Skripsi Iin Oktaviani

THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’
SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF

SMK NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG IN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2022/2023
UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
(Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Attainment of Bachelor’s Degree of English Education)
By:
IIN OKTAVIANI
NPM 181220033
SEKOLAH TINGGI KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

PERSATUAN GURU REPUBLIK INDONSIA
(STKIP PGRI) BANDAR LAMPUNG
2022
ABSTRACT
THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’

SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF
SMK NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG IN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2022/2023
By
IIN OKTAVIANI
The objectives of this research were to know the influence of Fishbowl Strategy
towards students’ speaking ability and to find whether the class which was taught
by using Fishbowl Strategy higher than the class which was taught by using
Conventional Strategy. In this research the researcher used experimental method
with pre-test and post-test control group design. The samples were 60 students in
2 classes. The sample was taken by using Cluster Random Sampling Technique.
The researcher conducted the research in 2 classes namely experimental and
control class The main technique in measuring students’ speaking ability was
speaking test. In collecting the data of research, the researcher used pre-test and
post-test. The result of validity and reliability showed that most of students
understood the instruction of the speaking test given.
In calculating the data analysis, the researcher used SPSS version 25.0 by using
Paired Sample t-test formula. Based on the data analysis, the researcher got the
result that H a was accepted. The result of normality was 0.102 > sig 0.05. It
means the data have normal distribution. Then, the result of homogeneity was
0.105 > α = 0.05. It means the data were homogeneous. For hypothetical test, it
was obtained that sig. (2-tailed) of the equal variance assumed in the paired
sample test where the sig. (2-tailed) was 0.023. It was lower than α = 0.05. (0.023
< 0.05). So, H a was accepted. It meant that there was significant influence of
Fishbowl Strategy towards students’ speaking ability at the eleventh grade of
SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023. Meanwhile, the average score of
experimental class higher than control class. (69.60 > 64.53). Based on the result
of the research, it is clear that Fishbowl Strategy can be used to influence the
students’ speaking ability.
Keywords: Fishbowl Strategy, Speaking Ability

LIST OF APPENDICES
1. Approval Letter of the Paper Title................................................................54

2. Seminar Approval Letter of the Research Proposal......................................55
3. Improvement Letter of Paper........................................................................56
4. Letter of the Paper Guidance Committee......................................................57
5. Letter of the Permission of STKIP PGRI Bandar Lampung.........................58
6. Admission of the Research............................................................................59
7. Card of Student Consultation........................................................................60
8. Letter of Paper Guidance Recommendation.................................................65
9. Syllabus and Lesson Plan..............................................................................66
10. Instrument.....................................................................................................68
11. Result of All Score in Experimental and Control Class................................69
12. Pre-test Experimental Class..........................................................................70
13. Pre-test Control Class....................................................................................71
14. Post-test Experimental Class.........................................................................72
15. Post-test Control Class..................................................................................73
16. Normality Test..............................................................................................74
17. Homogeneity Test.........................................................................................75
18. Paired Sample t-test.......................................................................................76
19. Paired Sample experimental class.................................................................77
20. Paired Sample Control Class.........................................................................78
21. Research Documentation..............................................................................79
LIST OF TABLES
1. The Population of Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung...............28

2. The Rubric Score of Speaking......................................................................32
DECLARATION
I hereby certify that this paper was completed by my own work with the title “The
Influence of Fishbowl Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh
Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2022/2023” I took some
sources and they were properly acknowledged in the texts. I did not copy or quote
with the way that was against the other that occured in scientific society. By this
declaration, I am ready to accept any judgement if found there is scientific ethnic
contrary in this paper or there is a claim from other sides towards the original work.
Bandar Lampung, September 2022
Declared by,
IIN OKTAVIANI
PREFACE
Alhamdulillahhirobbil’alamin. Asshalatu wassalamu’ ala Muhammad wa’ala alihi

wasohbihi ajma’in. All praise to Allah SWT the Most Merciful and the Most Grateful
for giving me health to finish this paper. Eventually, the researcher was able to finish
this paper as the requirement in accomplishing the S-1 Degree of English Department
of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
The objectives of teaching and learning as foreign language is that the students should
be able to use English in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The researcher
believes that teaching English in Senior High School level has a good purpose in our
country in which those skills are important to support students’ knowledge of
English.
Speaking is one of the skills in learning English which needs suitable teaching
strategy and has to be step by step in presenting it and it should be followed by some
ways to make the students interested and to make teaching learning process enjoyable
as well. That was why the researcher applied Fishbowl Strategy as one of some
effective strategy to develop students’ speaking skill. Therefore, the researcher did a
research entitled : “The Influence of Fishbowl Strategy towards Students’ Speaking
Ability at the Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year
2022/2023”.
The researcher would like to express her gratitude to :
1. Dr. Wayan Satria Jaya M.Si, as the Head of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
2. Dr. Akhmad Sutiyono, M.Pd, as the Head of Language and Art Department of
STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
3. Dr. Andri Wicaksono, M.Pd., as the Chief of Research Institution of STKIP
PGRI Bandar Lampung.
4. Eva Nurchurifiani, M.Pd., as the First Advisor who always gives his
suggestion and guidance to the researcher in finishing this paper.
5. Tommy Hastomo, M.Pd., as the Second Advisor who always guides the
researcher in finishing this paper.
6. Drs. Firdaus., M.M., as the Headmaster of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung and all
the Teachers and Staffs who have given a chance and guidance in collecting
the data for this paper.
7. Susanti Octiani, S.Pd, as the English teacher of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung
who has accompanied me to finish my research.
8. All the Lecturers and Staffs of STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung for all their
available knowlegde given to the researcher during she studied S-1 Degree at
STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung.
9. All the students of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, especially for the eleventh
grade.
10. My friends, Hany Nuraini, Licencia Poetica, Winda Ayu and all of my
classmates.
Finally, the researcher thanks to those who have contributed their ideas to the writing
of this paper, and the she would appreciate any constructive criticism and suggestion
concerning the improvement of this paper.
Bandar Lampung, September 2022
Declared by,
IIN OKTAVIANI
CURRICULUM VITAE
The name of the researcher is Iin Oktaviani. Her nick name is Iin. She was born in
Bandar Lampung, on October, 9th, 1995. She is the first child of the three children of
the couple named Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih. She is a Muslim.
The researcher began her study at SDN 1 Hajimena, graduated in 2009. After that,
she continued her study to SMPN 3 Natar Lampung Selatan, graduated in 2012. After
that, she continued her study to SMAN 1 Natar Lampung Selatan, graduated in 2014.
In 2018, she entered and continued his study to English Department of STKIP PGRI
Bandar Lampung.
DEDICATION
This paper is dedicated to :
1. My beloved parents, Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih.
2. My beloved brothers, Abdan Sakuro and Atma Aditya S.
3. My beloved big family.
4. My almamater.
MOTTO
“I would Rather be Optimistic and Wrong rather than Pessimistic and

