Linguistic, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal Volume 4 Nomor 2, Januari-Juni 2021 e-ISSN: 2597-3819 p-ISSN: 2597-9248 DOI : https://doi.org/10.31539/leea.v4i2.2183 446 RELATIONSHIP OF SOCIAL INTERACTIONS TO LEARNING OUTCOMES ENGLISH Ifna Nifriza STKIP Abdi Pendidikan Payakumbuh Ifnanifriza87@gmail.com Submit, 24-03-2021 Accepted, 19-06-2021 Publish, 21-06-2021 ABSTRACT This study aims to describe the relationship between social interaction and students' English learning outcomes. This study uses the correlation method. The population in this study amounted to 204 people. The sample is 32 people. Sampling was taken by random cluster sampling. The results showed that the average value of students' social interaction was 64, with sufficient qualifications. The average result of learning English is 79 with suitable qualifications. Therefore, there is a good relationship between student social interaction and Indonesian students' learning outcomes at SMA N 1 Akabiluru District. The test results prove that thitung>t table (3,268>1,697). In conclusion, there is a significant relationship between social interaction and the English learning outcomes of students at SMA N 1 Akabiluru District. Keywords: Learning Outcomes, Relationship, Social Interaction INTRODUCTION Humans are social creatures, where a human being needs another human being. Therefore, the social environment will affect a person's behavior and way of thinking. In a social climate, someone will interact, which is a reciprocal relationship. Interaction is a form of socialization where humans can learn various things and shape their way of thinking. Humans need interaction because, in essence, humans need other human roles in their daily life. A student's social interaction occurs at home in exchange within the family and interactions with the school's social environment, such as teachers and schoolmates. From this interaction, a student will accept things that he has not found in his social environment. The occurrence of social interaction every day between a student and a teacher and a schoolmate will influence the development of the student's personality and way of thinking, which will affect the student's learning process. Good social interaction will support students in the learning mailto:Ifnanifriza87@gmail.com 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 447 process and vice versa. Less social interaction will make students difficult in the learning process. Pahenra et al., (2017) state that was interacting is part of human life because there will be no social interaction process without communication. Therefore, humans are required to interact socially with each other, both individually and in groups. As social beings, humans are required to interact with each other, as well as teachers with students and students with other students who take action, react and interact with each other in the learning process, both verbally (spoken and/or written words) and non-verbally (cues, attitudes, behavior). Learning is a human process to achieve various kinds of competencies, skills. Humans can develop their potential through learning so that humans have a higher degree than other living things, and by learning, humans can advance their civilization and culture. Learning also means that humans try to make changes to adapt and adapt to their surroundings. These changes can be in the form of changes in behavior that a person gets both from the results of experiences that are carried out repeatedly or as a result of training. Besides that, changes that can be seen as learning outcomes include acquiring concepts, skills, or changes in attitude (Herawati, 2018). School success can be measured from the learning outcomes achieved by students at the school. Student learning outcomes can be seen in the form of report cards each semester. Good results are proof of student success in the learning process. Likewise, bad results are evidence of student failure in learning. For example, some students have high academic scores and some students have low academic scores even though these students get the same material from the same teacher at the school. Learning outcomes are changes that occur as a result of learning activities that individuals have carried out. These changes are the results that have been achieved from the learning process. Thus, the results and evidence of learning can be described as changes in a person's behavior, such as from not knowing to know and not understanding (Sulastri et al., 2014). Irfan (2018) found a significant relationship between social interaction in the family environment and student sociology learning outcomes. As for learning outcomes, Febriani & Sarino (2017) argue that learning methods and learning facilities positively and significantly affect student achievement, either partially or simultaneously. These studies have discussed the effect of social interaction on student achievement outcomes and also the relationship between learning methods and learning facilities in improving student achievement. However, this study focuses on the relationship between social interaction and English learning outcomes. Researchers chose to observe students' social interactions in this study 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 448 because social interaction is one determinant of achieving better learning outcomes. LITERATURE REVIEW Social interaction is a social factor that determines student learning outcomes. What is meant by social factors here are human factors, both humans. It exists (is present) and its presence can be inferred, so it is not immediately present. The life of people or other people when someone is learning, a child who is unable to adjust to his class or cannot interact with friends and teachers during the learning process, can miss the lessons he has learned (Wayan et al., 2014). According to Gunawan et al., (2018), learning outcomes are the results obtained by students through assessment and measurement activities in the learning process. The learning outcomes obtained are the same because factors affect learning outcomes divided into two categories, namely internal and external factors. These two factors influence each other in the individual learning process to determine the quality of learning outcomes. Internal factors include physiological factors, physiological factors related to the individual's physical condition, and psychological factors. These factors include intelligence, motivation, interests, attitudes, and talents. Meanwhile, external factors include social environment and non-social environment. The social environment is the student environment in social life, such as the school environment, community environment, family environment. The non-social background includes the natural environment, the instrumental environment, and the subject matter environment. According to Pahenra et al., (2017), there is a robust relationship between social interaction patterns and learning motivation. Other studies have also found the same results. One of them is Wahyuni's (2018) research. She states that the higher the physical fitness and social interaction of students, the higher the learning achievement of Physical Education and Health. According to Astuti et al., (2018), most students involved in organizational activities students have a relatively high level of social interaction. RESEARCH METHOD This research belongs to the type of quantitative research using the correlation method. The population in this study were students of class X SMAN 1 Akabiluru District, amounting to 204 people. The way of the sample dancer was using a random sampling technique, amounting to 32 people. The instrument used in this study was a questionnaire distributed to students who were the research samples. This questionnaire contains questions about social interaction, amounting to 40 statements. 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 449 The given score is arranged based on an assessment given a range of low to high scores using a Likert scale. The questionnaire used is based on a Likert scale that contains many questions stating the object to be revealed. The scoring of the Likert Scale questionnaire used in this study refers to five alternative answers, namely: Always (SL), Often (SR), Sometimes (KD), Rarely (JR), Never (TP). Each is given a weight of 1 to 5 for positive answers and 5 to 1 for negative responses. Furthermore, the data is entered into the Pearson product-moment formula and hypothesis testing, respectively. Rxy = ∑ ∑ ∑ √[ ∑ (∑ ) ][ ∑ (∑ ) ] t = √ √ FINDING This study will explain data about social interaction with student learning outcomes at SMAN 1 Kec. Akabiluru. After the data is collected, the researcher will discuss the research data: (1) the social interaction data will be described a. the value of social interaction, b. The average social interaction; (2) data on student learning outcomes will be described (a. the importance of learning outcomes, b, the average learning outcomes); (3) The relationship between social