efficacy-Activated Processes

Much research has been conducted

on the four major psychological processes

through which self-beliefs of efficacy affect

human functioning. Efficacy beliefs produce

their effects through four major processes

that usually operate in concert: cognitive,

motivational, affective, and selection

processes (Bandura, 1925).

a. Cognitive Process

The most course of action is initially

organised in thought. Managing difficult

tasks requires considerable effort and

analytical thinking. People with high efficacy

choose challenging goals for themselves and

regulate the necessary energy to reach the

goal and overcome impediments or threats.

Those who have a high sense of efficacy,

visualise success scenarios that provide

definite guides and supports for

performance. Those that doubt their efficacy

imagine failure scenarios and waver on

things which will get it wrong. People's

efficacy shapes the types of anticipatory

situations they construct and rehearse.

Bandura said that a significant function of

thought is to enable people to predict events

and to develop ways to control those that

affect their lives (Bandura, 1925).

It requires a robust sense of efficacy

to stay task-oriented within the face of

pressing situational demands, failures and

setbacks that have significant repercussions.

Indeed, when people are faced with the

responsibilities of managing severe

environmental requirements under taxing

circumstances, those that are beset by self-

doubts about their efficacy become more and

more erratic in their logical thinking, lower

their aspirations and therefore the quality of

their performance deteriorates. In contrast,

those that maintain a resilient sense of

efficacy set themselves challenging goals and

use good logical thinking which pays off in

performance accomplishments.

b. Motivational Processes

Self-beliefs of efficacy plays an

essential role within the self-regulation of

motivation. Most human motivation is

cognitively generated. People motivate

themselves and guide their actions

anticipatorily by the exercise of forethought.

272

They form beliefs about what they'll do. They

anticipate likely outcomes of planned

activities. They set goals for themselves and

plan courses of action designed to know

valued futures.

There are three different kinds of

cognitive motivators around which different

theories are built. They include causal

attributions, outcome expectancies, and

cognised goals(Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy

beliefs influence causal attributions. Folks

that regard themselves as highly efficacious

attribute their failures to insufficient effort,

people who consider themselves as

inefficacious attribute their failures to low

ability. Causal attributions affect motivation,

performance and affective reactions mainly

through beliefs of self-efficacy. In

expectancy-value theory, motivation is

regulated by the expectation that a given

course of behaviour will produce specific

outcomes and also the value of these

outcomes(Bandura, 1997). But people act on

their beliefs about what they'll do, similarly

as on their feelings about the likely results of

performance.

A large body of evidence shows that

explicit, challenging goals enhance and

sustain motivation. Goals operate primarily

through self-influence processes instead of

regulating motivation and action

directly(Bandura, 1997). Motivation

supported goal setting involves a cognitive

comparison process. By making self-

satisfaction conditional on matching

adopted goals, people give direction to their

behaviour and establish incentives to

continue their efforts until they fulfil their

goals

A. The PRO-VOC Method

The PRO-VOC Method is the

method that combines the teaching of

pronunciation and vocabularies. The

technique exploits the principle of

categorisation by organising new vocabulary

according to some aspect of the phonological

form of a word, i.e., a sound (vowel or

consonant) or other feature such as stress

pattern (des Langues, Malmberg, Nickel, &

Heidelberg, n.d.).

In addition to the pronunciation

focus, this method incorporates a vocabulary

focus in the form of teaching new vocabulary

items, collocations, sense relations, and so

on. Memory and social strategies are

exploited through the use of several activities

that promote deep processing and

interaction between classroom agents.

At the beginner or elementary level,

the vocabulary focus is on frequent lexical

items and concrete nouns; pronunciation

aims at the teaching of the English vowel

categories. At the intermediate level,

vocabulary relates to countries, nationalities

273

and food and is combined with the learning

of selected English consonant and the

phenomenon of stress shift (des Langues et al.,

n.d.).

B. Proficiency Level in The PRO-VOC

Method

Beginner or Elementary

For the implementation of a new

method at the beginner or elementary level,

the teaching of vowel categories is based on

the use of a coding system. It can involve the

use of colours, proper names, animal, and so

on.

