CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Research

Listening is one of the receptive skills as it involves students in capturing and

understanding the input of English. Reading, the other receptive skill, involves

students in understanding and interpreting the written word. Listening is probably

more difficult than reading because students often recognize the written word more

easily than they recognize the spoken word. Because of these issues, many students

find listening difficult. Listening tasks can be very disheartening and demotivating,

especially if students have had a previous negative experience. It is therefore

important to give students plenty of opportunities to practice the skill of listening in a

supportive environment that helps them to learn (Pollard, 2008:39).

Furthermore, listening subject is also one of the most difficult skill to be

learnt that make most of the students especially in Junior High School have low

achievement in listening skill especially in listening minimal pairs as it happened to

the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. The second year students of

SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan have low achievement in listening skill because of the

following reasons:

- The students were bored in the process of learning listening because the teacher

still used conventional method in teaching listening.

- The time of learning English in Junior High School was very limited

- The students assumed that English is a foreign language for them, so they did not

have to be so serious to learn English.

1

In short, it is important for English teacher to use the best techniques and

approach such as games which can provide students many opportunities to practice

English language because most of student in every school levels especially in Junior

High School, listening is difficult for them to learn.

Actually, listening is about hearing the encompassing message from

particular sound of speech. Student with the inefficiency of vocabulary range, weak

pronunciation ability and also rarely engaged in speaking activity are estimated to be

difficult in listening English especially in listening minimal pairs which sound

similar but has different meaning for example the word “sheep” and ‘ship’.

In learning listening, one of the difficulties that English foreign language

students face is minimal pairs. The term “minimal pairs” refers to two words within a

language which have different meanings but vary in one sound segment only.

Examples of this in English are the words “live” (verb) and “leave” (verb) (Fromkin,

Blair & Collins, 2000:194).

Based on the problems above, the researcher as one of English teachers at

SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan and also a student of English Department who has been

studying English for four years at Almuslim University would like to do a research

as the final task to complete her study on the title “The Implementation of Minimal

Pair Card Game to Improve Students’ Listening Comprehension (A Classroom

Action Research at The Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan)”.

1.2 Problem of the Research

The problems of the research are made as follows:

2

1. Can Minimal Pair Card Game improve the students’ ability in listening minimal

pairs?

2. What are the advantages of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching

listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan?

1.3 Purpose of the Research

Based on the problems above, the researcher draws the purposes of the

research as described below:

1. To find out whether Minimal Pair Card Game can improve the students’ ability

in listening minimal pairs.

2. To find out the advantages of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in

teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan.

1.4 Significance of the Research

This research is generally expected to be useful in many ways as described in

the following:

1. Theoretically, the finding of the research can be used as the additional theoretical

teaching resources at SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in teaching listening.

2. Practically, the result of this research can improve the students’ listening ability

in listening minimal pairs.

1.5 Scope of the Research

In order to get more specific data in this research, it seems important for the

researcher to limit the discussion of the research. Because the teaching listening is

3

very wide, the researcher limits this research on improving students’ ability in

listening minimal pairs.

1.6 Definition of Key Terms.

The definitions of key terms that are explained in this thesis are as follows:

1. Listening is a process of receiving, interpreting and reacting to a message

received from the speaker in listening to minimal pairs.

2. Minimal Pair Cards Game is the name of game in which the students are trained

to listen the differences of minimal pairs and the students uses some minimal

pairs’ cards in playing the game.

3. Classroom Action Research is a research which is done to improve the quality of

teaching and learning process.

4

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Definition of Listening

Listening is an active process. It differs from hearing, which is passive. In

listening, the listener has to pay attention and comprehend the verbal communication

delivered by the speaker (Barker, 1987:14). Hornby (1995; 687) defines listening as

hearing something that one is meant to hear. Valette (1989: 74) describes that

listening has three components. First is called sound discrimination. Here the listener

distinguishes all sounds in the language presented and discriminate between them.

Second is called auditory memory. While pair drills are used to teach sound

discrimination, connected phrases are used for increasing the auditory memory.

Mimicry and memorization, reading aloud, dictation, are some techniques, which are

beneficial in developing auditory memory. The last is achievement. The student’s

degree of achievement will depend on their ability to discriminate phonemes, to

recognize stress and intonation pattern and to retain what they have heard.

In fact, listening consumes more time than other facets of language speaking,

writing, and reading in our daily life. The average person spends 68 % of his working

time on listening. Nevertheless, researches on listening have extraordinarily been

made.

2.2 Listening Achievement

The teaching of listening achievement as a separate skill is a recent

innovation in language teaching (Allen, 1977: 179). It is because listening

5

achievement is simply considered as an adjunct of speaking, but listening precedes

the speaking, indeed. Developing the ability in understanding the spoken foreign

language, however, is long and continuous process. It is a skill that must be taught

and doesn’t happen automatically (Swarbrick, 1994: 13).

In learning a second language, students must acquire the skill of listening.

They must be able to discriminate the sound of the target language, to discriminate

among unfamiliar sounds. According to Valette (1989:74) students of foreign

language won’t be able to speak the target language accurately unless they perceive

the ability to distinguish features of the new phonetics system. They must rely on

their ears both to understand what is being said and to verify their own

pronunciation. The phenomenon of listening achievement is very complex. In the

daily conversation, native speakers do not consciously make all the possible

phonemic discrimination typical of their language. They are so familiar with certain

patterns and contexts that they can understand what is being said even they do not

pay precise attention to every word.

2.3 The Nature of Listening Comprehension

Research has shown that listening is not a passive process. Postovsky in

Mahdalena (2009: 9) points out that listening is not a passive skill and it requires full

participation and the undivided attention of the learners. In addition, he states that

when the nature of the skill is understood, the process becomes exciting. In addition

Vandergrift in Mahdalena (2009: 9) states:

Listening comprehension is anything but a passive activity. It is a complex, active process in which the listener must discriminate between sounds, understand vocabulary and grammatical

6

structures, interpret stress and intonation, retain what was gathered in all of the above, and interpret it within the immediate as well as the large sociocultural content of the utterance. Coordinating all of this involves a great deal of mental activity on the part of the listener. Listening is hard work, and deserves more analysis and support”.

Teaching listening comprehension, as a separate skill, is a recent innovation

in language teaching (Allen, 1977: 179). It is because listening comprehension is

simply considered as an adjunct of speaking, but listening precedes the speaking,

indeed. Developing the ability in understanding the spoken foreign language,

however, is long and continuous process. It is a skill that must be taught and doesn’t

happen automatically (Swarbrick, 1994: 13).

In learning a second language, students must acquire the skill of listening.