interactions and learning outcomes. The Value of Social Interactions Based on the research results, the scores obtained by students in filling out a questionnaire in which a total of 40 statement items were obtained the following values. Table 1. Value of Social Interaction No Sample Code Score Scores Qualification 1 001 150 75 More than enough 2 002 129 65 Enough 3 003 114 57 Enough 4 004 129 65 Enough 5 005 136 68 More than enough 6 006 118 59 Enough 7 007 115 58 Enough 8 008 118 59 Enough 9 009 106 53 Almost enough 10 010 136 68 More than enough 11 011 137 69 More than enough 12 012 118 59 Enough 13 013 119 60 Enough 14 014 137 69 More than enough 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 450 15 015 122 61 Enough 16 016 119 59 Enough 17 017 139 70 More than enough 18 018 128 64 Enough 19 019 131 66 More than enough 20 020 132 66 More than enough 21 021 122 61 Enough 22 022 140 70 More than enough 23 023 128 64 Enough 24 024 128 64 Enough 25 025 135 68 More than enough 26 026 122 61 Enough 27 027 114 57 Enough 28 028 142 71 More than enough 29 029 135 68 More than enough 30 030 129 65 Enough 31 031 128 64 Enough 32 032 126 63 Enough Amount 4081 2046 Average 64 Enough Based on the table above, it can be seen that one student is in almost enough qualification. 19 students are in sufficient qualification, and 12 students are in more than enough qualification. Overall, the qualification value of social interaction is 64, which is in sufficient capability. After the scores and scores of the students' social interactions are obtained, the scores and values are qualified by calculating the percentage scale of 10. For more details, see the following table: Table 2. Qualifications of Social Interaction No Mastery Rate Qualification Frequency Percentage 1 96-100 Perfect 0 0 2 86-95 Very well 0 0 3 76-85 Good 0 0 4 66-75 More than enough 12 37.5 5 56-65 Enough 19 59,38 6 46-55 Almost enough 1 3,12 7 36-45 Less 0 0 8 26-35 Very less 0 0 9 16-25 Bad 0 0 10 0-15 Very Bad 0 0 Amount 32 100 Based on the table, it can be concluded that more than enough qualifications were obtained by 12 people with a percentage of 37.5%, enough qualifications were obtained by 19 people with a rate of 9.375%, and one person got almost enough qualifications with a portion of 3.125%. 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 451 Average Value of Social Interaction After the value of social interaction is obtained, the average value can be found using the means formula. The following can be seen as the distribution of social interaction values. Table 3. Distribution of Social Interaction Values X F XF 53 1 53 57 2 114 58 1 58 59 4 236 60 1 60 61 3 183 63 1 63 64 4 256 65 3 195 66 2 132 68 4 272 69 2 138 70 2 140 71 1 71 75 1 75 Amount 32 2046 Average 64 Based on the data above, it can be seen that the average value of student social interactions is 64, with sufficient qualifications. The Value of Learning Outcomes The score that will be converted into a score is the raw score on learning outcomes. The value of each sample for learning outcomes can be seen in the following table. Table 4. Value of Learning Outcomes No Sample Code Scores Qualification 1 001 90 Very Well 2 002 88 Very Well 3 003 70 More Than Enough 4 004 70 More Than Enough 5 005 90 Very Well 6 006 75 More Than Enough 7 007 77 Good 8 008 68 More Than Enough 9 009 77 Good 10 010 87 Very Well 11 011 82 Good 12 012 62 Enough 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 452 13 013 75 More Than Enough 14 014 82 Good 15 015 77 Good 16 016 74 More Than Enough 17 017 70 More Than Enough 18 018 70 More Than Enough 19 019 78 Good 20 020 64 Enough 21 021 84 Very Well 22 022 88 Very Well 23 023 85 Good 24 024 83 Good 25 025 84 Good 26 026 84 Good 27 027 70 More Than Enough 28 028 83 Good 29 029 84 Good 30 030 84 Good 31 031 85 Good 32 032 78 Good Amount 2518 Average 79 Enough Based on the table above, it can be seen that five students got excellent qualifications, 16 students got good stuff, nine students got more than enough qualifications, and two students got enough qualifications. Overall the value of the students' Indonesian learning outcomes is 79 with good capabilities. Furthermore, the value is qualified by calculating a percentage scale of 10. For more details, see the following table: Table 5. Qualifications of Learning Outcomes No Mastery Level Qualification Frequency Percentage 1 96-100 Perfect 0 0 2 86-95 Very Well 5 15,63 3 76-85 Good 16 50 4 66-75 More Than Enough 9 28,12 5 56-65 Enough 2 6,25 6 46-55 Almost Enough 0 0 7 36-45 Less 0 0 8 26-35 Too Little 0 0 9 16-25 Bad 0 0 10 0-15 Very Bad 0 0 Amount 32 100 Based on the table above, it can be concluded that five people with a percentage of 15.63% get excellent qualifications, 16 people with a share of 50% get good capabilities, nine people with a portion of 28.12% earn more than enough qualifications, and two people with a percentage 6.25% get the good stuff. 