Table 1.1: The colour-coding system

Once the coding system has been

decided upon, any new vocabulary item

introduced is categorised according to the

colour (or proper name, animal, etc.) which

contains the same vowel as the vocabulary

item. For example, under green, which

provides/i:/, common words such as tree, sheep,

bean, cream, dream, peace etc. can be categorised.

For the teaching of /ɪ/, vocabulary items such

as pig, bin, fish, ship, pin, etc. can be categorized

under the pink (des Langues et al., n.d.).

This system can facilitate the

teaching and learning of pronunciation of

new words, can provide opportunities for

work on listening discrimination and

production and can progressively lead from

activities at the word level to events at the

phrase level (des Langues et al., n.d.).

Intermediate

The material in the intermediate level

is more complicated than at the elementary

level. In the elementary level, the student

learns pronunciation begins in a vowel

sound, but in the medium, they learn

consonant sound. So does the vocabulary. It

can be related to countries, nationalities, and

food.

Table 2.3: Categorisation of vocabulary

related to other

Phrases and collocations can be formed

based on familiar and contrasting sounds.

Nationalities and food can be combined in

phrases and collocations involving similar

sounds such as Chinese chopstick, Japanese jam,

British sugar, or different tones such as Belgian

chocolate, Russian soup, Lebanese courgette.

274

These formations also raise students’

awareness and practice the phenomenon of

stress shift, thus including a suprasegmental

aspect in pronunciation teaching

III. METHOD

The researcher observes the student of

fourth level Mamba’us Sholihin by using

classroom action research. Action

researchers tent to be working intentionally

towards the implementation of ideas that

lead to personal development, better

professional practice, improvement in an

institution, or contributing to the right order

of society.

Table 1.2 The scheme of action research

The Setting and Time of the Research

The study was conducted at

Mambaus Sholihin in 20118/2019 academic

year as the place of research. As the

description, this Muslim boarding school is

located on Jln. K.H. Syafi’i No.07 Suci

Manyar Gresik. Mambaus Sholihin is one of

Pesantren in Gresik which uses bilingual

circumstance, both English and Arabic. All of

the students have to joint in it. The session is

held in the morning for about 30 minutes,

conducted for three months, and from Mei to

July.

Data and Source of Data

There are two sources of data; they

are primary and secondary data. Quoting a

primary source means quoting a writer’s ideas

directly precisely as they appear in the original

work where they were published. In

contrast, citing a secondary reference means

quoting a writer who has expressed the

opinions of the original writer in his or her

own words, and in doing so has interpreted

and paraphrased (see below) the original

writer. In other words, what you end up

writing is two steps removed from the

source. When you are reading a secondary

source, you are not reading the actual words

of the original author of those ideas but a

‘second-hand’ version, which may not

necessarily reflect fairly and accurately the

original text. As such, wherever possible, it is

preferable to quote primary sources. If you do

wish to cite a secondary reference, be sure to

Planning

1st cycle Reflecting

Observin

Implementi

Planning

2nd cycle Reflecting

Observin

Implementi

275

read the primary source on which it is based;

that way you can be confident you are not

misrepresenting the ideas of other scholars.

The technique of Data Analysis

There was two technique in

analysing data, quantitative and qualitative.

In the quantitative method of analysing data,

the researcher uses the students’ previous

mark (pre-test) and final test at the end of

the cycle, the researcher, gave the students

final-test to know whether The PRO-VOC

method can improve the students’ self-

efficacy. The result of the tests is analysed

using descriptive statistics. It analyses the

effect of the teaching and learning process to

know the difference before and after the

cycle. The procedure of analysed using

descriptive statistics is as mean. The

qualitative data will be analysed as long as

collecting the data and after receiving data in

a particular period. During the interview, the

researcher will have been analyzed the

answer of the interviewee.

Figure 1.3 The component of data

analysing (flow model)

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Based on the interview and questionnaire

pre-cycle, the researcher realised that the

students face some problems in speaking,

they face difficulty how to pronoun a word in

English. They don’t have high self-efficacy

to give utterance in English. The lack of

vocabularies is also being one of the factors

that influence their self-efficacy in speaking.

