1

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING TO IMPROVE

STUDENTS SPEAKING COMMUNICATIVE SKILLS AT GRADE VII OF

SMP PGRI 174 CIKUPA TANGERANG

Rika Yusniah

Alumni STKIP BANTEN

Reynita Andriana Dosen STKIP Banten

ABSTRACK:The technique of collecting data was by using a test. After the data

of the effectiveness of cooperative learning and to improve students speaking

communicative skills were collected, the data were statistically computed to find

out the correlation between the two varibales. The writer analyzes the data based

on the effectiveness of cooperative learning to improve students speaking

communicative skills. This data is analyzed by using correlation product moment.

The value of correlation coefficient obtained is 0,544, while the criteria of the

correlation between 0,40 to 0,70 are considered moderate. It means that the level

of relationship of the correlation coefficient of the two variables is moderate. In

this research the variable Y is influenced too high by the variable X and the other

way the varble is also influenced too high by the variable Y. For the contribution

variable X to Variable Y, the writer get influence 29,60 % applying the

effectiveness of cooperative learning to improve students speaking

communicative skills and 70,4 % left is influenced by other factor, it means that

the effectiveness of cooperative learning to improve students speaking

communicative skills at grade VII of SMP PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang has quite

influence.

Keyword: EFFECTIVENESS OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING, STUDENTS

SPEAKING

1. INTRODUCTION

The learning process in the Education Unit Level Curriculum (KTSP) requires the

active participation of all students. Thus, student centered learning activities, the

teacher as a motivator and facilitator in it for the class more attractive atmosphere.

Jigsaw cooperative learning techniques are considered particularly suitable to be

applied in education in Indonesia, especially for Junior High school students

because of them in accordance with national culture that values mutual

cooperation.

Based on the above information, the researcher is interested to Cooperative

Learning , because It is a kind of activity guided by the aim or purpose to be

accomplished, which suggests a change from the traditional teacher centered

teaching method to a focus on learner centered learning. Some believe that the

traditional teaching methods only stress theoretical content and neglect training of

any skills involving effective interaction between both teacher-student and

student-student in the EFL (English as Foreign Language) classroom, while

1

2

cooperative learning will improve students’ confidence in using a foreign

language and as lingua franca, encourage students in creative thinking and active

learning, and help students gain English speaking skills intuitively. Others argue,

however, that the cooperative learning method has some limitations related to our

current junior high school students situations such as too many students in one

class, uneven development across speaking, and a tradition of task-aimed teaching

methods. The cooperative learning method has gained a considerable reputation in

English as a foreign language learning classrooms or a second language

classrooms all over the world. Meanwhile, it is also very important for people to

enhance cooperation with others to improve speed and success levels for assigned

tasks. These address social needs and academic needs for students. However, the

results of students’ English proficiency, especially in English speaking skills, have

not improved satisfactorily even after more than ten years of formal instructions.

Students who demonstrate sub-standard English speaking performance are

troubling since speaking skill is central to learning process and academic

achievement in other content areas. Therefore, the purpose of this research paper

is to determine whether or not cooperative learning has a positive effectiveness on

speaking skills. A related purpose is to discover the limitations of cooperative

learning to be carried out in Indonesia and to make some recommendations to

resolve these problems.

Therefore, a researcher is being challenged to help student’s problems to

conduct research and get best solutions for improving speaking skills. The

treatments which are given some steps to the students, such as; first, acknowledge

thoughts ideas or feelings, second, Say it different words, forth, Ask and open –

ended question, fifth, Summarize and clarify , the last ,Give opinions. It can make

them widely insight into the understanding of speaking skills, give high

motivation for speaking that they will not get failure but get good experience,

recognize about some good learning strategies, enrich new vocabularies which

make easier to speak or describe something, make discussion about some

interesting topics in the text from simple topic until difficult topic which

The objective of this research, she wants to understand about students’

difficulties of SMP PGRI 174 Tangerang - Banten communicative Speaking skills

, and giving a solution toward learning process by changing from old style to

newest style which is better, namely the usage of cooperative learning more

effective to conduct student’s achievement of speaking skills. Given the

restrictions on the issue, the study aims to answer the following questions : Is

there any effectiveness of Cooperative Learning to improve student’s

communicative speaking skills at first grade of SMP PGRI 174 Tangerang-

Banten ?

2. THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1.Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning is one strategy for group instruction which is under the

learner-centre approach. Many educators give the definitions of cooperative

learning.

3

It is supported by Brown (1994) said that : “Cooperative learning involves

students working together in pairs or groups, and they share information .They are

a team whose players must work together in order to achieve goals successfully.”

In addition, Kessler (1992) proposes the definition of cooperative learning

particularly in language learning context: “Cooperative learning is a within-class

grouping of students usually of differing levels of second language proficiency,

who learn to work together on specific tasks or projects in such a way that all

students in the group benefit from the interactive experience.”

2.2. The Definition Of Speaking Skills

Tarigan, (1987:15) said that: Speaking is the ability to utter articulate sounds or

words to express, express and communicate thoughts, ideas, and feelings. The main

purpose of speaking is to communicate. Communication can unite individuals into

groups by way convey the general concepts, creating a unity of symbols that

distinguish it from other groups, and assign an action, and will not survive long if

not societies language.

Speaking language is a skill that develops in the child's life, which only

preceded by listening skills, and on the ability to speak or say. It was studied

Tarigan, (1981:3).

2.3. FRAME OF THINKING

Cooperative learning is a teaching method that creates a feeling of togetherness

and confidence of the students to improve their ability to speak in class, so Gagne

describes learning as, a set of external events for the scholarships that are

designed to support internal learning processes.in the context of learning and the

impact on student learning outcomes, because learning is a process performed by

an individual over time everywhere. Thus, learning is a process that involves the

selection, arrangement, and delivery of appropriatemess ages to the environment

and how learners interact with information them.

The effects of cooperative learning, in some ways, may be intangible and

cannot be quantitatively assessed with accuracy. However, research has suggested

that cooperative learning is a better way to promote academic achievement than

traditional instruction. In a study conducted by Stevens and Slavin (1995) students

who had participated in cooperative learning were post-tested two years after

initial training. These students scored significantly higher on academic tasks than

students involved in traditional classroom instruction. (Lopata, 1-2), Interaction

between group members implies that students gain approximately five times more

input concerning the content than students engaged in individualized tasks. This

results in more relevant information, as well as improved language expression.

(Gillies, 1-2) The academic benefits make cooperative learning a highly desirable

asset in the education society.

Within special education and remedial classrooms, cooperative learning

has promoted interaction, as well as emphasized the value of cooperation, among

group members (both preferred and non-preferred). However, modifications and

accommodations may be more necessary in these classrooms. The most dominant

modification needed is in the selection of group members. (Jenkins, 16) Another

4

noteworthy benefit of cooperative learning is the inclusion of students with

exceptionalities and learning differences into regular classrooms. (Gillies, 1) In

one study, the most common benefits mentioned by special education teachers

implementing cooperative learning were "self-esteem, the security that comes

from being part of a group, and higher success rates and/or better products."

(Jenkins, 7) Group relations -- an obvious element of cooperative learning -- can

be used to bridge the gap between ethnic and race groups in society beginning in

the classroom.

"The challenge for educators is to create the conditions under which

students are likely to cross the borders that delimit their narrow personal and

social worlds and provide opportunities to experience the worlds of those

different from them. Positive cross-ethnic interactions help students expand their

own self-identity and build an appreciation of difference at the same time."

(Cooper, 1)

2.4. HYPOTHESIS

Null Hypothesis (Ho) : There is no effect of Cooperative Learning to

improve communicative speaking skills at grade

VII of SMP PGRI 174 CikupaTangerang.

Alternative Hypothesis ( Ha) : There is any effect of Cooperative Learning to

improve communicative speaking skills at first

grade of SMP PGRI 174 Tangerang- Banten.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Population and Sample

a. Population

The writer will analyze the seventh grade of Junior High School at SMP PGRI

174. There are 100 students of seventh grade, which consists of 68 females and

32 males.

b. Sample

The writer takes 30 students as sample from the seventh grade of SMP PGRI 174

Cikupa Tangerang using prefer ship random sampling technique considering the

high of homogeneity. According to Suharsimi if the subject of the research is

between a hundred population or more, we can take those subjects between 10 %

until 15 % or more from the population as random sampling. So the percentage of

this sample in this research is 25 %. It means that the sample is quite

representative.