They must be able to discriminate the sound of the target language, to discriminate

among unfamiliar sounds. According to Valette (1989:74) students of foreign

language won’t be able to speak the target language accurately unless they perceive

the ability to distinguish features of the new phonetics system. They must rely on

their ears both to understand what is being said and to verify their own

pronunciation. The phenomenon of listening comprehension is very complex. In the

daily conversation, native speakers do not consciously make all the possible

phonemic discrimination typical of their language. They are so familiar with certain

patterns and contexts that they can understand what is being said even they do not

pay precise attention to every word.

7

2.4 Extensive and intensive listening

Students can improve their listening skills and gain valuable language input

through a combination of extensive and intensive listening material and procedures.

Listening of both kinds is especially important since it provides the perfect

opportunity to hear voices other than the teacher’s, enables students to acquire good

speaking habits as a result of the spoken English they absorb, and helps to improve

their own pronunciation.

2.4.1 Extensive listening

The researcher can claim that extensive reading helps students to acquire

vocabulary and grammar and it make students better readers, so extensive listening

(where a teacher encourages students to choose for themselves what they listen to

and to do so for pleasure arid general language improvement) can also have a

dramatic effect on a student’s language learning.

Extensive listening will usually take place outside the classroom, in the

students home, car, or on personal stereos as they travel from one place to another.

The motivational power of such an activity increases dramatically when students

make their own choices about what they are going to listen to.

Material for extensive listening can be found from a number of sources. A lot

of simplified readers are now published with an audio version on tape. These provide

ideal listening material. Many students will enjoy reading and listening at the same

time using both the reader and tape. Students can also have their own copies of

course book tapes, or tapes which accompany other books written especially at their

level. They can also listen to tapes of authentic material provided that it is

8

comprehensible.

In order for extensive listening to work effectively with a group of students or

with groups of students, the teacher will need to make a collection of appropriate

tapes clearly marked for level, topic, and genre. These can be kept like simplified

readers in a permanent collection (such as in a self-access centre, or in some other

location), or be kept in a box or some other container which can be taken into

classrooms.

The keenest students will want to listen to English tapes outside the

classroom anyway, and will need little encouragement to do so. Many others,

however, will profit from having the teacher give them reasons to make use of the

resources available. The teacher needs to explain the benefits of listening

extensively, and come to some kind of agreement about how much and what kind of

listening they should do. The teacher can recommend certain tapes, and get other

students to talk about the ones which they have enjoyed the most (Harmer,

2000:228).

2.4.2 Intensive listening

Many teachers use taped materials, and increasingly material on disk, when

they want their students to practice listening skills. This has a number of advantages

and disadvantages.

The Advantages are that taped material allows students to hear a variety of

different voices apart from just their own teacher’s. It gives them an opportunity to

‘meet’ a range of different characters, especially where real people are talking. But

even when tapes contain written dialogues or extracts from plays, they offer a wide

9

variety of situations and voices. Taped material is extremely portable and readily

available. Tapes are extremely cheap, and machines to play them are relatively

inexpensive. For all these reasons most course books include tapes, and many

teachers rely on tapes to provide a significant source of language input.

The disadvantages are that in big classrooms with poor acoustics, the

audibility of taped and disk material often gives cause for concern. It is often difficult

to ensure that all students in a room can hear equally well. Mother problem with

classroom tapes is that everyone has to listen at the same speed, a speed dictated by

the tape, not by the listeners. Although this replicates the situation of radio, it is less

satisfactory when students have to take information from the tape. This is because

they cannot, themselves, interact with the taped speakers in any way. Nor can they

see the speaking taking place.

Finally, having a group of people sit around listening to a tape recorder or

disk player is not an entirely natural occupation. Despite the disadvantages, however,

the teacher still wants to use taped material at various stages in a sequence of lessons

for the advantages mentioned above. In order to counteract some of the potential

problems described above, the teacher needs to check tape (Harmer, 2000: 229).

2.5 The Importance of Listening Comprehension

Teaching and learning of second or foreign language seems to concentrate on

speaking, reading, writing and pronunciation. It has been seen that listening

comprehension is often left out of many theoretical books while other skills like

reading, speaking and writing are always incorporated. Listening comprehension is

claimed to be taken cat-c of but it actually seems to be neglected and overlooked by

10

both teachers and learners in second and foreign language in all educational levels in

many countries including Indonesia. It is the least stressed or focused on skill in the

language classroom and receives the least pedagogical attention. Pearson and

Fielding in Mahdalena (2009: 19) remark on the general neglect in listening

comprehension that teacher do not understand why there is so little attention paid to

listening comprehension as a matter for a school curriculum when students spend so

much time listening. The teacher would like to see more emphasis given to listening

comprehension as an entity in its own right.

Although the preceding comment was made several years ago, the minimal

attention paid to listening comprehension still persists. Most of the teachers of

English can point out the history of extensive instructional focus on the expressive

areas of language use or speaking and the comparative neglect of the receptive areas

like listening, even though it is clear that the receptive skills are used more than

twice as much as the expressive skills.

Listening comprehension often plays only a trivial role in foreign language

teaching and learning environments despite the fact that it often figures prominently

in particular guidelines and statements of objectives. It is always included as one of

the main objectives in the curriculum that students need to acquire but in practice it

usually receives little attention. This statement proves true as many teachers of

English as a foreign language in Indonesia in general and in the province of Central

Kalimantan in particular pay very little attention to the area of teaching listening

comprehension for some reasons.

11

In fact, listening skills are very important but relatively few research projects

are carried out in this area. In addition, it is widely believed that listening skills are

enabling skills that can happen on their own. Some teachers also believe that if

students are efficiently taught and trained in reading and speaking skills, they would

acquire these skills and as a consequence their listening skills will be improved too.

Furthermore, listening skills are viewed as developing automatically without any aid

or teaching. The only thing that students require is repeated listening or large doses

of listening and they would acquire the skills on their own without any teacher help.

Brown in Mahdalena (2009: 19) also points out that it is assumed in teaching that

students would easily acquire the ability to understand the spoken language if they

hear their teachers speaking or listen to a tape. He further clarifies:

“For many years it was suggested that students would learn to understand the spoken form of the language simply by being exposed to it. Many courses which purport to teach’ listening comprehension in fact consist of exercises which expose the students to a chunk of spoken material on a tape and then ask comprehension questions’ to try to find out whether or not the student has understood the language of the text. . . .The students are not receiving any help in learning”.

Furthermore, Scarcella (1998: 133) indicates that the reason that listening is

often neglected in language instruction is that: “The concept, shared by other

authorities, seems to be that listening comprehension simply takes care of itself

without any aid or teaching. and that osmosis is all that needed.” Hedge in

Mahdalena (2009: 20) also states a misconception of listening comprehension in the

English language teaching curriculum, “Certainly some ELT methods have assumed

that listening ability will develop automatically through exposure to the language and

through practice of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation.”