Overall, the condition was identified as the

answer to the questionnaire which was gained

in preliminary research was mostly

unsatisfying. The survey consisted of ten

questions which indicate how much

confidence they have to acknowledge their

capability in speaking, by rating the degree of

trust from 10 up to 50. Ten-point suggested

that the student was not confident at all,

twenty-point to show very little of their

belief, thirty points represent some

confidence, forty points for much confidence

and fifty points for complete confidence.

TABLE 1.5

Students’ percentage of self-efficacy scale in

speaking

ANALYSIS

276

Based on the percentage of their

questionnaire answer, ten students got the

upper 50%, and twelve students got under

50%. The highest point was 66% while the

lowest score was 28% and the average of

their point was 46.36%.

According to the average of their

point, the researcher concludes that most of

the student set on low self-efficacy, only

some student that is on high self-efficacy. It

also supported with the data of their

pronunciation and vocabulary score in the

preliminary test. The researcher gave a test to

the students by asking them to pronounce

some word and mention the meaning of the

word. There are five questions for both the

pronunciation aspect or vocabulary. The

correct answer is one point and zeroes for the

wrong one. So, the total score of

pronunciation and vocabulary is ten.

Table 1.6 Students’ score for pronunciation
and vocabullary test

Almost all the students are under 50,

and only a few students are upper 50. The

detail is that one student got 80, one student

got 70, and one student got 60. There are

seven students got 50, four students got 40,

four students got 30, three students got 20

277

and one got 10. The average of their score is

41.36.

Table 1.7 The percentage of student score

Based on the result of questionnaire and

students’ rating in the preliminary test, most

of the students had difficulties in speaking. It

can be seen from their average the score (4.1)

and their average percentage of the

questionnaire (46.3%). From the problem

found in preliminary research, the researcher

planned to apply The PRO-VOC Method in

English course to help the students to

overcome the difficulties in speaking.

Analysis of First-Cycle

This cycle consists of four steps; they

are planning, acting, observing, and

reflecting. The measures will be itemized as

follow:

Planning

The first cycle was conducted on

Wednesday, 25 Mei 2016. After identifying

students’ difficulty in speaking lesson, the

researcher had to prepare and design the

lesson plan as guiding to teach students in

the first cycle. The lesson plan was designed

for three meetings. In the first meeting, the

theme was about short and long vowel

combined with Daily vocabularies. For the

second meeting, it was about Diphthong and

Daily vocabulary. The last meeting was being

taught Consonants and Daily Vocabulary.

The researcher made an observation

guide to observe the students during the

teaching-LEARNING process. The items to be

observed are teacher preparation, class

management, media, feedback, and students’

attention, student active or enthusiastic.

The next step is preparing the

materials and choosing the media of

instruction. The article of every meeting

which has been mentioned before gave to the

student in the form of blueprint. The teacher

also used the whiteboard to help in drilling

the students all the related vocabularies.

Acting

The researcher greeted the students and

checked students’ attendance. She gave

stimulant to the students related to The

PRO-VOC Method. The teacher taught the

Upper
50

5 4 3 Under
3

Series1

278

students used memory strategy, asking the

students to repeat after her reading the

phonetic symbol and the vocabulary more

than once. Then, she asked the students to

mention vocabulary and its meaning,

according to the phonetic symbol she had.

The next step was production or

feedback, asking the students to look for

another vocabulary related to the phonetic

symbol as much as possible. After having

some minutes to search for dictionary, the

students were divided into four groups. All

the groups had to make a small circle and

each group had 37 pieces of phonetic symbol

cards. Then, all the cards had to be divided

into the member with the same number, and

the last card had to be in the middle of the

circle. The rule is that who finish the map for

the first time is the winner, the score based

on the rating of the winner. To complete the

card, the student had to mention three

vocabularies related to the last card in the

middle of a circle and one vocabulary related

to the dictionary which she put on the

centre. The purpose of using this card is to

persuade the students to remind or recall the

vocabularies they had learned.

Observing

The next phase is observation. In this

phase, the researcher observed the class

during the teaching-learning process. The

view was done to know teaching-learning

activity, teacher performance, and students’

participation.