3.2 Method of The Research

In conducting the research, the writer use correlation method (Tx Ty). She

applies Cooperative Learning and Speaking skills test to investigate student’s

cooperative learning and their speaking skills test. then she formulates the score

by Pearson Product Moment formula to find out the correlation coefficient value.

The writer use quantitative research. Quantitative research is to develop

and mathematical models, theories and / or hypotheses pertaining to phenomena.

5

3.3 Validity and Reliability

In order to gain trustworthy data, the instruments that will be used within a

research should be reassured for its validity and reliability. Since the researcher

will use Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by Oxford

(1989) in this study , the researcher will not test the validity and reliability of this

questionnaire due to it was already known for its validity and reliability , and for

the reason within this discussion, the researcher only will reassure the validity and

reliability of speaking skills test that will be used in this study.

a. Validity

Gronlud (1988) in Brown said that validity refers to “the extent to which

inferences made from assessment results are appropriate, meaningful, and useful

in terms of the purpose of the assessment”. Thus, a reading test can only be said

valid if it actually measures reading ability .moreover, Alderson (1995) cited in

Arifin states :

A good test has three criteria, namely; rational, empirical and construct

validity. Rational (content) depends on a logical analysis of the test content to see

whether the test contains a representative sample of the relevant language skills,

empirical validation depends on empirical and statistical evidence as to whether

students marks on the test similar to their scores on other test, their assessment of

their teacher’s ratings of their ability. Construct validation refers to what the test

scores actually mean.

b. The Reliability

On the other hand, a test is considered to be reliable when the scores of the test are

consistent. Haris said that “ a test cannot measure anything well unless it measures

consistently”. According to Henning (1987) there are two conditions where we

can say an instrument is reliable without the need to be tried out. First, the

instructions of the instrument should be made clear to be understood by

respondents, that is, by making them short and precise. In this case , the language

used in the instrument should be relevant to the level of the students. Second, the

instrument should be arranged to avoid “ a tendency on the part of the respondents

to inflate positive evaluations by consistency and arbitrarily giving high ratings.”

Another way to obtain the reliability ,without the necessity to conduct a try

out test is by using the method of Split half reliability . according to the Split Half

method (Henning),the test is administered once half contains the odd numbers and

the other contains the even numbers.the scores of each half are then correlated

without the other half.To measure coefficient of the reliability of the first and

second half groups, the researcher will use the following formula :

6

note :

r : the correlation /coefficient of reliability of the score from one

half of the test with those from the other half

X : the total numbers of the first half group

Y : the total number of second half group

The criteria can be seen below.

Table.3.1 Criteria for Reliability Index

The Mount Of Rxy Interpretation

0.00 – 0.20 Very low

0.20 – 0.40 Low reliability

0.40 – 0.70 Medium reliability

0.70 – 0.90 High reliability

0.90 – 1.00 Very high reliability

3.4 Technique of Data Collecting

In completing the data, the next step of this research is collecting the data; the

function of data collecting is to determine the result of the research.

In collecting data, the writer uses some techniques.

a. Observation

The first is by observing directly to the location where the research is carried out.

The purpose is to ask permission from the headmaster, getting important

information from the English teacher about his teaching materials and the uses of

their curriculum.

b. Testing

Since the writer wanted to investigate the correlation between two kinds test,

Cooperative Learning and Speaking skills ,so that the writer use test method. The

test is divide into two parts, the first is Cooperative Learning, the second is

Speaking skills.

c. Research procedure.

To collect the data, the researcher will use the speaking test and 2 (two)

questionnaires. There are several steps that will be done in gaining dat. First, the

researcher will explain the purpose of conducting the research to the participants

and inform them that they have to do a speaking test and answer the

questionnaires regarding their general information and the cooperative learning

that they will be using. Second , the researcher will administrate the speaking test

and supervise it. However, before the test should be completed in 60 minutes. At

last, the questionnaires will be given to the students to be filled in after they will

accomplish the test. The result of the speaking test and the questionnaires will be

scored based on scales mention previously.

4. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

4.1. Descripts Data

7

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of cooperative learning to

improve student speaking communicative skill in the school SMP PGRI 174

Cikupa Tangerang.

Further more,to facilitate the authors in this study divides the variables into 2

parts, Namely the independent variable (x) and dependent variable (y). The

following data are both variable.

1. Data variable x (effectiveness of cooperative learning)

70 70 71 72 73 74 74 75 75 76

77 78 78 79 79 79 80 80 80 80

80 81 83 85 85 85 86 86 89 90

1.1. Creating a distribution table frekuensi variable X to create table that take the

following steps:

a) Determine range, that the highest value lessened by the lower

value:

R = H – l

= 90 – 70

= 20

K = 1 + 3,3 log n

= 1 + 3,3 log 30

= 1 + 3,3 (1,477)

= 1 + 4,87 = 5,87 = 6

b) Determine the length of the class (p) with the formula :

P = R : K

= 20 : 6

= 3,33 = 4

c) Create a table variable X distribution

Interval Fx Xi FXi

90 – 93 1 91,5 91,5

86 – 89 3 87,5 262,5

82 – 85 4 83,5 334

78 – 81 11 79,5 874,5

74 – 77 6 75,5 443

70 – 73 5 71,5 357,5

30 2363

1.2. Calculated values of central tendency

8

From the values in the table above, then the central tendency value can be

calculated variable X as follows:

a) Determine Mean Variable X by formula:

N

FXM

30

373.2M

797,78 M

b) Determine Median Variable X (Me) by formula:

Fi

FkbniBbMdn

)2/1(

11

)1115(45,77

Mdn

11

)4(45,77 Mdn

)36,0(45,77 Mdn

)44,15,77 Mdn

7994,77 Mdn

c) Determine modus (Mo) by formula

xifbfa

faiBbMo

475

55,77 xMo

67,15,77 Mo

7917,79 Mo

From the result of these studies was obtained (Yield - average) mean = 79, mode

79 and median 79 if depicted in a graph histogram and polygon will look like the

image blow :

Graphic Histogram Mean, Median and Mode of Varibale Y

2. Data Varible Y (student’s achievement of English Language)

9

76 76 76 78 78 78 78 79 79 80

80 81 82 82 82 82 83 83 84 85

85 86 87 87 89 90 90 90 92 93

2.1.Creating a distribution table freukuensi variable Y. To create tables that the

following steps:

a. Determine range, that the highest value lessened by the flowr

value:

R = NB – NK

= 93 – 76

= 17

b. Determine the class interval with the formula:

K = 1 + 3,3 log n

= 1 + 3,3 log 30

= 1 + 3,3 (1,477)

= 1 + 4,87 = 5,87 = 6

c. Determine the length of the class (p) with the formula:

P = R : K

= 17 : 6

= 2.83 = 3

d. Created a table variable X distribution

Interval Fx Xi FXi

91 – 93 2 92 184

88 – 90 4 89 356

85 – 87 5 86 430

82 – 84 7 83 581

79 – 81 5 80 400

76 – 78 7 77 539

30 2490

2.2.Calculated values of central tendency

From the values in the table above, then the central tendency value can be

calculated variable X as follows:

a) Determine Mean Variable X by formula:

N

FXM

10

30

490.2M

83M

b) Determine Median variable X (Me) by formula:

Fi

FkbniBbMdn

)2/1(

7

)12302

1(

35,81

Mdn

7

)1215(35,81

Mdn

)7

3(35,81 Mdn

)43,0(35,81 Mdn

8379,8229,15,81 Mdn

c) Determine modus (Mo) by formula:

xifbfa

faiBbMo

322

25,81 xMo

34

25,81 xMo

835,15,81 Mo

From the results of these studies was obtained mean = 83, mode 83 and median 83

if depicted in a graph histogram and polygon will look like the image bellow:

Graphic Histogram Mean, Median and Mode of Varibale Y

4.2.Testing Data Analysis

To know the effectiveness of cooperative learning to improve student speaking

communicative skills in school SMP PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang the author

gives a questionnaire relating to cooperative learning to improve student speaking

11

communicative skills in school SMP PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang of grade VII

of academic year 2012-2013. The result in meant to be seen in the following table:

Table 1

Corelaton table of cooperative learning and speaking communicative skills

No X Y X2 Y

2 XY

1 71 76 5041 5776 5396

2 85 78 7225 6084 6630

3 76 80 5776 6400 6080

4 77 78 5929 6084 6006

5 72 80 5184 6400 5760

6 75 82 5625 6724 6150

7 80 79 6400 6241 6320

8 74 76 5476 5776 5624

9 85 86 7225 7396 7310

10 79 83 6241 6889 6557

11 74 76 5476 5776 5624

12 80 90 6400 8100 7200

13 83 89 6889 7921 7387

14 70 78 4900 6084 5460

15 70 79 4900 6241 5530

16 89 81 7921 6561 7209

17 79 84 6241 7056 6636

18 90 85 8100 7225 7650

19 78 87 6084 7569 6786

20 80 83 6400 6889 6640

21 86 85 7396 7225 7310

22 75 78 5625 6084 5850

23 80 82 6400 6724 6560

24 80 82 6400 6724 6560

12

No X Y X2 Y

2 XY

25 78 87 6084 7569 6786

26 73 82 5329 6724 5986

27 81 92 6561 8464 7452

28 85 93 7225 8649 7905

29 79 90 6241 8100 7110

30 86 90 7396 8100 7740

2370 2491 188090 207555 197214

79302370 xMX

03,83302491 xMX

2222 )(()( yYxX

xyXYrxy

22 )03,83(30555.207()79(30090.188

)03,83)(79(30214.197

xyr

43,819.206555.207)(230.187090.188

1,781.196214.197

xyr

57,735)(860

9,432xyr

2,590.632

9,432xyr

544,0xyr

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

Provide interpretation of rxy and draw conclusions after the unknown value of “r”

(r the calculation), then authors interpret the results of these calculations are: Hn is

accepted if the price of “r” (r the calculation) is less than the price of “r” table.

Conversely, if the price of “r” than or equal to the price of “r” table, so Ho

accepted.

To determine the level of correlation (correlation criterion) of the “r” (result of

calculation between the tow varibles, it consulted with the criteria of “r” product

moment. The criteria are:

Less than 0.00 – 0.20 : the correlation is very less it is urgently ignored.

Between 0.20 – 0.40 : the correlation is low

Between 0.40 – 0.70 : the correlation is low but significant

Between 0.70 – 0.90 : the correlation is high

Between 0.90 – 1.00 : the correlation is very high

13

From research and data processing or analysis, the authors provide data

interpretation of rxy.

From the calculation of “r” (“r” calculation) = 0,544 and the result is meaned the

correlation is low but significaly. This means that there is considerable

cooperative learning to improve student speaking communicative skills is

sufficient correlation.

Thus, the results of a study of “r” calculation is sufficient the effectiveness of

cooperative learning to improve student speaking communicative skills in the

school SMP PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang.

Likewise, if the price were consulted “r” calculation (0.544) into the product

moment coefficient of criteria (interia for reliability index p.39 ) which lies

between 0.40 – 0.70, indicating sufficient correlation criteria.

To know the sigificane index price significant influence on a certain level, we

need to hold the testing of hypotheses. Testing is done by comparing the size of

“r” calculated by the “r” listed in the table “r” product moment by first seeking the

degree of free (db) or its degrees of freedom (df) that the formula as follows:

df = N – nr

description of the formula

df = degrees of freedom

N = Number of cases

n r = number of variables

By obtaining degrees of freedom, then it can look for the “r” listed in the table of

values “r” product moment, both at significant level 5% and the level 1%. In this

case degrees of freedom are:

df = 30 – 2 = 28

for in this table are the number 28, then its value at df = 28 with 5% significance

level obtained pricing table r = 0.374. Thus, “r” the calculation (0.544) is greater

than “r” table, 0.544 > 0.374, then at 5% significance level the null hypothesis

(Ho) is accepted.

Then, when compared with the “r” calculated with the “r” table at 1% significance

level where the “r” in the table with df = 28 is 0.478, then at any significant level

of 1% “r” calculation is smaller than “r” tables, 0.544 > 0.478, so the null

hypothesis (Ho) is rejected.