Right”
(Elon Musk)
LIST OF CONTENTS
COVER ........................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT..................................................................................................... ii
DECLARATION............................................................................................ iii
DEDICATION................................................................................................ iv
MOTTO........................................................................................................... v
CURRICULUM VITAE................................................................................ vi
PREFACE....................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF CONTENT...................................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................... ix
LIST OF APPENDICES................................................................................ x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Problem..................................................................... 1
B. The Identification of Problem.................................................................. 4
C. The Limitation of Problem........................................................................ 4
D. The formulation of Problem...................................................................... 4
E. The Objectives and The Uses of Research................................................ 4
F. The Uses of The Research........................................................................ 4
G. The Scopes of Research............................................................................ 5
1. The Subject of the research.............................................................. 5
2. The Object of The Research............................................................. 5
H. The Time of The Research........................................................................ 5
I. The Place of The Research........................................................................ 5
CHAPTER II FRAME OF THEORIES, THINKING AND HYPOTHESIS

A. The Frame of Theories........................................................................... 6
B. Speaking................................................................................................. 6
C. Purpose of Speaking............................................................................... 8
D. Problems in Speaking Performance........................................................ 8
E. Elements of Speaking........................................................................... 10
F. Teaching Speaking............................................................................... 12
G. Principles of Teaching Speaking.......................................................... 13
H. The Role of Teacher Teaching Speaking............................................. 15
I. Definition of Fishbowl......................................................................... 16
J. The Advantages and Disadvantages..................................................... 17
K. Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Fishbowl Technique........ 18
L. Related Research Study.........................................................................20
M. Frame of Thinking.................................................................................21
N. The Hypothesis............................................................................................ 22
CHAPTER III THE METHOD OF RESEARCH

A. Method of the Research.........................................................................23
B. Population, Sample and Sampling Technique.......................................23
1. Population........................................................................................23
2. Sample ............................................................................................24
ii
3. Sampling Technique........................................................................24
C. Variable of the Research.......................................................................25
D. Operational Definition of Variable........................................................25
E. Technique and Data Collection Instrument ..........................................25
1. Data Collecting Technique..............................................................25
2. Data Collection Instrument..............................................................26
F. Validity of the Test ...............................................................................27
G. Data Analyzing Technique....................................................................28
1. Normality of the test........................................................................28
2. Homogeneity Test of Variance........................................................29
3. Hypothesis Test...............................................................................29
4. Equality Test of Two Average........................................................30
5. Different Test of Two Average.......................................................30
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
A. Report of Research................................................................................38
1. Data Pretest Experimental and Control Class.................................38
2. Data Posttest Experimental and Control Class................................39
3. Data Normality Test........................................................................40
4. Data Homogeneity Test...................................................................41
5. Data Hypothesis Test.......................................................................42
a. First Hypothesis.........................................................................42
b. Second Hypothesis....................................................................43
B. Discussion..............................................................................................44
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion.............................................................................................46
B. Suggestion............................................................................................46
1. For English Teacher........................................................................46
2. For Students.....................................................................................46
3. For School.......................................................................................47
4. For Further Research.......................................................................47
REFERENCES
iii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Problem