12

In fact, listening comprehension needs more attention from both teachers and

students. It is actually an important skill and the most frequently used; it plays an

important role in everyday life. Morley in Mahdalena (2009: 20) also mentions the

proportion of the listening in daily life “Listening is the most frequently employed

skill in daily language use. Research results vary slightly, depending upon the groups

studied, but on the average, time spent in communicating divides into approximately

50 percent listening, 25 percent speaking, 15 percent reading, and 10 percent

writing”.

2.6 Stages in Listening

There are three stages in a listening activity:

1. Pre-listening

The teacher should assign a listening task before learners listen. She may also

provide learners with necessary language skills, prepare them for the theme of the

listening passage, ask them to make predictions about the listening passage, and

connect listening passage with their experience.

2. Listening

Learners listen to the listening material

3. Post-listening

Teachers should first check learner’s comprehension & completion of

listening task and then continue with tasks with require creative application of

information from the listening passage. Teachers should use listening tasks that are

appropriate for the listening passage.

13

Learners will create creative pre- and post-listening tasks for listening

passage. Write a lesson plan that has pre-listening activities, a listening passage, and

creative post-listening activities. Teacher demonstrates a listening activity without

any pre-activity (teacher can read A Place to Live, and then ask learners to complete

one of the sample listening activities). Think-pair-share: Was the demonstration

difficult? What could I do to make it more effective? Teacher presentation of pre

and post-listening stages. Information gallery of while and post-listening activities

(Which activities are most interesting? Which activities are most creative? Which

activities are most difficult?). Learners report answers from the information gallery.

Small groups of learners prepare pre- and post-listening activities for a listening

passage.

Groups present pre-and post-listening activities for a listening passage. Class

discusses sources of listening passages. Learners write a lesson plan that uses a

listening passage (homework). Is an organizational moment or warm-up a pre-

activity? Why or why not? How is this approach similar to or different from the

traditional approach? What parts of a lesson are usually more learner-centered?

More teacher-centered? Why is it important to connect new information with

learners’ experience and lives? (http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol32/no4/http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol32/no4/).

2.7 Listening lesson sequences

Listening can occur at a number of points in a teaching sequence. Sometimes

it forms the jumping-off point for the activities which follow. Sometimes it may be

the first stage of a ‘listening and acting out’ sequence where students role-play the

situation they have heard on the tape. Sometimes live listening may be a prelude to a

14

piece of writing which is the main focus of a lesson. Other lessons, however, have

listening training as their central focus. However much the teacher has planned a

lesson, the teacher needed to be flexible in what he or she does as a teacher. Nowhere

is this more acute than in the provision of live listening, where the teacher may, on

the spur of the moment, feel the need to tell a story, or act out some role. Sometimes

this will be for content reasons because a topic comes up and sometimes it may be a

way of refocusing students’ attention.

Most listening sequences involve a mixture of language skills though one, in

particular, is often the main focus of the sequence. Frequently students listen for gist

on first hearing before moving on to different task skills at other times they may

listen for specific information straight away. In general, the teacher should aim to use

listening material for as many purposes as possible both for practicing a variety of

skills and as source material for other activities before students finally become tired

with it (Harmer, 2000:232).

2.8 The Meaning of Minimal Pairs

In (Wikipedia, 2011:1), it defined that minimal pair is a pair of words that

differ in a single phoneme. Minimal pairs are often used to show that two sounds

contrast in a language or pairs of words that have one phonological element that is

different. Practicing minimal pairs can help students understand the differences in

pronunciation between one word and another. It also helps students practice the finer

elements of muted vowel sounds which are common to English vowel production.

The examples of minimal pairs can be seen in the following list:

15

a. thick - sick b. pin - thin c. thick - lick

d. thong - song e. rink - think f. nerd - third

g. chin - thin h. thick - pick i. long - thong

j. third - bird k. tick - thick l. thigh - bye

m. corn - thorn n. thigh - tie o. pink - think

p. wick thick q. thorn - worn r. thief - beef

s. high - thigh t. horn - thorn u. third - word

v. kick - thick w. leaf – thief

2.9 Teaching Listening through Minimal Pair Card Game

One of the difficulties faced by a learner in learning English listening is

minimal pairs. The term “minimal pairs” means two words in a language which have

different meanings but vary in one sound segment only (Fromkin, Blair & Collin,

2000:249). Examples of minimal pairs in English are the words “fat” and “hat”.

There are many of these in the English language.

Minimal pairs are a more serious problem than simple poor pronunciation or

listening skills on the part of a student. This is because mistakes with minimal pairs

do not only impair understanding but also can lead students to believe that they

understand but in fact they are quite mistaken. These kinds of mistakes can hamper

their conversation skills in the obvious way that they are difficult to understand, but

it can also affect their confidence when they try to communicate in English.

Therefore in proposal, the researcher would like to apply Minimal Pair Card

Game in teaching listening to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan.

16

Here, the researcher explains about how to teach listening through Minimal Pair

Card Game.

First, the teacher gives the explanation about minimal pairs. As the students

understand, the teacher divided the students in groups. Then the teacher gives each

student minimal pair cards game. The students then take turns asking each other for

cards matching the ones they possess. This game may be done in groups of two to

six, though four members are probably best.

In each group, one student starts by asking one of the other students for a pair

to a card they possess. “Excuse me, ……..(Name of the student they want to ask), do

you have a fifteen?” If the student has it, she/he gives it to the asking student, then

the asking student places the newly made pair down and can ask the same student or

any other student for another card they possess one of. If, on the next request, the

student does not have the card they simply say, “No, I don't have it. Sorry.”. Then the

student who is doing the asking takes a card from the pile in the center and his or her

turn is complete.

When the students have played the game a few times, the teacher should

improve the effectiveness of the game. For example, if a student hears a card being

asked for which they have on their turn, when they ask for the card, they should ask

for card with, “May I have …… rather than “Do you have ……… ?”, as they know

that the student whom they are asking has the card in question. If they do so and they

are correct, they receive an extra turn after making a mistake if they are mistaken

they lose a turn. This will both teach them a useful phrase and encourage them to

listen during the other students' turns (Friyer, 2010:2).

17

This simple game is effective because it forces students to focus both on their

pronunciation and listening. One might suggest that a simple “repeat after me”

exercise with the teacher has the same function. The difference is there is a certain

amount of pressure as there is an actual need to be understood. For the students to

ensure they receive the card they need for a pair, they must pronounce correctly or

potentially be misheard and not receive the card or receive the wrong card. The

student being asked is in the same situation, only they must focus and listen to avoid

giving the wrong card. Any students not participating in the exchange must also

listen as a card they possess might be mentioned, giving them an opportunity on their

turn to ask for it (Friyer, 2010:2).

