ANALYZING NEGOTIATION OF MEANING IN SPEAKING CLASS AT SECOND GRADE SMAN

Ning Setiawati, Hery Yufrizal, Muhammad Sukirlan

Abstract


Abstract

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui (1) apakah siswa menggunakan negosiasi makna pada dua jenis dari tasks (tugas) yaitu jigsaw dan information gap, (2) komponen dari negosiaasi makna yang paling sering digunakan oleh siswa pada dua jenis tasks, dan (3) perbedaan negosiasi makna pada percakapan siswa di kedua tasks. Motode penelitian dari penelitian ini adalah deskripsi kualitatif. Subjek dari penelitian ini adalah 30 siswa XI IPA 1 SMAN 1 Pasir Sakti. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa (1) siswa menggunakan negosiasi makna pada percakapan mereka, (2) jigsaw task menyebabkan negosiasi makna tertinggi pada trigger,  namun pada information gap task menggakibatkan  negate response (RN) menjadi  frekuensi tertinggi berbeda dengan jigsaw task, dan (1) terdapat perbedaan negosiasi makna pada kedua jenis tasks. Hal ini meunjukan bahwa siswa menggunakan negosiasi makna di kelas speaking (berbicara) mereka.

The aims of this research were to investigate (1) whether the students used negotiation of meaning in the two types of the tasks i.e., jigsaw and information gap, (2) the component of negotiation of meaning mostly used by students in two types of the tasks, and (3) the differences of negotiation of meaning in the students’ conversation in both tasks. The method of this research was qualitative descriptive research. The subjects of this research were 30 students of XI science 1 SMAN 1 Pasir Sakti. The result of the study showed that (1) the students used negotiation of meaning on their conversation, (2) the jigsaw task led to the highest negotiation of meaning in terms of trigger, while the information gap task resulted in negate response (RN) most frequently by contrast to the jigsaw task, and (3) there were differences of negotiation of meaning in both types of the tasks. This suggests that different tasks facilitate students to negotiate meaning.

Keywords: negotiation of meaning,  jigsaw, information gap


Full Text:

PDF

References


REFERENCES

Bryne, D. 1984. Teaching Oral English. New Jersey: Longman Group Ltd.

Mason, I. & Bramble, C. 1997. The Role of Description Method Theory in Teaching Class. Quinquereme : Cornell University.

Pica, T. & Doughty, C. 1988. Variation is Classroom Interaction as a Function of Participation Pattern and Task. New York: Abex.

Pica, T. Holliday, L. Lewis, N. & Morgenthaler, L. 1989. Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demand on the Learner. Studies Second Language Acquisition 11, 63-90.

Sadikin, LS. 2011. Young learners’ vocabulary improvement trough audio visual by using youtube videos: A case study at EEP English course in Bandung, West Java. Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Yufrizal, H. 2007. Negotiation of Meaning by Indonesia EFL Learners. Bandung: Pustaka Reka Cipta.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 U-JET

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.