English has become essential part of International communication
throughout the world. Communication is one of the most significant aspects
for a personal survivor. Communication helps students to deal with numerous
real life problem and issues. Language and communication are two distict
aspects that involve each other while skill occuring independently. It means
that language plays a vital role. In the process of communication, people use a
particular language to interact by others.
In English, there are four basic skills of English (listening, reading, writing
and speaking); all those are including some component such as vocabulary,
grammar, pronunciation, spelling etc. The one about speaking was assumed
that the ability to speak fluently followed naturally from some aspects of the
teaching of grammar, vocabulary and also pronunciation.
Nowadays, speaking is much more complex than this and it involves both
a command of certain skills and several different types of knowledge. It means
that the important things to accomplish objective of communication as being
taught through grammar and vocabulary is to produce high quality
understanding of communication in which each of the communicating agents
understands each other and be understood by others.
All of skills in English are equality important to be learnt, these skills
should be learned and mastered equal degrees it means that the student should
not learn and mastere a skill only and ignore the other skills. One of objective
of learning a language is to use the language in communication so one form of
communication is the any interactive between speaker and listener. The
interaction is facilitated by the communication function of language.
Speaking is a productive oral skill that consists of producing systematic
verbal utterance to make ideas, feelings, etc. known to somebody. It means
that speaking skill is the one important thing that should be mastered by
2
students, because speaking is the productive skill that can highly influences in
communication. Speaking is the ability to work collaboratively in speech turn
management as interactive and needs. Therefore that speaking is needs, in a
way that cannot be avoided in certain situation to be able to communicate.
The speaker delivers ideas or opinion about a topic to the listener, which
the listener understand and respond to. It means to create sounds using many
parts of body; that involves the lungs, vocal chords, tongue, teeth and lips. An
understanding of the nature of speaking has undergone considerable in recent
years. It means that speaking is difficult enough to be mastered, almost of
student find difficulties to speak because they rare to practice maybe by
practicing the language is the one ways to improve the students’ speaking
ability.
There are some factors that make students feel difficult to speak English
such as: they are lack of motivation, shyness, anxiety, lack of confidence, and
fear or mistake. Speaking is the utterance of intelligible speech. To make the
students understand about English text but they have limited skill to be able to
communicate fluently. Some factors such as unlikely to reading, writing, and
listening activities because students worried about making mistakenness,
fearful of critism or shame of the attention that speech attracts.
Some of students have difficulties in learning speaking are influenced by
their limited of vocabulary used, grammar and do not understand how to
pronounce words correctly and almost all of students are lazy to do their
assignment given by the teacher, when they to learn a language in classroom,
nervous or embarrassed about speaking to other people and when the teacher
asks the students to describe something based on material, they are not
confident about their ability so it makes them confuse to speak English in the
class. In this case teacher should be more attention for the English material
method that was could be taught for students.
In the preliminary research at SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, the researcher
did an interview with the teacher of student eleventh grade of vocational high
school 8 Bandar Lampung on November 24 th 2021. She stated that there are
3
three problems in speaking faced by students the first one she said that in
general for students of vocational School their lack of spirit for explore the
lessons that their non-vocational lessons of course. Therefore, in speaking
English still so far in able to speech. In general their only knowing a common
sentence such as good morning and introducing you, etc. The second one , she
said that students are having very low English ability and the last one they
have limited vocabulary therefore their often stammered (Mrs Desti, English
Teacher of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung, Interview November 24th 2021).
To overcome this problem, all teachers must find suitable method to ease
the learning process, especially in speaking ability. By applying fishbowl
technique, it can increase motivation, enhance research skills and develop
communication proficiency. Besides, the group discussion exposes the class to
a focused. In depth multiple-perspective analysis. Fishbowl technique had
great contribution in speaking field. It can activate students’ speaking class
and also improve their accomplish speaking ability.
The fishbowl technique is one of the techniques that can solve this
problem. The fishbowl technique has become a learning strategy that involves
many students in a small group with varying skill levels. Any student or
member of the task group should work together to complete the task and
encourage each other in understand the topic that the teacher has assigned.
Fishbowl technique has the added dimension of requiring students to assume a
position opposite to their own, Encourage students to challenge their existing
assumptions. This can move students beyond simple dualistic thinking, deepen
their understanding of an issue and helps students to recognize the range of
perspective inherent in complex topics. In this case, fishbowl may also build
appreciation for diversity and develop for other viewpoints.
Regarding the explanation above, the researcher interested to apply
fishbowl technique. The researcher wanted to determine the influence of
fishbowl strategy in increasing the ability of students to speak. In this study,
the researcher carried out research entitled “The Influence of Fishbowl
4
Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh Grade of

SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2021/2022”.
B. The Identification of Problem

Based on the previous background, some problems can be defined by
following:
a. The students need to improve their speaking ability.
b. The students need to improve their vocabulary.
c. The students need to improve their spirit of learning.
C. The Limitation of Problem

From the identification of the problems above, the researcher only
focused and limits the problem on applying a rubric taken from the rating
scale for five criteria of speaking ability elements and the process of the
research assessment by only the researcher itself.
D. The Formulation of Problem

The researcher formulated the problem as follows:
a. Is there any influence of fishbowl technique towards students’ speaking
ability?
b. Is the average score of students’ speaking ability who learn through
fishbowl technique is higher than who learn speaking through
conventional technique?
E. The Objectives of Research

In this research the researcher concluded about the objective of research
as follows:
1. To know and describe Influence the students’ speaking ability through
fishbowl technique.
2. To know and describe whether the average score of students’ speaking
ability which is taught throughout Fishbowl Technique.
5
F. The Uses of The Research

The uses of this research as follows:
1. To give information for English teacher about influence students’ speaking
ability through fishbowl strategy.
2. To motivate the students in learning English
3. To give information for further research with certain interest.
G. The Place of The Research

This research was conducted at SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
It is located on Jl. Imam Bonjol No.52 Kemiling, Bandar Lampung.
CHAPTER II
FRAME OF THEORIES, THINKING AND HYPOTHESIS
A. The Frame of Theories