Table 1.8 Teacher’s Score of Observation in

the First Cycle

NO ASPECT
SCORE GRADE

1 2 3 4 5

1 Teacher's lesson plan √ 4

2
Apperception or
Motivation √

3 Teacher's explanation √ 4

4
Teacher's management of
class

√ 5

5 Media instruction √ 3

6 Giving feedback √ 3

7 Teacher's closure √ 3

Total Score 26

The score of teacher’s observation in

the first cycle as follows:

𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞 =
𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞

𝑴𝒂𝒙𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒍 𝑺𝒄𝒐𝒓𝒆
× 𝟏𝟎𝟎%

=
𝟐𝟔

𝟑𝟓
× 𝟏𝟎𝟎%

= 74.2%

According to the result of

observation, it shows the teacher activity

when implementing The PRO-VOC Method

is fair with 74.2%. The teacher read the

material clearly and the students repeated

after her loudly. The teacher divided the

students into some group to work effectively

and asked the students to play the phonetic

279

symbol card to persuade the students to be

active in the learning process.

Table 1.9 Students’ Score of Observation in
the first cycle

No Name code 1st Day 2nd Day 3rd Day

1 A-1 10 9 9

2 A-2 5 5 6

3 A-3 10 9 10

4 A-4 5 5 7

5 A-5 8 9 7

6 A-6 7 7 5

7 A-7 8 10 7

8 A-8 9 8 9

9 A-9 10 8 9

10 A-10 9 10 8

11 A-11 9 10 10

12 A-12 7 7 7

13 A-13 5 7 10

14 A-14 9 8 9

15 A-15 6 6 5

16 A-16 6 5 6

17 A-17 10 10 10

18 A-18 8 8 8

19 A-19 7 7 8

20 A-20 7 5 5

21 A-21 5 6 5

22 A-22 8 9 8

The game, which was played by the

students was designed to have the students

participated actively. The entire student

finished the card they had. The highest point

was for who finished the map for the first

time and so on up to the last one with 5

points as the score. The game helped the

students to remind the vocabulary and

practice more in reading the phonetic

symbol.

To measure the students’

achievement in speaking, the researcher did

the speaking test. The students were ordered

to speak in front of the class with a particular

theme. The measurement of the speaking test

score was based on Hughes’s speaking

measurement. According to Hughes’s

speaking measurement, there are our aspects

of assessment to measure student speaking

skill, and they are pronunciation aspect,

grammar aspect, vocabulary and fluency

aspect. In this research, the researcher used

only three dimensions to measure student

speaking skill; they are pronunciation,

vocabulary and fluency element.

Table 1.10 Students’ score of the final test in

the first cycle

280

After calculating the students’ score,

the researcher calculated the average score to

measure the improvement of students’ score

in every cycle. The average of students’ rating

in the first cycle as follow:

M =
∑ −𝑥

𝑛

=
1107

= 50.30

According to the data above, the

researcher observed that the entire student

participated on playing the game; it was easy

for the researcher to monitor the students’

ability in reading phonetic symbol and

recalling the vocabularies that had been

learned.

To measure students’ level of self-

efficacy, the researcher gave the students’

questionnaire. There are seventeen elements

which indicate how many confident

students have. The students’ answer the

survey by rating 10 - 50 to mean their

confidence.

Table 1.11 Students’ result of questionnaire

Based on the table above, it can be

concluded that the highest percentage of

speaking self-efficacy scale was 85% and the

lowest was 48%. The average student

percentage in talking self-efficacy scale was

65%. Refer to the data above, seven students

were on low self-efficacy, nine students were

on medium self-efficacy, and six students

were on high self-efficacy

1. REFLECTING

In this cycle, several notes could be

taken as consideration. From the observation

result, it was observed that the

implementation of the research cycle one

succeeded in changing the classroom and

281

learning atmosphere. The formerly passive

students were improving to become active

learners. They could participate and give

feedback to each other in their group. The

students appeared quite happy with most of

the language-animated activities. By using

The PRO-VOC Method, the students could

read the phonetic symbol well and recalling

more vocabularies. This two of speaking

aspects were hopefully able to support

students’ speaking ability.

On the other hand, there were also

undesirable results in implementing The

PRO-VOC Method. Based on the effect of the

final test, the students’ score was

unsatisfying. There were five students got

upper 50, and seventeen students got under

50. Almost the students still could not do the

speaking test based on three of speaking

measurement aspect.