18

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

In this research, the researcher used qualitative approach which is designed in

classroom action research. The researcher used qualitative approach because, in this

research, the researcher collected qualitative data and analyzed the data qualitatively.

Furthermore, the researcher designed this research in classroom action research

because the objective of this research is to improve the second year students’

listening comprehension of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. As it is explained by

Subyantoro (2009:8) that classroom action research is a form of systematic and

reflective research conducted by educators or teachers by giving certain action to

improve and increase the quality of teaching practices in the classrooms in order that

those practices become more professional. The researcher chose classroom action

research as the design of this research because in this research, the researcher

intended to improve her quality in teaching listening and improve her students’

listening comprehension in listening minimal pairs.

3.2 Setting and Subject of the Research

This research takes place at SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. There are many

parallel classes of the second year students. The researcher only took the second year

students in class VIII-2 as the subject of this research. The number of students in the

class is 34 students. The students were taken as the subject of the research because

they had some problems in listening minimal pairs.

19

3.3 Research Procedure

Subyantoro (2009:10) explains that action research is done through many

repeated cycles in which each cycle consists of four steps; planning, action,

observation and reflection. In this classroom action research, the researcher adapted

the procedure of classroom action research that was promoted by Kemmis and

Taggart (1998:22). The procedure was described in the following figure:

Figure 3.1 Classroom Action Research Procedure

Figure 3.1. The Classroom Action Research(Adapted from Kemmis and Taggart, 1998:22)

20

PRELIMINARY STUDY

Observing the teaching-learning process in pronunciation and giving pre-test to the second year students of SMP NEgeri 2 Peusangan.

FINDINGS1. Students have difficulty in distinguishing

minimal pairs 2. The students were bored in the process of

learning listening because the teacher still used conventional method in teaching listening.

3. The students assumed that English is a foreign language for them, so they did not have to be so serious to learn English.

IMPLEMENTING

Implementing minimal pair card game in teaching listening.

PLANNING Preparing the lesson plans instructional materials

and research instruments such as observation form, pre-test, post-tests and questionnaire.

ANALYSIS AND REFLECTION

Analyzing the result of observation. Doing reflection on the result.

OBSERVING Observing the action through

observation form, questionnaire and the result of post-test for each student.

Stop Revise the plan and continue to the next

cycle

Successful Unsuccessful

Conclusion and Report

3.3.1 Preliminary Study

Preliminary study was one of the steps in which the researcher collaborated

with the teacher to find some problems that are faced by the teacher and students in

the classroom. This step was done before the researcher did this research in the

classroom. Here, the teacher and researcher tried to find some problems in teaching

and learning listening by observing the process of teaching-learning listening and

giving pre-test to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in class

VIII-2 to know the students’ basic knowledge in listening minimal pairs.

3.3.2 Planning

Planning is one of the steps in classroom action research in which the

researcher prepared everything for the completion of doing actions in the class like

designing a lesson plan, preparing research instrument such as observation forms,

post-tests and questionnaire, specifying the criteria of success and verifying the

research schedule.

3.3.3 Implementing

Implementing is one of steps in classroom action research to conduct the

research in the classroom by using the proposed technique to improve students`

listening skill. In this case, the researcher used minimal pair card game as a

technique to improve the students’ listening comprehension in listening minimal

pairs.

21

3.3.4 Observing

Observing is one of steps in classroom action research in which the

researcher acted as the practitioner and the other English teacher observed the

researcher in doing the actions in the classroom. Here, the observer could observe

about the students’ motivation and performance, the classroom atmosphere and the

advantageous of applying minimal pair cards game in teaching listening.

3.3.5 Analysis and Reflection

Reflection is one of steps to know whether the result of research can reach the

criteria of success or not. The researcher and the teacher could make reflection after

accomplishing each cycle of the research. The purpose of reflection in this research

was to know whether this research could improve students’ listening comprehension

in listening minimal pairs or not. Here, the researcher reflected on the effects of the

above steps as a basis evaluation for further planning, subsequent action and so on

through a succession of cycles.

3.4 Technique of Data Collecting

To collect the required data, the researcher uses research instruments such

observation checklists, questionnaires and tests (pretest and posttest).

1. Observation checklists

Observation checklist is a list of things that an observer is going to look at

when observing a class. This list may have been prepared by the observer or the

teacher or both (Sukayati, 2008:29). Observation checklists give an observer a

structure and framework for an observation to get specific information on aspects of

22

the class. In this research, observation checklist is used to obtain data about how the

teacher in implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second

year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan and gathers data about the students’

activity during the teaching and learning process.

2. Questionnaire

Questionnaire is list of a research or survey questions asked to respondents,

and designed to extract specific information (Arikunto, 2006:225). In this research,

questionnaires were administered to the students to complete the information that

cannot be attained from observation checklist. In distributing questionnaires to the

students, the researcher tells to the students that questionnaire would influence their

score in English subject. Thus, the students can fill the questionnaire freely and

honestly. Questionnaire is very useful to know the students` feeling and response

during teaching and learning process.

3. Test

Test is sequence or list of questions to measure, skill, ability, intelligence,

owned by individual or group (Anwar, 2009:30). In this research, the researcher used

minimal pairs test to measure the improvement of the students’ ability in listening

minimal pair card games.

There were two kinds of tests used in this research; pre-test and post-test. Pre-

test was used to identify the problems as the basic knowledge to do the research and

post-test was used to measure the improvement of the students’ achievement in

listening minimal pairs after giving some actions. The tests consisted of 20 questions

in which each question was scored 5 if it was answered correctly.

23

3.5 Technique of Data Analysis

Technique of data analysis is the continuation of the data collecting phase.

Data analysis is an essential part of a study. Therefore, a researcher must understand

the techniques of data analysis to get reliable and scientific results. Usually, there are

two kinds of data collected and analyzed in classroom action research namely

qualitative and quantitative data.

Quantitative data is in form of students’ score and it is analyzed

descriptively by using descriptive statistics for example searching for students’

means score, percentage of successful learning and displaying data in a good way.

The formula of means score used in this research is described as follows:

x=∑ fx

N

On the contrary, qualitative data is the data in the form of sentence which

obtained from observation checklist and questionnaire like students’ attitude and

motivation during teaching-learning process. Qualitative data is analyzed

qualitatively by taking conclusion from all the qualitative data collected.

24

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Data Presentation

The data were collected from the second year students of SMP Negeri 2

Peusangan. The research was done to know whether Minimal Pair Card Game could

improve the students’ ability in listening minimal pairs and to find out the advantages

of implementing Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second year

students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan.

The researcher found the data through two cycles. This research was done in

two cycles to get more accurate data. Application of each cycle involved planning,

implementing, observing and reflecting.