The researcher. explains about concept of speaking, teaching speaking, the
role of teacher in teaching speaking, purpose of teaching speaking, principle of
teaching speaking, Elements of teaching speaking, Problem in teaching
speaking, Concept of fishbowl, the procedure of teaching speaking by using
fishbowl, the advantages and disadvantages of fishbowl.
B. Speaking
In English the most important thing in form communication is speaking.
The single most important aspect of learning a language is mastering the art of
speaking and success as measured in terms of the skill to carry out
conversation in the language. Hussain stated that having a good quality
pronunciation and fluency in speaking skill is the hallmark of the way of life
or culture where, pronunciation is the way in which a language or particular
word or sound is pronounced and the quality of being able to speak or write a
language, especially a foreign language, easily and well. Therefore, it is the
duty of the teacher or lecturer to achieve this aim approximately as an
Englishman does (Hussain, 2017). Speaking is an interactive interpersonal
process which does not lend itself easily to the requirements of test designers
so it means in a speaking process to create communication it needs at least two
people, as a listeners and as a speakers where one of speakers is to give
information and another one as a listener who receives information.
Burns explains that the teaching and learning of speaking are a vital part of
any language education in the classroom, not only does the spoken language
offer “affordances” for learning as the main communicative medium of the
classroom, but it is also an important component of syllabus content and
learning outcomes (Burns, 2019). It means that to develop the students’
speaking ability the teachers could give the situations and opportunity for the
7
students to use English in the classroom as much as possible without being

ashamed or afraid of communicating with other students to tell their ideas,
experience or feelings. The teachers can create a new method, strategy, and
technique to understand them. As these factors challenged them, they tend to
be quiet when they invite the students to engage in English in the classroom.
Students are less motivated to speak English.
Speaking is an interactive interpersonal process which does not lend itself
easily to the requirements of test designers (Rebecca, 2002: 73). It means that
speaking is a process to create communication it needs at least two people.
One speaker is to give information and another one as a listener who receives
information and give feedback in interaction process.
Speaking skill is a part of productive skills. Learners need to generate
language to communicate their ideas either in speech or text. In the point of
view of Sreena and some experts explains that speaking skill is apparent in
society in various styles such as formal, informal, normal, strong, etc. These
styles are situation based and for speakers to strike the rights thought (Sreena
& Ilankumaran, 2018). It means that in speaking have a various styles that
based on situation from speaker’s thought in order to create a straightforward
process in communication. Speaking is the ability to express and convey the
ideas, thought and feelings, means that through speaking be able transfer
person ideas to each other.
According to Thornbury stated that speaking is very much part of daily life
communication takes it for granted. In speaking involved speech production
takes place in real time and is therefore essentially linear. Words follow
words, and phrases follow phrase likewise, at the level of utterance. Speech is
produced utterance by utterance and in response to the word by word and
utterance by utterance productions of the person we are talking to (Thornbury,
2005). Based on the previous explanations above, the researcher concludes
that speaking is part of essential the way to communicate to other person. It
means that use to share their thought, ideas, information and feelings and also
8
speaking is person’s ability how to use language to convey meaning and to

gain information in our daily communication.
C. Purpose of Speaking
Speaking serves several purposes. This is involving a different set of skill.
Kurniasih explains that, the level production skill (speaking), the majority of
speaking activities used in the first levels should be designed to enable pupils
to participate with a minimal verbal response. However, in the last level, for
example eleventh grade, students are encouraged to begin to manipulate
language and express themselves in a much more personal way (Kurniasih,
2011).
It means that speaking must be plays and practice from fist level, for
example elementary school. Because of that speaking is very important thing
as vital form of communication in language field. Harmer stated that there are
three main reasons for encouraging students to talk in the classroom. One of
main reasons that speaking exercise enables students to practice speaking in
controlled circumstances in the classroom (Harmer, 2007).
According to Okar and some experts, stated that Language components
have been processed in the minds of students. The more they engage in
speaking practices, the more these elements become second nature to them
(Okar & Shahidy, 2019). It means that they will be able to speak fluently
without having to confuse about it. Speaking is one of the central elements of
communication in aim a learning language is to communicate well.
In summary, the purpose of speaking is to inform ideas, to gain
information from speaker to listener. On the other hand the purpose of
speaking is not only to providing information from people but the purpose of
speaking it means speaking activities should to convey something to others by
the objectives the speaker expected.
9
D. Problems in Speaking Performance