Table 1.12

Rating of Students’ score

Based on students’ average (43.4),

there were some aspects or component of

speaking which need to be improved. The

Students’ improvement of speaking skill in

the first cycle was far from expectation and

unsatisfying. It is caused by the lack of

practising putting words into sentences. So,

the students are confused about how to

speak with the vocabularies they had.

Refer to the student questionnaire

result; the average of student speaking self-

efficacy scale was 65%. It improved 19% from

the effect of preliminary research which the

result was 46.3%.

Therefore, in cycle two, the

researcher proposed using a subset of

memory and social strategy to facilitate and

enhance students’ score. In the first cycle, the

researcher was applied memory strategy. It

focused on the in-depth process to be better

recalling the form and meaning of each

vocabulary. So, in the second cycle, the

researcher combined both memory and social

strategy to promote students interaction

with the teacher or researcher and classmate

and aim to support the learning of form and

meaning of vocabulary further.

A. ANALYSIS OF SECOND-CYCLE

1. PLANNING

The first cycle created a lively

atmosphere for the students to learn English.

1 anak 1 anak 3 anak 5 anak 7 anak 3 anak 2 anak

282

It had encouraged the students who formerly

were passive learners to start becoming more

active performers in the classroom. It was

shown by the data from the students’

observation sheet which recorded that

students were enthusiastic and enjoyed most

of the arranged research activities.

The learning activities in the first

cycle, however, still had been implemented

in the second cycle by mixing the memory

and social strategy to overcome the problems

raised in the first cycle. The second cycle was

conducted on Saturday, 04 June 2016. After

identifying the issue raised in the first cycle,

the researcher redesigned the lesson plan

according to the strategy chosen before. The

activity in the second cycle was designed to

give the students more opportunity to

communicate with both the teacher and

classmate.

There were some differences between

the first and second cycle lesson plan. It was

in the theme which being taught. In the

second cycle, long and short vowel combined

with education vocabulary was being taught

in the first meeting. The second meeting, the

researcher showed diphthong and social

instruction vocabulary. In the third meeting,

the students learned consonant combined

with food and hobby vocabulary.

2. Acting

In this cycle, the researcher did the

teaching and learning process according to

the procedures that had been made before.

All the activities in the second cycle were

almost the same as the first cycle; the

difference is in giving feedback to the

students. In the second cycle, the researcher

gave feedback using social strategy.

The first time entering the class, the

researcher opened the course by greeting and

checking the students’ attendance. After

opening, the researcher gave an ice breaker or

stimulant to make the students more focus

on the teaching-learning process.

The next step, the researcher began

the lesson by asking the students how to read

these phonetic symbols. After the researcher

showing the way to understand the phonetic

symbol, she ordered the students to repeat

after her, such in the first cycle. Then, the

researcher asked the students to mention the

vocabulary she appointed after wiping off the

dictionaries on the whiteboard one by one.

The last step of the main activity was

giving feedback. In the first meeting, the

researcher asked the student to debate in

pairs. Each student got minimally one

minute to share their ideas before the

opportunity was given to their rivals. The

students discussed under the title “pesantren:

between the best or the out of date education

283

system in Indonesia”. The theme was

matching with the subject being learned.

This activity aimed to allow the students to

practice the vocabularies had been learned.

In the second meeting, the researcher

divided the student into two groups. Each

group consisted of eleven students. Then, the

researcher contributed a question card to all

the students, and each student had only one

card. The questions on the maps were

matching with the vocabulary being learned.

It was about a social problem. The first

question was given by the researcher, who

answered the question right to provide an

item to other students. When all the cards

had been finished, the student had to make a

question by their selves and so on.

In the last meeting, the researcher

divided the students into four groups which

consisted of 5-6 students. She asked the

students to present their hobbies and

favourite food in front of their group. Each

student had to pay attention to the presenter

to give a question, and the issue was counted

as their contribution. Almost the students

spent time for about 3-4 minutes in

presenting their hobbies and favourite food.

They only had two minutes to arrange their

presentation.

3. Observation

In the second cycle, the researcher

observed the teaching-learning process and

the improvement of students’ performance.

In the second cycle, the students were more

alive than the first cycle because they had

been allowed to practice the vocabulary they

had put it into sentences.