4.1.1 Application in Cycle 1

The implementation of Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening

comprehension to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in cycle 1

was done from Mei 11th, 2011 – Mei 19th, 2011. In other words, three meetings were

needed to do the actions in the first cycle in one week. The duration of each meeting

was 2 x 45 minutes. The Application of cycle 1 was done through the steps:

planning, implementing, observing and reflecting. The researcher had to give pre-test

through preliminary study before planning of action in the cycle 1. Preliminary study

was done to get information about how far the students` ability in listening minimal

pairs before Minimal Pair Card Game was given. Each of steps is explained as

follow:

25

4.1.1.1 Preliminary Study

Preliminary study was held on Mei 12th, 2011 at the second year students of

SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan. In this step, the researcher met the headmaster of SMP

Negeri 2 Peusangan to ask permission to do the research in that school by giving a

formal letter for research. Then, the researcher met the teacher who would be a

partner or a collaborator in this research.

Here, the researcher discussed about the class and teacher. The students in

class VIII-2 were chosen as the sample of the research. After discussing, the teacher

agreed to give pre-test for the students.

The pre-test was done on Mei 12th, 2011. Duration of test was 45 minutes. In

the pre-test, the students were asked to listen to some sentences from listening CD

and choose which of the target words has been used in the sentences. The score were

taken based on listening rubric score. The result of pre-test can be seen in the

following table:

Table 4.1 The Result of Pre-test

No Name of Students Score

1 M. Reza 45

2 Mustafa Kamal 40

3 Azwar 50

4 Bahrul Fatzal 30

5 Doni Saputra 40

6 M. Ridhwan 50

7 Fauzannur 50

8 Anwar 45

26

9 Amiruddin 45

10 Muhammad 50

11 Syahrullah 55

12 Karimullah 45

13 M. Rizki 45

14 Munirwan 55

15 Mulyadi 45

16 M. Nasir 45

17 Aulia Dani 35

18 Hasanuddin 50

19 Kamaruzzaman 40

20 Herizal 50

21 Zulkifli 45

22 Efendi Zakaria 50

23 Maulana 35

24 Faisal Amri 55

25 Asrif Aditya Gunawan 45

26 M. Iqbal 45

27 Ibnu Hajar 40

28 Mukhlis 45

29 Mujiburrahmat 55

30 Zufri 50

31 Ihsanuddin 35

27

32 Rahmatullah 55

33 Husaini 40

34 Marzuki 35

Listening Mastery Scale

Level 4 = 76 – 100 = Excellent

Level 3 = 50 – 75 = Good

Level 2 = 26 – 49 = Fair

Level 1 = 0 – 25 = Poor

The pre-test was held to find the mean score of students` ability in listening

minimal pairs before the students were treated to the action. To find out the mean

score of students, the researcher used the formula x = ⅀ fxN

introduced by Winarsunu

(2002:88).

Where: x = Mean score

⅀ fx = Total score of all students

N = The number of samples

Thus, x = ⅀ fxN

= 154034

= 45,29

Based on the data found in the pre-test calculated through the formula, the

means score of the students` ability in listening minimal pairs was 45,29 and

categorized in the level “fair”. In other words, the result showed that the ability of the

second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs was still

low and had to be improved.

28

4.1.1.2 Planning

In planning the action, the researcher consulted about the schedule of the

research in class with the teacher. Then, the researcher discussed about the lesson

plans and technique that would be used to improve the students` ability in listening

minimal pairs. Here, some research instruments involved observation checklists,

field notes, questionnaire, and post-test for the first and second cycle were also

prepared. In preparing the tests, the researcher was helped by an English teacher in

that school. Therefore, there was no a significant problem for the researcher in

passing this step.

4.1.1.3 Implementing and Observing the Plan

In classroom action research, the researcher collaborated with an English

teacher Mr. Azmi as the observer. She is a smart and creative teacher. While, the

researcher taught, Mr. Azmi observed the process of implementing the actions that

done by the researcher and students during this research.

The researcher had to explain about the technique of Minimal Pair Card

Game to the teacher before the teacher did action in the class. Therefore before the

researcher implemented the action in the class, the researcher did modeling session to

the teacher so that she could understand the way of teaching listening through

Minimal Pair Card Game. In the modeling session, the researcher acted as the

teacher in implementing the action to show the teacher how to apply Minimal Pair

Card Game in teaching minimal pairs. Implementing of the plan was begun when the

researcher and teacher were ready to do the research in the class. There were three

29

meeting in each cycle in which each last meeting of the cycle was used to do post-

test.

4.1.1.3.1 First Meeting

First meeting was conducted on Thursday May 12th, 2011. In this meeting,

researcher did greeting to the students. Then, the researcher told about the purpose of

this research and tried to motivate the students in this research. The next step was the

researcher did observation about teacher`s and students` activities in class. The

process of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described in the three

teaching phases below:

I. Pre-Teaching Activity

First, the researcher gave the explanation about minimal pairs. As the

students understood about minimal pairs, the researcher explained how to play

minimal pair cards game to the students and divided the students in groups. One

group consisted of four students. Then, the researcher gave each student minimal pair

cards game. The list of minimal pairs that were used in playing minimal pair cards

game in the first meeting was as listed below:

1. Hat- had

2. sheep - ship

3. know - knew

4. were - wear

5. eat - ate

6. led - lid

7. see - say

8. my - may

30

9. will- well

10. pull – pool

II. Main-Teaching Activity

In the main teaching activity, the researcher firstly taught the students how to

read the minimal pairs that written in the minimal pair cards. After that, the

researcher asked the students to take turn asking each other for cards matching the

cards they had. In each group, one student starts by asking one of the other students

for a pair to a card they had. For example “Excuse me, Amir! Do you have “a

fifteen”? If the student has it, he gives it to the asking student, then the asking student

placed the newly made pair down. The asking students also could ask the same

student or any other student for other cards they had. If on the next request, the

student did not have the card, they could say, “No, I don't have it. Sorry.”. In this

game the winner was the students who could find their cards pair as soon as possible.

III. Post-Teaching Activity

In the post teaching activity, the researcher corrected the students’ errors that

made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading

“Alfatihah”

4.1.1.3.2 Second Meeting

The second meeting was conducted on Saturday Mei 14th, 2011. The process

of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described in the three teaching

phases below:

31

I. Pre-Teaching Activity

As usual, in the pre-teaching activity, the researcher greeted the students and

checked their attendance list. There were two students who were absent on that day.

After that the researcher wrote new list of minimal pairs on the board and then taught

the students how to read the words. The list of minimal pairs that were used the

second meeting is written below:

1. by- bay2. who- how3. fill- fell4. bet - bit5. wait- wet 6. mode - mood7. been- bin8. bad – bat 9. for – fur10. chip – cheep

II. Main-Teaching Activity

As the students understood the way to read words of minimal pairs above, the

researcher asked the students to play the game. In this meeting, the students looked

very enthusiastic and active in playing the game. They were well-organized and very

cooperative in playing the game.