Speaking within the target language is not simple for many foreign
language learners, since more than comprehension; learning to speak a foreign
language requires grammatical and semantic rules. Language learners often
encounter two kinds of difficulties in speaking (Linguistic and Non-linguistic).
a. Linguistics is the objective study of language structure grammar, words,
and phonology, among other things. Linguistics includes vocabulary,
grammar, and pronunciation. In addition linguistics concerns are those that
cause students’ speaking abilities to deteriorate. Some linguistic concerns,
such as a lack of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation that influence of
speaking (Spolsky & Hult, 2008). Those issues are lack of vocabulary
available for poor grammar to communicate and poorly in pronunciation
as well.
b. Non-linguistic problem
Non-linguistic problems originate from outside the language, but external
influences come from outside the language or language. In addition, non-
linguistic components, such as movements and body language or posture
and facial expression, can be used in combination with speech to convey
messages directly.
According to Heriansyah which cited Ibrahim Stated that, many non-
linguistic problem related to issues, including not being confident to speak,
not being used to speak in class, fearful of making mistakes and being
mocked by classmates.
a) Not being confident to speak; when speaking in public, high self-
esteem is absolutely important, the high trust will help to master the
stage and the material that is going to convey.
b) Not being used to talk in classroom; often, students with a high ability
to speak can control the conversation in classroom situations rather
than students with a low ability to speak. Therefore, students with poor
speech capacity would not be used for classroom interaction.
10
c) Since EFL students are not native English speakers, they are most
likely to make mistakes while speaking English since they are fearful
of making mistakes, in reality, afraid is a feeling when we want to say
something when talking to someone, but instead, we keep it because
we are unsure whether it is right.
Students are afraid of being mocked; they are worried about speaking
English because they fear making intonation, pronunciation, and language
structure errors as the frequent errors in speaking. Think that their fellow
students would receive an unsatisfactory answer, such as teasing if they
make mistakes when talking (Heriansyah, 2012).
E. Elements of Speaking
To full fill its needs every skills has component. Speaking also has some
components to be known by the teacher and students in teaching and learning
speaking. According to (Maximillian, 2014) there are three components in
speaking.
1. The speakers
Speakers are a people who produce the sound. They are useful as
the tool to express opinion or feelings to the hearer. So if there are
no speakers, the opinion or the feelings or the feeling won’t be
stated.
2. The listeners
Listeners are people who receive or get the speaker’s opinion and
feeling. If there are no listeners, speakers will express their
opinion by writing.
3. The utterances
The utterances are words or sentences, which are produced by the
speakers to state the opinion. If there are no utterances, both of the
speakers and the listeners will use sign.
In speaking several components that language should be concerned by a
speaker. It is very important because this way to assess speaking score. In
11
point of view Harmer is learners need to talk English fluently, they have to
properly pronounce phonemes, use spare stress and intonation, and speak in
connected speech (Harmer, 2007). It means each student has to strive for some
speaking aspects that need to be accomplished such as pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. These parts will get
assessing of scholars’ speaking skills.
a. Pronunciation
In language learning activities, mastering pronunciation skills, for EFL
students is one of the most common and challenging aspects of teaching
and learning speaking. It happened because each of the learners has
different backgrounds. Moreover, the things that make pronunciation more
problematic are the teachers mostly focused on the students’ vocabularies
development and grammatical structures. Even though, teachers know that
the key to learning and teaching pronunciation to the students is to
differentiate the features of the sound and focus on helping the learners
understand and overcome the difficulties of pronouncing each of the words
accurately and systematically. Pronunciation has an important part in
conveying meaning because it is used to gain the idea through the sound
used in communication (M & Burns, 2012). Therefore the researcher
concludes that the pronunciation learning activities will help the learners
quickly understand the spoken ideas, thus the communication will go
smoothly and also students will get understand and know to reply.
b. Grammar
Grammar knowledge is significant for students in order for them to be
able to process and produce correct language usage. However, some do not
mind their grammar in their communication as long as the intended idea
can be conveyed. Even though of grammar knowledge is vital for learning
processes.
c. Vocabulary
Vocabulary is a set of frequently used words by a large number of
people and has linguistic meaning and also critical when it comes to
12
teaching and learning how to speak. When someone wants to convey a

message, they should be well-versed in the necessary vocabularies.
d. Fluency
In speaking, the activity has a goal to speak understandably and easily.
With more practice in speaking, students can get speak easily and rapidly.
People know fluency is the fast well on speaking, but it also focuses on
correcting the placement of doing stop and pause. According to (Brown,
2001) stated that fluency is the ability to communicate plainly, run
smoothly, and maintain contact while having insufficient communicative
skills to comprehend. It means that fluency and accuracy focuses on
articulation, phonology, and syntax right for understudies, while fluency is
the fundamental objective in language education. In general, the educator
will be pointed in mastering fluency and accuracy to arrive at a reason for
curriculum on understudies talking.
e. Comprehension
In point of view (Hughes, 2002) stated that somebody fathoms the
language when they understand everything in both formal and informal
discourse, not out of the ordinary of an informed local speaker. It means
that in communication context, the speech should be conveyed by speaker
and should be gotten well by listener. Therefore concluded that
comprehension is one of the important things in teaching speaking to get
the meaning when somebody takes the communication/ in the classroom,
the teacher can be looking for who was a misunderstanding about
comprehension in their lesson that had gotten before.
To sum up, that these five elements (pronunciation, grammar,
vocabulary, fluency, comprehension) are required for measuring oral
production.
F. Teaching Speaking
Teaching speaking is very necessary to be given to the students earlier. It
is capable give the effect of students’ communication skill, where the
13
student’s will be active to acquire the information around them by the

socialization (Andika, 2019). It means that teaching speaking as necessary tool
that must to teach early from kindergarten. The Aim capacity in speaking
makes the students more confident to speak in foreign language, in order to
share understanding with other people requires attention to precise details of
the language. The students and teachers should have good cooperation in order
to gain the ability speaking skill and also the students are encouraging to
speak up about what they want to say from their thought or ideas and feelings
even though it is out of the text. According to Harmer, stated that speaking
serves several purposes, each involving a different set of skills. There are three
main reasons for encouraging students to talk in the classroom. First, the
speaking’s exercise enable students to practice speaking in a controlled
environment such as the classroom. Second, students attempt to use some or
all of the languages they are familiar with. And third students have
opportunities to active the various elements of English they have stored in
their brains, the more automatic their use of these elements communicates
efficiency (Harmer, 2007). It means that learners should be able to make
themselves understood, using they current proficiency to the fullest. They
should try to avoid confusion in the message due to faulty pronunciation,
grammar, or vocabulary become.
Sreena and some experts explain that, Speaking skills need a wide attitude
and modern ideas and needs an expression as well. This is to make the speaker
confident to express what he/she communicates. Some speaking situations are
partially interactive especially when speech is given to a live audience (Sreena
& Ilankumaran, 2018). According to (Fulcher, 2003:23) Speaking is the
verbal use of language to communicate with others. In additional according
(Channey, 2006) speaking, is the process of building and sharing meaning
though the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols in variety contexts by
knowing several theories about speaking. Therefore, speaking is a tool for
communication and it emphasizes the speech and it can be learning process to
mastering a foreign language. In teaching speaking, there are many ways of
14
teaching of lecturer and teacher can use in the classroom. (Nunan, 2003) says,
that teaching speaking involved providing students with the components of the
language in hopes that they would eventually put them all together and speak.
In learning process, speaking’s learners as one of the important part in the
schools. When the students want to speak fluently English, they should know
how to speak by using English grammatical rule correctly and know how to
speak in order to get skill of language itself. Speaking skills is recognized as a
basic skill in mastering a foreign language, the students can study a foreign
language, they are must know how to speak in order to get the skill of
language. The goal of capability in speaking makes the students are more
confident to speak English correctly, in order to share the concept with other
people requires attention to piece details of the language. The students and the
teacher should have good contribution to get the ability in speaking. From the
explanation’ expert above, the researcher assumed that teaching speaking as a
foreign language especially English, the teacher must be able to achieve their
objectives teaching speaking in learning speaking. And the teacher must give
examination to measure their knowledge and what the students understand or
not and also as the teacher should make the students more confident to speak
and practice their language. In this case, the teacher and students should have
good cooperative to get speaking well.
G. Problem in Teaching Speaking