Table 1.13 Teacher’s score of second cycle

observation

Explanation:

1 = Not so good (unfulfilled, inappropriate for

aspect, ineffective, not punctually)

284

2 = Not good (fulfilled, inadequate for issue,

unproductive, not punctually)

3 = Good ((fulfilled, appropriate for issue,

practical, not punctually)

4 = Very good ((fulfilled, appropriate for

issue, effective, punctually)

The percentage of result score

=
Total result score

Total maximal score

× 100 %

=
81

104
× 100 %

= 77.8 %

Table 1.14 Students’ Score of Second

Cycle Observation

Explanation:

1 = Not so good (unfulfilled, inappropriate for

aspect, ineffective, not punctually)

2 = Not good (fulfilled, inappropriate for

aspect, ineffective, not punctually)

3 = Good ((fulfilled, appropriate for aspect,

effective, not punctually)

4 = Very good ((fulfilled, appropriate for

aspect, effective, punctually)

The percentage of result score

=
Total result score

Total maximal score

× 100 %

=
29

36
× 100 %

= 80.5 %

In the first meeting, the students

debated with a particular theme. Their rivals

gave the students the score. The score was

gotten according to how long they speech by

giving plus or minus in every statement.

Table 1.15 Students’ score in debate

season

Every student got the opportunity to

speak 9-10 times. The lowest of the minus

point was 0 and the highest was 5. For plus

285

point, the highest was nine, and the lowest

was 5.

In the second meeting, the students

discussed the social problem. Each student

had to answer one of question card available.

Not only answers, but they also had to make

questions to make the discussion alive.

Figure 1.16 Interactions Charting between

Students in “A Group” and “B Group”

According to the interaction charting

above that indicated what was going on, the

arrows showed who spook to whom. In “A

Group”, the student who spoke most was by

name code “A-17” and in “B Group” was “A-

8”. Few students who only answered and

gave a question according to the card they

had.

In the third meeting, the students

presented their hobbies and favourite food.

The researcher observed how long their

presentation and how much they

contributed to other performance by giving

question.

Table 1.17 Students Participation in Other

Presentation

The highest number of contribution was 5,

and the lowest was 1. For the most extended

presentation was a student with the length

of presentation time 00:04:09. The shortest

was by the period 00:03:10.

A-17

A-1

A-11

A-15

A-5

A-19A-21

A-3

A-9

A-7

A-13

A-20

A-4

A-10

A-14

A-6

A-16A-22

A-8

A-12

A-2

A-18

286

Table 1.18 Students’ Final Score of Cycle

Two

The average student percentage in cycle two

as follow:

M =
∑ −𝑥

𝑛

=
1667

= 75.7

To measure students’ scale of self-

efficacy, they answered the questionnaire

given by the researcher. There are seventeen

elements which indicate how many

confident students have. The students’

answer the survey by rating 10 - 50 to show

their confidence.

Table 1.19 Students’ scale of self-efficacy in

speaking

Based on the table above, it can be

concluded that the highest percentage of

speaking self-efficacy scale was 93% and the

lowest was 56%. The average student

percentage in talking self-efficacy scale was

287

73%. Refer to the data above, two students

were on low self-efficacy, eight students

were on medium self-efficacy, and twelve

students were on high self-efficacy.

4. Reflecting

For the reflection in the second cycle,

the researcher found that the students’ score

in period two was improved than the first

cycle. The students were more active and

dared to speak in public. The researcher

assumed that using memory and social

strategy could enhance students’

achievement. It was appropriate for student

speaking score achievement. With the

average 75.7, it showed that the students

could reach the standard score for speaking.

It was necessary with the result of the

questionnaire; that the average student

percentage in self-efficacy scale for speaking

was 73%. This result of this cycle was higher

than in the previous period. According to the

result, the researcher concluded that the

second cycle was successful. The researcher’s

target was better, and she could stop this

cycle. The research findings show some

important points as follows:

1. The PRO-VOC Method can improve

student’s self-efficacy in speaking

The researcher found several things

that could be written down from the result of

observation during the teaching-learning

process. The result showed the improvement

of students’ score in each cycle. The

researcher stopped the research because the

expected result has been reached.