III. Post-Teaching Activity

In the post teaching activity, the researcher corrected the students’ errors that

made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading

prayer together.

32

4. 1.1.3.3 Third Meeting

Third meeting was conducted on Thursday Mei 19 th, 2011. In this meeting,

the post -test was held to evaluate whether the students` ability in listening minimal

pairs could be improved or not. Therefore, no one was absent in this meeting. The

result of post-test can be seen as follows:

Table 4.2 The Result of Post-test in Cycle 1

No Name of Students Score

1 M. Reza 65

2 Mustafa Kamal 50

3 Azwar 50

4 Bahrul Fatzal 65

5 Doni Saputra 50

6 M. Ridhwan 50

7 Fauzannur 55

8 Anwar 55

9 Amiruddin 55

10 Muhammad 70

11 Syahrullah 55

12 Karimullah 50

13 M. Rizki 60

14 Munirwan 55

15 Mulyadi 69

16 M. Nasir 55

33

17 Aulia Dani 45

18 Hasanuddin 50

19 Kamaruzzaman 55

20 Herizal 65

21 Zulkifli 50

22 Efendi Zakaria 70

23 Maulana 50

24 Faisal Amri 65

25 Asrif Aditya Gunawan 50

26 M. Iqbal 65

27 Ibnu Hajar 70

28 Mukhlis 45

29 Mujiburrahmat 55

30 Zufri 75

31 Ihsanuddin 50

32 Rahmatullah 50

33 Husaini 65

34 Marzuki 60

Listening Mastery Scale

1 = 96 – 100 = Excellent 2 = 85 – 94 = Very Good 3 = 71 – 84 = Good 4 = 56 – 70 = Fair 5 = 51 – 55 = Low6 = 25 – 50 = Very Low (Depdiknas, 2008:12).

34

The post – test in the first cycle was done to find the mean score of students`

ability in listening minimal pairs after the students were treated through minimal pair

card game. To find out the mean score of students` ability in listening, the researcher

used the formula x = ⅀ fxN

introduced by Winarsunu (2002:88).

Where: x = Mean score

⅀ fx = Total score of all students

N = The number of samples

Thus, x = ⅀ fxN

= 1944

34 = 57,17

Based on the data found in the post-test calculated through the formula, the

average score of students` in listening minimal pairs was 57,17. The score 57,17 was

categorized in the level “fair”.

4.1.1.4 Reflecting

This was the last step done in cycle 1. It was done to determine whether the

cycle 1 was success or not. In this case the researcher together with the teacher did

reflection based on predetermined criteria of success. The Analysis process consisted

of the evaluation of researcher’s performance in teaching listening through minimal

pair card game and the students’ performance in learning listening through minimal

pair card game. Based on the result of observation checklists for the teacher, it

showed that the score of the teacher’s performance in teaching listening through

minimal pair card game was in level 2 (fair). Furthermore the result of observation

checklists for the students in learning listening through minimal pair card game was

also in level 2(fair). In addition, based on the result of questionnaires distributed to

35

the students, it showed that almost all of students had good motivation in learning

listening through minimal pair card game, although the students were still confused

about the knowledge of minimal pairs in first meeting.

After doing some actions in the first cycle, the students had not showed their

improvement yet in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students’ average

score in the post-test done in the first cycle was only 57, while the qualified average

score demanded in this research was higher than 65. Even though the students’ post-

test average score was not qualified to the criteria of success, however it was higher

than the students’ average score in the pre-test.

The product of teaching and learning in the first cycle can be seen the

following table:

Table 4.3 Product of Teaching and Learning Process in Cycle 1 based on Criteria of Success

NoCriteria of

successData Source Instrument

Technique of data

collection

1. Actively involved

Commenting Responding Questioning

StudentsObservation

Checklist Non-test

NoYesYes

2.Motivated

Almost all of students are active and have good motivation.

Students

Observation Checklist

Questionnaires Non-test Yes

3. Students` ability in listening minimal pairs had improved.

The mean score of post-test is 57,17 (fair)

Students Post-test Test Yes

36

4. Teaching and learning process.

Not very well-done.The class was not boring

Class

Observation Checklist

Questionnaires

Non-test No

Yes

From the result of the analysis, the researcher found that the result of the first

cycle have not reached all the criteria of success. First, the teacher’s performance in

teaching listening minimal pair card game was considered fair. It means the teacher

missed some teaching procedures as described in the lesson plan. Second, only 60 %

of the students were enthusiastic and actively involved during the learning and

teaching process. And the last, the students’ average score in the post-test in the first

cycle was 57 and it was not qualified to the average score demanded in the criteria of

success.

From the explanation above, the researcher concluded that the first cycle was

considered failed because the findings of the first cycle had not met the criteria of

success. Therefore, it was necessary for the researcher to revise it to the next cycle.

4.1.2 Application in Cycle 2

Since the first cycle was failed, the researcher revised it to the second cycle.

The implementation of Minimal Pair Card Game in teaching listening to the second

year students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in cycle 2 was done from Friday Mei 20 th,

2011- Thursday Mei 28th, 2011 The Application of cycle 2 was also done through the

steps: planning, implementing, observing and reflecting.

37

4.1.2.1 Planning

Planning or planning the action was done on Friday Mei 20 th, 2011. In

planning the action, the researcher and the teacher prepared the research instruments

like observation checklists, questionnaires and tests. In this activity, the researcher

also designed lesson plan and specified the criteria of success.

4.1.2.2 Implementing and Observing the Plan

In this step, the researcher did the action and Mr. Azmi acted as observer.

Implementing and observing the action were done all at once. It means the teacher

observed the actions that was done by the researcher. Implementing and observing

the action in second cycle were divided in three meetings as in the first cycle.

4.1.2.2.1 First Meetings

The first meeting in the second cycle was conducted on Saturday Mei 21st,

2011. In this meeting, researcher also implemented the actions in three teaching

phases. The three teaching phases are described below:

I. Pre-Teaching Activity

In this activity, the researcher reviewed the previous lesson about minimal

pairs. After that the teacher introduced the students the new list of minimal pairs that

would be used in the meeting. After all the students had understood how to read the

minimal pairs, then, the teacher divided the students in groups and gave each student

minimal pair cards game. Each group consisted of four students. The list of minimal

pairs that were used in playing minimal pair cards game in this meeting was as listed

below:

38

1. teeth - tea 2. patch - path 3. bag badge 4. mat math 5. math map 6. back black7. tent tenth 8. two tooth 9. this kiss 10. then den

II. Main-Teaching Activity

In the main teaching activity, the researcher asked the students to start

playing minimal pair card game. In this meeting, most of the students looked very

happy because most of them had already understood the knowledge of minimal pairs.