Teaching speaking needs to figure out about obstacles that may be occur in
the teaching and learning process. Several problems come from the internal of
students and others come from outside students. The factors to push the
students in English learning are to teach them from under the age of puberty.
Generally the child in under the age of puberty like an empty paper that must
you fill it with many word or language. So they can speak like a native
speaker. Sometimes, they can be extremely sensitive but motivation and
concern are high, and then the necessary effort will be expanded in pursuit of
goals. Teaching speaking does not only come from internal aspects of the
15
students but also influenced by external factors that the effectiveness in

teaching and learning process.
There are some factors discussions about several matter that come from
body of the students themselves, include the way they pronounce the word.
The problems are commonly become obstacles in teaching speaking. The
native language is the most influential factor affecting a learner’s speaking. If
we are familiar with the sound system of learner’s native language, teacher
will be better able to diagnose student difficulties it means teacher must be
mastering language knowledge for many aspects especially about
pronunciation. Have a good quality pronunciation also have a good speaking.
Many first language and second language carryovers can be overcome through
a focused awareness and effort on the learner’s part. Based on statement
above, the researcher assumes that mother language as first language of
students have a problem in teaching speaking because, affected to the second
language as a foreign language for learners. If the teacher cannot realized the
fact and decided a way to solve the condition moreover if the linguistic aspect
of the students’ native language have is really different with target language.
In the condition, linguistically, the difference of first language and second
language are the fundamental factors that determines success of a speaking
class.
As usually in speaking under the age of puberty children stand an excellent
opportunity of speaking like a native, if they have continued exposure in
authentic contexts. Beyond the age of puberty, while adults will almost surely
maintain a foreign accent, there is no particular advantage attributed to age. A
fifty-year-old can be as successful as an eighteen-year-old if all other factors
are equal. Learners are often described as children, young learners,
adolescents, young adults or adults, (Harmer, 2007).
Actually children are often innovative in language forms but still have a
great many inhibitions. They are extremely sensitive, especially to peers.
Moreover, their egoism is still being shaped, and therefore the slights of
communication can be negatively interpreted. Children are also focused on
16
what this new language can actually be used for here and now. They are less
to willing to put up with language that doesn’t hold immediate that is neither
authentic nor meaningful. Some learners are not particularly concerned about
their speaking, while others are. The extent to which learners’ intrinsic
motivation propels them toward improvement will be perhaps the strongest
influence of all six of the factors in this list. According to (Brown, 2001) says
that motivation and concern are high and then the necessary effort will be
expended in pursuit of goals. It means that the motivation of learning speaking
is very important to achieve goal.
The effectiveness of teaching speaking does not only come from internal
aspects of the students but also influenced by external factors. The teacher
should know the complete understanding of problem in teaching speaking.
The factor is an institutional context that puts English as second or foreign
language in a nation. The context in which the language is learnt is still
considerable relevance to the kind of English that a nation will want and need
to study, and the skills they will need to acquire. Language teaching in what
might broadly categorize as an EFL context is clearly a greater challenge for
students and teachers. Often, intrinsic motivation is a big issue, since students
may have difficulty in seeing the relevance of learning English (Brown, 2001).
Their immediate use of language may seen far from removed from their own
circumstances, and classroom hours may be the only part of the day when they
are exposed to English. Besides, the facilities of learning activities the teacher
competences may influence the success of teaching speaking.
H. Principles of Teaching Speaking

Principle is a law; a rule or a theory that has something is based on that has
to be followed or a basic generalization that is accepted as true and that can be
used as a basis for reasoning or conduct. Nunan, in his book explains about the
principles for teaching speaking, that there are five principles for teaching
speaking (Nunan, 2003).
Here are the explanations:
17
1. Be aware of the differences between second language and foreign

language learning contexts.
Speaking is learned two broad contexts; foreign language and second
language situation:
a. A foreign language (FL) context is one where target language not the
language communication in the society. Learning speaking skills is
very challenging to use the target language outside the classroom.
b. A second language (SL) context is one where the target language is the
language of communication in the society. Second language learner
includes refugees, international students and immigrants.
2. Give the students practice with both fluency and accuracy.
Accuracy is the extent to which students’ speech matches what people
actually say when they use the target language whereas fluency is the
extent to which speakers use the language quickly and confidently. With
few hesitations or unnatural pauses, false stars, word searches, etc. In
language lesson especially at the beginning and intermediate levels
learners must give opportunities to develop both their fluency and their
accuracy. They cannot develop fluency if the teacher is constantly
interrupting them to correct their oral errors. Teachers must provide
students with fluency building practice and realize that making mistakes is
a natural part of learning a new language.
3. Provide opportunities for students to talk by using group work or pair
work and limiting teacher talk.
Pair work and group work activities can be used to enhance the amount of
time that learners get to speak in the target language during lessons. One
further interesting is that when the teacher is removed from the
conversation, the learners take on diverse speaking roles that are normally
filled by the teacher.
4. Plan speaking tasks that involve negotiation for meaning.
Negotiating for meaning involves checking to see if you have understood
what someone has said, clarifying your understanding and confirming that
18
someone has understood your meaning. By asking for clarification,

repetition, of explanation during conversations, learners get the people
they are speaking with to address them with language at a level they can
learn and understand.
5. Designing classroom that involves guidance and practice in both
transactional and interactional speaking.
Speaking activities inside the classroom need to embody both interactional
and transactional purpose, since language learner will have to speak the
target language in both transactional and interactional settings.
I. The Role of Teacher Teaching Speaking

