Using contextual teaching and learning (CTL) approach to improve students' speaking ability

Ramzi Yusyac, Asnawi Muslem, Burhanuddin Yasin

Abstract


The objective of this research is to investigate the implementation of Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) to improve students’ speaking skills in the aspects of accuracy, clarity, and fluency. This research employed a quantitative method in nature. A pre-experimental design with pre-test and post-test was used. The population of this research was all second-year students. The sample of this research was one of the second-year classes chosen by using the purposive sampling technique. The instrument used in this research was a speaking test: pre-test and post-test. The data collected were analyzed statistically. The results showed that the implementation of contextual teaching and learning (CTL) improved students’ speaking skills in terms of accuracy, clarity, and fluency. The result of Wilcoxon showed the value of Asymp. Sig (2-tailed) for accuracy, clarity, and fluency is 0.000 which means that the resulting test is less than the minimum requirements of the statistics range (0.05). Therefore, the use of CTL in teaching and learning speaking is very beneficial for students to improve their speaking skills. Thus, the hypothesis of this research was accepted. There is a significant improvement in students’ speaking skills after they were taught by using CTL.

Keywords


accuracy, clarity, CTL, fluency, speaking skill, teaching speaking for English

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adams, K. (2005). The sources of innovation and creativity. (ERIC No. ED522111). National Center on Education and the Economy.

Al Mahmud, A. (2013). Constructivism & reflectivism as the logical counterparts in TESOL: Learning theory versus teaching methodology. TEFLIN Journal, 1(2), 237-253.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc. New Jersey.

Basil, C. E. O. (2015). Effects of constructivist method of teaching on students' achievement in financial accounting: issues and challenges for accountancy education development. Knowledge Review (33) (2).

Berns., Robert, G., Patricia, M., & Erickson. (2001). Contextual teaching and learning: preparing students for new economy. The Highlight Zone: Research @Work No.5. ERIC, (5).

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd Ed). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Crawford, L. M. (2001). Teaching contextually: research, rationale, and techniques for improving student motivation and achievement. Texas: CCI Publishing, Inc.

Gattis, K. (2002). A look at productive tutoring techniques user’s guide. (2nd Ed.). Raleigh: North Carolina State University.

Gibbs, G. (2010). Using assessment to support student learning. Leeds Met Press.

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of english language teaching. (3rd Ed.). London and New York: Longman Group.

Harnish, D., & Lynch, D. L. (2003). Contextual teaching and learning: lessons learned from teacher preparation through novice teaching. University of Georgia.

Johnson, B. E. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: what it is and why it's here to stay. SAGE Publications.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2013). Cooperative learning: improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 25. 85-118.

Joyce, B. R., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of teaching. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon Publishers.

Muliani., Maurisa, S., & Nurusshobah. (2016). Intasc standard cores: raising students' english modality competence. Lingua Cultura, 10(2). 111-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.21512/lc.v10i2.929

Nazir, M. (1999). Metode Penelitian (Research method). Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Nunan. (1991). Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: Graw Hill.

O’Malley, J. M., & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assesment for english language learners: practical approaches for teachers. New York: Addison-Wesley, pp. 268

Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using the SPSS program. 4th Ed. Allen & Unwin, Berkshire.

Parker, R. (2009). A learning community approach to doctoral education in the social sciences. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 43–54.

Rocconi, L. M. (2011). The impact of learning communities on first year students' growth and development in college. Research in higher education 52 (2), 178-193.

Romsdahl, R. J., & Hill, M. J. (2012). Applying the learning community model to graduate education: Linking research and teaching between core courses. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 722–734.

Ruhimat, T. (2012). Kurikulum dan pembelajaran (Curriculum and learning). 2nd Ed. Rajawali Pers: Jakarta.

Sanjaya, W. (2009). Strategi pembelajaran berorientasi standar proses pendidikan (Educational process standard oriented learning strategy). Jakarta: Kencana Media Group.

Schoonheim‐Klein, M., Wesselink, P. R., & Vervoorn, J. M. (2012). A community of learners in the evidence‐based dental clinic. European Journal of Dental Education, 16(1), 174–179.

Sears, J. S. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: a primer of effective instruction. USA: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative Learning: Theory, research, and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Publishers.

Underhill, N. (1987). Testing spoken language: a handbook of oral testing. London: Cambridge University Press




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/eej.v12i3.19189

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


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

P-ISSN: 2085-3750

E-ISSN: 3025-9789 

Creative Commons License

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