After the all the students had played the minimal pair card game, the researcher

asked each student to make some sentences based on the words of minimal pairs that

they had already learnt from the game.

III. Post-Teaching Activity

In the post teaching activity, the researcher corrected the students’ errors that

made by the students during playing the game and then closed the class by reading

“Alfatihah”

4.1.2.3.2 Second Meeting

The second meeting in the second cycle was conducted on Thursday Mei

26th, 2011. The process of teaching and learning listening minimal pairs is described

in the three teaching phases below:

39

I. Pre-Teaching Activity

As usual, first, the researcher greeted the students and checked their

attendance list. There were one students who was absent on that day. After that, the

researcher wrote new list of minimal pairs on the board and then the researcher

taught the students how to read the words. The list of minimal pairs that were used

the second meeting is written below:

1. Slip – sleep 2. Chick – cheek 3. Lip – leap 4. Ship – sheep5. Pick – peek 6. Ring – wing 7. Rest – west 8. Pat – fat 9. Copy – coffee 10. Pan –fan

II. Main-Teaching Activity

As the students understood the way to read words of minimal pairs above, the

researcher asked the students to play the game. In this meeting, almost all students

looked very eager and active in playing the game. They were well-organized and

very cooperative in playing the game.

III. Post-Teaching Activity

In the post teaching activity, the researcher corrected the students’ errors that

made by the students during playing the game and then the researcher closed the

class by reading prayer together.

40

4. 1.2.3.3 Third Meeting

Third meeting was conducted on Saturday Mei 28th, 2011. In this meeting,

the researcher did post -test to evaluate whether the students` ability in listening

minimal pairs had improved or not. In this meeting, no one of the students was

absent. The result of post-test in the second cycle can be seen as follows:

Table 4.4 The Result of Post-test in Cycle 2

No Name of Students Score

1 M. Reza 75

2 Mustafa Kamal 80

3 Azwar 65

4 Bahrul Fatzal 65

5 Doni Saputra 70

6 M. Ridhwan 75

7 Fauzannur 75

8 Anwar 75

9 Amiruddin 65

10 Muhammad 70

11 Syahrullah 65

12 Karimullah 60

13 M. Rizki 60

14 Munirwan 65

15 Mulyadi 69

16 M. Nasir 60

41

17 Aulia Dani 65

18 Hasanuddin 80

19 Kamaruzzaman 65

20 Herizal 65

21 Zulkifli 80

22 Efendi Zakaria 70

23 Maulana 70

24 Faisal Amri 65

25 Asrif Aditya Gunawan 70

26 M. Iqbal 65

27 Ibnu Hajar 70

28 Mukhlis 65

29 Mujiburrahmat 70

30 Zufri 75

31 Ihsanuddin 85

32 Rahmatullah 75

33 Husaini 80

34 Marzuki 75

Listening Mastery Scale

1 = 96 – 100 = Excellent 2 = 85 – 94 = Very Good 3 = 71 – 84 = Good 4 = 56 – 70 = Fair 5 = 51 – 55 = Low6 = 25 – 50 = Very Low (Depdiknas, 2008:12).

42

The post-test in the second cycle was done to find the mean score of students`

ability in listening minimal pairs after the students were treated through minimal pair

card game. To find out the students’ average score, the researcher used the formula x

= ⅀ fxN

introduced by Winarsunu (2002:88).

Where: x = Mean score

⅀ fx = Total score of all students

N = The number of samples

Thus, x = ⅀ fxN

= 219934

= 70,11

Based on the calculation above, the researcher found that the students’

average scre in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70,11 and it was

categorized in the level “good”.

4.1.2.4 Reflecting

This was the last step done in cycle 2. It was done to determine whether the

cycle 2 was successful or not. In this case, the researcher together with the teacher

did reflection based on predetermined criteria of success. The Analysis process

consisted of the evaluation of teacher’s performance in teaching listening through

minimal pair card game and the students’ performance in learning listening through

minimal pair card game. Based on the result of observation checklists for the teacher

in cycle 2, it showed that the score of the teacher’s performance in teaching listening

through minimal pair card game was in level 3 (good). Furthermore the result of

observation checklists for the students in learning listening through minimal pair card

game in cycle 2 was also in level 3 (good). In addition, based on the result of

43

questionnaires distributed to the students, it showed that almost all of students had

good motivation in learning listening through minimal pair card game and they had a

good attitude to the researcher in the process of learning listening through minimal

pair card game.

After revising the first cycle to the second cycle, the students had showed

their improvement in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students’ average

score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70,11, while the qualified average

score demanded in this research was higher than 65.

The product of teaching and learning in the first cycle can be seen the

following table:

Table 4.4 Product of Teaching and Learning Process in Cycle 2 based on Criteria of Success

NoCriteria of

successData Source Instrument

Technique of data

collection

1. Actively involved

Commenting Responding Questioning

Students ObservationChecklist

Non-testYesYesYes

2. Motivated Almost all of students are active and have motivation.

Students

Observation Checklist

QuestionnairesNon-test Yes

3. Students` ability in listening minimal pairs had improved.

The mean score of post-test is 71,11 Students Post-test Test Yes

4. Teaching and learning

Well-done Observation Checklist

Non-test Yes

44

process. Class is not boring.

Class Questionnaires Yes

From the result of the analysis, the researcher found that the result of the

second cycle had already met all criteria of success in this research. First, the

teacher’s performance in teaching listening minimal pair card game was good. It

means the researcher followed almost all teaching procedures as described in the

lesson plan. Second, 75 % of the students were enthusiastic and actively involved

during the learning and teaching process. And the last, the students’ average score in

the post-test in the second cycle was 70,11 and it was qualified to the average score

demanded in the criteria of success.

From the explanation above, the researcher concluded that the second cycle

was considered successful because the findings of the second cycle had already met

all the criteria of success. Therefore, it was not necessary for the researcher to revise

it to the next cycle.

4.2 Discussion

The result of the first cycle showed that the students were not very actively

involved in teaching and learning process. However, the students were motivated in

the process of learning listening minimal pairs through minimal pairs card game by

showing their good behavior or attitude. Besides, the ability of the second year

students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs has successfully

improved. The evident can be seen from the mean score of post – test in first cycle

(57,17) which was bigger than the mean score of pre – test (45,29). Even though the

45

students’ means score in post-test was higher then the students’ menas score in pre-

test but the students’ means score in post-test was not qualified to the means score

demanded in the criteria of success 65. Therefore, the researcher stated that the

implementation of minimal pair cards game to improve the students’ listening ability

in listening minimal pairs in the first cycle text had not reached all the criteria of

success.