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 453 Average Learning Outcomes Furthermore, student scores are entered into the distribution table as follows: Table 6. Distribution of Average Value X F XF 62 2 124 64 1 64 68 1 68 70 1 70 74 1 74 75 2 150 77 6 462 78 1 78 82 1 82 83 1 83 84 1 84 85 1 85 87 2 174 88 3 264 90 3 270 Amount 32 2518 Average 79 Based on the table above, it can be seen that the average score of students' English learning outcomes is 79 with suitable qualifications. Relationship Between Social Interaction and English Learning Outcomes The author uses the product-moment correlation to determine the relationship between students' social interactions and the learning outcomes of Indonesian students at SMA N 1, Akabiluru District. Student social interaction data as variable X and data on English learning outcomes as variable Y. The value data of each variable is entered in the following table. Table 7. Correlation of Student Social Interactions with English Learning Outcomes No. X Y X2 Y2 XY 1 75 90 3481 8100 6750 2 65 88 3600 7744 5720 3 57 70 4761 4900 3990 4 65 70 3721 4900 4550 5 68 90 4624 8100 6120 6 59 75 3481 5625 4425 7 58 77 3364 5929 4466 8 59 68 3481 4624 4012 9 53 77 2809 5929 4081 10 68 87 4624 7569 5916 11 69 82 4761 6724 5658 12 59 62 3481 3844 4832 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 454 13 60 75 3600 5625 4500 14 69 82 4761 6724 5658 15 61 77 3721 5929 4697 16 59 74 3481 5476 4366 17 70 70 4900 4900 4900 18 64 70 4096 4900 4480 19 66 78 4356 6084 5148 20 66 64 4356 4096 4224 21 61 84 3721 7056 5124 22 70 88 4900 7744 6160 23 64 85 4096 7225 5440 24 64 83 4096 6889 5312 25 68 84 4624 7056 5712 26 61 84 3721 7056 5124 27 57 70 3249 4900 3990 28 71 83 5041 6889 5893 29 68 84 4624 7056 5712 30 65 84 4225 7056 5460 31 64 85 4096 7225 5440 32 63 78 3969 3969 4914 Amount 2046 2518 131582 199958 161600 Table 8. Hypothesis Test for Social Interaction with Learning Outcomes R Tcount n-2 Ttable P 0.05 0.512 3,268 32 1.697 Based on the table data above, it can be concluded that there is a good relationship between students' social interaction and the English learning outcomes of SMA N 1 students in Akabiluru District. DISCUSSION In everyday life, humans cannot be separated from social interaction. Social interaction is a relationship between two or more individuals, where the behavior of one individual affects, changes, or improves the behavior of another individual or vice versa. In other words, social interaction is the process by which people act on or respond to others in a reciprocal manner (Rahmawati & Yani, 2014). The results of data analysis showed that the average value of learning outcomes was 79, with suitable qualifications. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship with a good level of connection between students' social interactions and students' English learning outcomes at SMA N 1 Akabiluru District. It means that the higher the level of students' social interaction, the better learning Indonesian results will be. 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 455 The results of this study are in line with and support each other with theoretical studies, which state that there is a positive and significant relationship between social interaction and learning outcomes. Nita (2019) revealed a meaningful relationship between learning creativity and Indonesian language learning outcomes. In line with this, Hendrisman (2020) also stated that students' family background is related to the results of learning Indonesian. The better the family background of the students, the better the results of learning Indonesian. According to Tasilah et al., (2016), there are various ways of interacting between family members in the family, especially social interaction between parents and children. Social interactions in different families can be a determinant of children's learning achievements because, directly or indirectly, forms of social interaction in the family can affect children's learning process in the family environment and the school environment. If social interaction goes well, there will be a harmonious collaboration. As