Thus, the results of a study of “r” calculation is effectiveness cooperative learning

to improve student speaking communicative skills in the school SMP PGRI 174

Cikupa Tangerang. At the 5% significance level but not at significant level 1%.

Determine how big the contribution variable X to variable Y by using coefficient

determination:

CD = r2 x 100

= (0.544)2 x 100

= 0,295936 X 100

= 29,5936 = 29,60

From the last calculation we get the effectiveness of cooperative learning 29,60%

(Variable X) to improve student speaking communicative skills (Varible Y). while

14

70,4% left is influenced by other factors that it can be reexamined. It means that

the effectiveness cooperative learning to improve student speaking

communicative skills in the school SMP PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang has quite

influence.

Indicator For Test

No Indicator Number of Test

1 Function of dialogue 1, 5

2. Ekspres of dialogue 2, 4

3. Mention of dialogue 6 , 3

4. Interpreting of dialogue 7

5. Conversation 8

+Indicator of Angket

No Indicator Number of Test

1 Conversation 1, 5, 8, 10

2. Communicative 3, 16, 4, 9

3. Interpenting 6, 11, 14, 17

4. Topic 12, 15, 19, 20

5. Opinion 2, 7, 13, 18

5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTON

5.1.Conclusions

After conducting the research, the writer comes to her conclusions that:

1. From the calculation of “r” calculated = 0.544 and the price is marked

positive correlation coefficient. This means that the effectivess of cooperative

learning to improve student speaking communicative skills in the school SMP

PGRI 174 Cikupa Tangerang is direct correlation to moderate. From the

results of a study of “r” calculated at significance level of 5% and 1%.

Likewise, if consulted “r” 0.544 calculation into the product moment

coefficient of criteria which lies between 0.40 to 0.70, indicating sufficient

correlation criteria.

15

2. So it can be seen how the value of “r” and how many degrees of free. At df \

28 with 5% significance level obtained pricing table r = 0.374. Thus, “r” the

calculation (0.544) is greater than “r” table, 0.544 > 0.374, then the

significance level of 5% of alternative hypothesis (Ha) accepted. This means

at the 5% significance level there is a effectiveness between motivation in the

school environment and academic achievement that was achieved.

3. Then, when compared with the “r” calculated with the “r” table at 1%

significance level where the “r” in the table with df = 28 is 0.478, then at any

significant level of 1% “r” calculation is greater than “r” tables, ie, 0.544 >

0,478, so the null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected any significant level of 1% “r”

calculation is greater than “r” tables, ie, 0,544 > 0,478, so the null hypothesis

(Ho) is rejected.

5.2. Suggestion

From this research, the author can recommend the following:

1. To Parents

Should not get bored giving motivation to their children to continue learning

English and to improving their English language

2. To Teacher

The teacher can improve the method of teaching with cooperative learning

and they have to create with the other methods so the teaching learning can

do effectively.

3. To Students

Students feel enjoyable and easy to understand the lesson. They can improve

their speaking competency with this method. This method can also improve

the other competencies like reading, writing or listening.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Azis, E. A. 2003. Indonesian English: What s det tuh ? TEFL IN Journal.

Brown, H. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey:

Prentice Hall.

Byrne, D. 1980. English Teaching Perspectives. Essex, U. K.: Longman.

Cahyono, B. Y. 1997. Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris: Teknik, Strategi, dan Hasil

Penelitian. Malang: Penerbit IKIP Malang.

Cahyono, B. Y. Communication Strategies. TEFLIN Journal.

Citraningtyas, C. E. C. 2005, Desember. Breaking the Silence: Promoting Critical

and Creative Thinking Skills Through the Traditionally Passive English

Subjects.

Danasaputra, I. R. 2003. Dialogue vs Role Play Techniques. Paper Presented at

the 51st TEFLIN International Conference, Bandung, Indonesia.

Diani, A. 2005, March. Some Techniques to make shy students active. Paper

.presented at LIA international conference, Jakarta.

Dukut, E. M. 2004. Making use of photographs to enhance cultural

understanding: An American studies approach. In B. Y. Cahyono & U.

Widiati Eds., The tapestry of English language teaching and learning in

Indonesia pp. 307- 316. Malang: State University of Malang Press.