Because of the first cycle was categorized failed, the researcher revised it to

the second cycle. The result of second cycle was different from the result of first

cycle. In the second cycle, students showed that they were more interested in

learning listening through minimal pair card game. It was evident from the students’

responses, comments and questions. Furthermore the teacher’s performance in

teaching listening through minimal pairs was better than the teacher’s performance in

the first cycle. In addition the students’ means score in post-test done in the second

cycle was higher than the students’ means score in the post-test done in the first

cycle. The students’ means score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70,11.

Thus, based on data found from the second cycle, it was proven that teaching

listening through minimal pair card game could improve students` ability in listening

minimal pairs. The students also felt more comfortable in the process of learning

listening through minimal pair card game.

46

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Conclusion

Based on research findings, the researcher could conclude as follows:

1. Minimal pair card game improved the second year students` ability of SMP

Negeri 2 Peusangan in listening minimal pairs.

2. The students felt more enjoyable and comfortable in the process of learning

listening through minimal pair card game.

3. After revising the first cycle to the second cycle, the students, had showed their

improvement in learning listening minimal pairs in which the students average

score in the post-test done in the second cycle was 70.11, while the qualified

score demanded in criteria of success was higher than 65.

4. The students’ response toward minimal pair card game was very good because

this technique could help them in listening comprehension especially in

comprehending minimal pairs.

5.2 Suggestion

Based on the conclusion above, it is suggested to the:

1. Teacher should use minimal pair card game as a technique in teaching listening

especially listening minimal pairs to improve the students’ listening skill.

2. Teacher should introduce other kind of games in teaching English to the students

because games can create the class atmosphere become more comfortable and

fun.

47

3. Teacher should give motivation to the students by doing interaction with

students so they will not be bored in teaching and learning process.

4. Students should be active and always pay attention to the teacher`s explanation

during learning process.

5. Other researcher should keep on doing research on this topic at the school to

improve English education especially in listening skill.

48

49

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Manajemen Penelitian. Jakarta: Penerbit Rineka Cipta.

Anwar. 2009:30. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Yogyakarta: Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidikan dan Kependidikan.

Allen Edward David & Rebecca M. Valette. 1977. Classroom Technique: Foreign Language and English as a Second Language. New York: Harcout Brace.

Barker, L, 1987, Communication. New Jersey, Prentice Hall

Blair, D., Collins, P., Fromkin, V., (2000). An Introduction to Language. Sydney: Harcourt Australia Pty Limited.

Brown, J.D. 1998. Understanding in Second Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fryer. 2010. Minimal Pair Card Game. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XI, No. 9, September. 2010 http://iteslj.org/.

Hornby, A.S.1995. Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London:Longman.

Maureen: http://www.achieveyourdreamcoaching.com. Accessed 12th March, 2010

Mahdalena. 2010. Improving listening through Movie. Unpublished Thesis: State University of Malang.

Pollard, Lucy. 2008. Teaching English: Oxford Cambridge University Press

Sukayati. 2008. Penyusunan Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta. .Erlangga

Subyantoro (2009:8). Subyantoro. 2009. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Semarang: Universitas Diponogoro.

Swarbric, Ann, 1994. Teaching Modern Language, London: Routledge.

Saricoban (http://iteslj.org/listening), Accessed 12th March, 2010.

Scarcella, R.C. 1998. Language Learning: London: Heinle

50

Valette, M. Rebecca. 1989. Modern Language Testing. New York: Harcout Brace Javanovich, Inc.

51

the implementation of minimal pair card game to improve students’ listening comprehension (a classroom action research at the second year students of Smp Negeri 2 Peusangan)

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINIMAL PAIR CARD GAME TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ LISTENING COMPREHENSION

(A Classroom Action Research at the Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 2 Peusangan)

Thesis

Submitted to the English Department of FKIP AlmuslimUniversity in the Fulfillment of Requirement

for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

By

NASRIAHNIM: 080202331

52

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATIONUNIVERSITY OF ALMUSLIM

MATANGGLUMPANGDUA, BIREUEN 2011

Allan, Paivio. 1981, Psychology of Language, Englewood Diff: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Allen Edward David & Rebecca M. Valette, 1977, Classroom Technique: ForeignLanguage and English as a Second Language, New York: Harcout BraceJavanovich, Inc.Arikunto, Suharsimi, 1998, Prosedur Penelitian,Bandung: Rineka Cipta.Ebel,R. Robert & David A. Frisbie, 1991, Essentials of EducationalMeasurement, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.Finocchiaro, Mary,1974, English as a Second Language from Theory to Practice,

53

New York: Regents Publishing Company.Gay, L.R, 1987, Educational Research Competence for Analysis and Application,London: Merrill Publishing Company.GBPP,1995, GBPP Muatan Lokal Sekolah Dasar Mata Pelajaran BahasaInggris, Semarang: Kanwil Depdikbud Jawa Tengah.Hadi, Sutrisno, 1980, Metodologi Research, Yogjakarta: Yayasan PenerbitanFakultas Psikologi UGM.Hornby, A.S., 1984, Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.Kelly, G.Kelly, 1976, Centuries of Language Teaching, Newbury House,Massachusetts, USA.Krashen. D., Stephen, 1989, Language Acquisition and Second LanguageEducation, Pretice Hall International, New York.Larsen, Dianne & Freeman, 1986, Techniques and Principles in LanguageTeaching, Oxford University Press, London.Little, David, 1994, Language Awareness and the Autonomous of LanguageLearner, Language Awareness Magazine, vol 6.4344Littlewood, T.William, 1989, Foreign and Second Language Learning,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Madsen S, Harold, 1983, Techniques in Testing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Miles B, Matthew & Michael Huberman, 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis, NewYork: Sage Publication Inc.Nagaraj, Geeta, 1996, English Language Teaching Approaches and MethodsTechniques, Calcutta: Sangam Book L.td.Ramelan 1992, Intro to Linguistics, Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press.Richards C, Jack & Theodore S Rodgers, 1995, Approaches and Methods inLanguage Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Richards C, Jack, 1976, The Sociolinguistics of Learning and Using Non NativeLanguage, Rowley: Newbury House.Saleh, Mursid, 2001, Penelitian Pengajaran Bahasa, Semarang:IKIP SemarangPress.Scott A, Wendy & Lisbeth H. Ytreberg, 1990, Teaching English to Children,London: Longman.Tinambunan, W., 1988, Evaluation of Students’ Acvhievement, Jakarta:Depdikbud.Tuckman, Bruce W., 1978, Conducting Educational Research, New York:Harcout Brace Jovanovich,Inc.Underwood, Marry, 1987, Effective Class Management, London: Longman.Valette M., Rebecca, 1989, Modern Language Testing, New York: Harcout BraceJavanovich, Inc.Van de Walt, Christa, 1997, English as a Language Learning in South Africa,Language Education Magazine Volume 6.Wood, Peter & Bob Jefrey, 1996, Teachable Moments, Great Britain: St

Edmunbury Press, L.td.

54

55