a result, there is calm and can create a high concentration of learning in the child's self, which in the end the learning process will run smoothly and the results achieved will be maximized. In addition, according to Ruswanto (2017), student learning methods and student attitudes also affect students' learning achievement in Indonesian. Similar results were also found by Nurmiati (2017) that there is a relationship between learning methods and learning motivation and student biology learning outcomes. CONCLUSION There is a significant relationship between students' social interactions and the English learning outcomes of students at SMA N 1 Akabiluru District. REFERENCES Astuti, P. D., Hadiwinarto, H., & Sholihah, A. (2018). Studi Deskriptif Interaksi Sosial Mahasiswa S1 Jurusan Ilmu Pendidikan Berdasarkan Keterlibatan Organisasi Kemahasiswaan di Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Bengkulu. Consilia : Jurnal Ilmiah Bimbingan Dan Konseling, 1(2), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.33369/consilia.1.2.20-28 Febriani, P. S., & Sarino, A. (2017). Dampak Cara Belajar dan Fasilitas Belajar dalam Meningkatan Prestasi Belajar Siswa Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan. Jurnal MANAJERIAL, 16(1), 163. https://doi.org/10.17509/manajerial.v16i1.10584 Gunawan, G., Kustiani, L., & Hariani, L. S. (2018). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Hasil Belajar. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pendidikan IPS (JPPI), 12(1), 14–22. http://ejournal.unikama.ac.id/index.php/JPPI/article/view/4840/2786 Herawati, H. (2018). Memahami Proses Belajar Anak. Jurnal UIN Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh, 4(1), 27–48. https://jurnal.ar- raniry.ac.id/index.php/bunayya/article/download/4515/2974 2021. Linguistics, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal 4 (2):446-456 456 Hendrisman, H. (2020). Latar Belakang Keluarga terhadap Hasil Belajar Bahasa Indonesia. Jurnal KIBASP (Kajian Bahasa, Sastra dan Pengajaran), 3(1), 308–319. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31539/kibasp.v3i2.1099 Irfan, I. (2018). Hubungan Interaksi Sosial Keluarga dengan Hasil Belajar Sosiologi di SMA Negeri 1 Kota Bima Tahun Pembelajaran 2010/2011. EduSociata Jurnal Pendidikan Sosiologi, 2(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.33627/es.v2i1.61 Nita, O. (2019). Hubungan Kreativitas dengan Hasil Belajar Bahasa Indonesia. Jurnal KIBASP (Kajian Bahasa, Sastra dan Pengajaran), 3(1), 92–103. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31539/kibasp.v3i1.903 Nurmiati, N. (2017). Hubungan Antara Cara Belajar dan Motivasi Belajar Siswa dengan Hasil Belajar Biologi Siswa SMA di Kota Makassar. Saintifik, 3(1), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.31605/saintifik.v3i1.115 Pahenra,P., Arfin, A., & Reni, R. (2017). Hubungan Pola Interaksi Sosial dengan Motivasi Belajar Siswa. Pendidikan dan Ilmu Pengetahuan, 17(1), 64–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.30651/didaktis.v17i1.1557 Rahmawati, V. E., & Yani, D. P. (2014). Hubungan Interaksi Sosial dengan Hasil Prestasi Belajar Mahasiswa Semester IV Program Studi Diploma III Kebidanan UNIPDU Jombang. Jurnal Edu Health, 4(2), 104-111. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/245770-none-96bf74f7.pdf Ruswanto, R. (2017). Pengaruh Cara Belajar Siswa dan Sikap Siswa terhadap Prestasi Belajar Bahasa Indonesia Kelas XI SMK Negeri di Kabupaten Subang. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 3(2), 2461–3961. http://ejournal.unsub.ac.id/index.php/FKIP/article/view/113 Sulastri, S., Imran, I., & Firmansyah, A. (2014). Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa Melalui Strategi Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah pada Mata Pelajaran IPS di Kelas V SDN 2 Limbo Makmur Kecamatan Bumi Raya. Jurnal Kreatif Tadulako, 3(1), 90-103. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/113571-ID-meningkatkan- hasil-belajar-siswa-melalui.pdf Tasilah, T., Imran, I., & Salim, I. (2016). Pengaruh Interaksi Sosial dalam Keluarga terhadap Hasil Belajar Sosiologi Siswa Kelas XI IPS. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 5(11), 1-11. https://jurnal.untan.ac.id/index.php/jpdpb/article/view/17413/14840 Wahyuni, S. (2018). Pengaruh Kebugaran Jasmani dan Interaksi Sosial terhadap Prestasi Belajar Penjasorkes Siswa Kelas Tinggi SD I Donotirto Kretek Bantul. Ideguru: Jurnal Karya Ilmiah Guru, 3(1), 73-84. https://jurnal- dikpora.jogjaprov.go.id/index.php/jurnalideguru/article/view/45