Pakula stated that teachers might not want to use precious class time for
oral production but instead teach to the test and prioritize. grammar, written or
reading skill (Pakula, 2019). Teaching speaking is a very important part of
second language learning. The ability to communicate in a second language
clearly and efficiently contributes to the success of the students (Kayi, 2006).
It means that teaching speaking is essential part where language teachers must
be pay great attention to teaching speaking.
In the classroom activity teacher expected to teach effectively and guide
students and to keep order in the classroom. However, the most critical crucial
role teachers are expected to play is providing a high quality of encouraging
using their energy, knowledge along with motivation. In teaching and learning
process, the teacher has a rather important role in creating the sciences that are
taught to be accepted by existing students.
The roles teachers play in the class field are mostly of an educator,
facilitator, counselors, motivators, innovator, elevators, etc. As a good teacher
is the one who assesses their students speaking skill by means of both
observation and quizzes or exams designed to evaluate oral proficiency of the
learners.
Organizer is one of the most important roles of teachers during speaking
activities; this is more than just explaining or doing some oral exercise.
19
Teacher should know what kind of activity to use at first or to do after that,
therefore this role includes different aspects of teaching context.
J. Definition of Fishbowl
Fishbowl technique is one of collaboration teaching technique. It is an
active activity, where the student’s will be guided to make a circle which
content of inner and outer group. Thoose types of group discussion that can be
utilized where there are separated into two groups inner and outer.
Every group has an opportunity to discuss the subject and the other groups
observe and listen and take notes. In the other hand the students need some
support to change their thought and place the English language as important to
practice; therefore it is still relatively easy for students to express their ideas
orally in English. One of the ways to change their thought it as it mentions
before, the teacher recommended to use another technique for example
fishbowl technique.
One group watches and another group in this action, the first group
divided into two groups, one of which forms a circle and discusses a topic.
The inner group is surrounded by the second group divide which forms a
circle. All students can imagine their ideas to give arguments and opinion
based on the teacher’s topic.
According to Brozo which cited by Yabarmase stated that the fishbowl
technique is a learning technique that can help students conduct oral debates in
small groups in classroom. Each group chooses a group member and prepares
ideas (Yabarmase, 2013). Meanwhile, according to Silberman which Mulki
stated that the fishbowl technique can emphasize active, cautious, agile,
encourages, responsive in learning and improved acknowledgment in their
learning (Rahma, 2015).
Wulandari stated that, the fishbowl technique could be an efficacious
teaching method such as a grouping process that can impact students’
speaking skill in classroom activity (Wulandari, 2015). It means that the
fishbowl technique is very useful for teaching learning process.
20
Based on explanation from previous study the researcher concludes that

fishbowl is a group that separated into two groups. The inner circle was
intended for “fish” whereas, the outer circle was intended for “bowl”.
Therefore, this is a group discussion in order to increase student’s speaking
ability where in the inner circle their have discussion and actively to
communicate their ideas, opinion or arguments. They have debates and then in
the outer circle, students only listening, pay attention to the inner circle and
take notes.
K. The Advantages and Disadvantages

In field educating and learning English speaking affluence, it is significant
for the teacher to make engaging activity just as bolstered to use many kinds
of showing media, approach, strategy, or procedures. Applying some methods
in educating and learning processes hopes to help students be more confident
and fearless in studying English. In the other hand, by using fishbowl
technique, students can offer their conclusion, thought, ideas, opinion,
argument etc. according to wood which cited by (Effendi, 2017) stated that
Fishbowl has three intended are following:
a. It can be a useful teaching method for explaining group dynamics.
b. For involving students or another group in a cross-cultural or complicated
issue discussion.
c. Give students more freedom in class discussion.
Therefore, the researcher concluded that the fishbowl activity has many
benefits both for teacher and student for example fishbowl can give students
more freedom in class discussion. Students no more felt fear, unconfident,
shy. Etc. Through this technique it capable to solve problems faced by
students and teachers.
Fishbowl technique has some disadvantages as well from in a point of
view (Taylor, 2007) are following:
a. There may be conflicts between students.
b. May provide false information.
21
c. Some students may have difficulty expressing themselves, and

d. The focus of the subject may change.
L. Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Fishbowl Technique

There are several steps to using fishbowl technique in the classroom
activity. According to (Brozo & L Michele, 2007) by following:
a. Determining a focal point for classroom events. The subject is linked to
the students’ ability to keep their motivation and consideration alive.
b. Inviting students to turn to a neighbor and discuss their feelings about the
topic. Inform the students that they must take notes on their tasks.
c. Explain the arrangements and desires of the fishbowl activities. It almost
clearly indicates the rules of fishbowl activities and the goal to be
achieved.
d. Getting the activities begun by telling the students sitting in a cluster to
conversation about their thoughts, ideas, and opinion when speak with a
partner.
e. When engaging in a small group game, instructing the other students to
pay close attention to their peers and requiring notes.
f. Inquire of the other students for a response after the small group has
finished. It is an excellent opportunity to illustrate relevant feedback and
questions.
g. Making a few varieties of fishbowl activities to create it more interesting
for the students.
Diagram 1 Conceptual Framework
The Students of SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung
Teaching Speaking
Interactional Speaking Skill