Table 1.20

Comparison of Students’ Score

Pre cycle First Cycle Second Cycle

Average 41,36 50,30 73,64

Highest 80 67 80

Lowest 20 33 60

Table 1.21

Comparison of Students’ Percentage Scale

Pre cycle First Cycle Second Cycle

Average 46,36 64,55 73,37

Highest 66 85 93

Lowest 28 48 56

2. The PRO-VOC Method Contribution

toward Students’ Self-Efficacy in

Speaking English

In implementing The PRO-VOC

Method, the researcher tries to construct

student pronunciation and vocabulary

knowledge. According to some aspects

which compose speaking skill, they are

grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, etc.

This research overcomes two of speaking

sub-skill, they are pronunciation and

vocabulary.

By using memory and social strategy,

this method provides an opportunity to

288

practice speaking English more. It also

supports the researcher in improving student

self-efficacy because one of the sources of

self-efficacy is mastery experience

V. CONCLUSION

The research conclusion is presented

according to the data. From all the

data analysis about the implementation of the

PRO-VOC Method to improve students’ self-

efficacy in speaking skill, it can be concluded

that:

1. The application of The PRO-VOC

Method can be applied in some

variation. In the first cycle, the

researcher uses memory strategy in the

teaching-learning process to be better in

retaining and recalling the form and

meaning of vocabularies. In the second

cycle, memory and social policy are

applied not only to maintain the

structure and sense but also as further

support in learning form and meaning of

vocabularies.

2. In the preliminary research, the students

were not interested in the teaching-

learning process. The students’

achievement is only 41.36%. It rises to

50.30% in the first cycle and 73.64% in

the second cycle after the researcher

implementing The PRO-VOC Method.

Majority of the students were

enthusiastic in the teaching-learning

process.

3. The students' responses when The PRO-

VOC Method applied were good. The

students’ speaking competence can

improve when The PRO-VOC Method

used. The students’ speaking

competence can increase in every

meeting. The students result of the

questionnaire also improved, from

46.36% in primary research, reach

64.55% in the first cycle and 73.37% in

the second cycle. It means that The

PRO-VOC Method can help the

students to improve their self-efficacy in

speaking English.

The weakness of The PRO-VOC Method

in the teaching-learning process is: that this

method does not facilitate the students in

grammar learning while the lack of grammatical

knowledge being the obstacle in improving

students’ self-efficacy. The strength of The PRO-

VOC Method is: in providing the opportunity for

the students to learn both pronunciation and

vocabulary. By applying the memory and social

strategy, this method persuade the students in

recalling and practising the vocabularies more

than another method

VI. REFERENCES

Anggia, M. (2013). STUDENTS’SELF-
EFFICACY IN SPEAKING ENGLISH:
A Study of Students’ Self-Efficacy in A
Senior High School in Bandung.

289

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Aziz, I. N., & Dewi, Y. A. S. (2019). The
Concept of Language Environment: A
Descriptive Study at Madrasah Aliah
Keagamaan Gresik. EDUKASI: Jurnal
Pendidikan Islam, 7(2), 1–23.

Bandura, A. (1925). Self-Efficacy: Exercise of
Control (First). United State of
America: W.H. Freeman and Company
New York.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of
control. Macmillan.

Bandura, A. (2010). Self‐efficacy. The Corsini
Encyclopedia of Psychology, 1–3.

des Langues, E., Malmberg, B., Nickel, L. G.,
& Heidelberg, J. G. V. (n.d.).
International Review of Applied
Linguistics in Language Teaching.

Gilakjani, A. P., & Ahmadi, M. R. (2011).
Why Is Pronunciation So Difficult to
Learn?. English Language Teaching, 4(3),
74–83.

Li, F. (2010). Relationship between EFL
learners’ belief and learning strategy
use by English majors in vocational
colleges. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 1(6), 858.

Mahyuddin, R., Elias, H., Cheong, L. S.,
Muhamad, M. F., Noordin, N., &
Abdullah, M. C. (2006). The
relationship between students’ self
efficacy and their English language
achievement. Malaysian Journal of
Educators and Education, 21, 61–71.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in
academic settings. Review of Educational
Research, 66(4), 543–578.