22
Pronunciation Vocabulary Grammar Fluency
FISHBOWL TECHNIQUE
TEACHER PROCESS LEARNERS
1. The teacher explained about the materials and the rules of

Fishbowl Technique.
2. The teacher give the topic to the students.
3. Then, the students begin to discuss about the topic.
Students’ Speaking Ability
M. Related Research Study

The researcher took two related previous researchers in this section. The
first research was written by (Andika, 2019). The research was entitled The
Effect of Fishbowl technique and Students’ Interest toward the Eight Grade
Students’ Speaking Ability of SMP Xaverius 1 Palembang. This was
experimental research which used factorial design that was aimed to see the
effect of fishbowl technique and students’ interest on the eighth grade at SMP
Xaverius Palembang. The sample was 30 students taken as sample
experimental group and 30 students were as control group. The research had
two variables; they are independent variable and dependent variable. The
independent variable was about fishbowl technique. The dependent variable
was students’ interest. It was found that the use of fishbowl was mostly
effective used in teaching speaking both high and low interest.
23
Second, a researcher conducted by (Anakotta et al., 2020). The research

was entitled Fishbowl Technique towards the Students’ Speaking Skill. This is
quasi experimental research which was aimed to investigate whether or not
fishbowl technique can improve students’ speaking skill at the tenth grade of
IPS 1 SMAN 2 Sorong Regency. The sample was 30 students which was 1
class as the sample and it consisted of 30 students which one for one group pre
–test and post-test. The research had two variables; they are independent
variable and dependent variable. The independent variable was about fishbowl
technique. The dependent variable was speaking ability. It was found that the
score is 2.045 with the significance level of 0.05 with df 29. P-value is 0.005 <
0.05, it is know that t-value > (3.048 > 2.045 ). Meanwhile, the alternative
(HI) is accepted and null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected. It means that Fishbowl
technique can improve students speaking skill at the tenth of SMAN 2 Sorong
Regency.
Based on the related research study above, the researchers have similarities
with the researcher’s research, but they also have some differences. The
differences and similarities of those two related researchers with the
researcher’s research can be explained below:
The differences and similarities of the related research
1. Title & year : The Effect of Fishbowl technique and Students’ Interest
toward the Eight Grade Students’ Speaking Ability of
SMP
Xaverius 1 Palembang, 2019.
Writer/Source : Andika / from English Community Journal, Accessed
from google scholar.
Contribution
for
The researcher : The research gave a contribution about the
implementation or how Fishbowl technique affected the
improvement of learning English in Speaking skill.
24
The differences : The differences in the researcher’s research and

Andika’s
Research are the method, variable (Y), sample and setting
of the research. Andika’s research used experimental
research and the method was quantitative method. The
variable (Y) was student’s interest. The sample consisted of
30 students on the eighth grade at SMP 1 Xaverius
Palembang in 2018. The sample was only from one class.
Meanwhile, the researcher’s research uses quasi-
experimental research and the method is quantitative
method and the variable (Y) of writer’s research is student’
speaking ability. The sample of the researcher’s research is
420 students on the eleventh grade at SMK N 8 Bandar
Lampung in academic 2021/2022. The samples of the
researcher’s research are from two classes.
The similarities : The similarities in the researcher’s research and Andika
is title and research method, almost have similar. The
researcher’s title is use fishbowl strategy and Andika’s
title is fishbowl technique and students’ interest in
speaking ability. Meanwhile the research method is use
experimental research. The variable (X) is fishbowl
technique.
2. Title & year : Fishbowl Technique towards the Students’ Speaking
Skill, 2020.
Writer/source : Raisa Anakotta et al / from Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa,
Accessed from google scholar.
Contribution
For the
Writer : The research gave a contribution about fishbowl
technique affected the improvement of students’ speaking
ability.
25
The differences : The differences in the researcher’s research and Anakotta

et
al’s research are sample and setting of the research. The
sample consisted of 217 students were divided into seven
class in academic year 2019/2020. 1 class as the sample and
it consisted 30 students. Meanwhile, the sample of the
researcher’s research is 420 students on the eleventh grade
at SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung in academic 2021/2022. The
samples of the researcher’s research are from two classes.
The similarities : The similarities in the researcher’s research and Anakotta
et
al’s research are variable x and y, research method and
also title. Variable x and y is fishbowl and speaking ability.
The researcher’s title is use fishbowl strategy and Anakotta
et al’s title is fishbowl technique towards students’
speaking skill. Meanwhile the method of Anakotta et al’s
research is quasi experimental research.
N. Frame of Thinking
From the previous theory and explanation above, the researcher assumes
that speaking is part of essential the way to communicate to other person. It
means that use to share their thought, ideas, information and feelings and also
speaking is person’s ability how to use language to convey meaning or
message and to gain information in our daily communication. In teaching and
learning process especially in speaking skill, the teacher should be pay great
attention to teaching speaking effectively. Based on the crucial role of teacher
that expected to providing a high quality of encouraging to the student’
motivation by use teacher’s energy, knowledge, motivation and includes
others role of teachers. The teacher should make the students feel comfortably
afford the lesson. In the other hand, teacher should know the condition and
atmosphere in classroom. Therefore teacher should know about teaching
26
strategy or technique precisely. Fishbowl technique of course, one of teaching

technique that can helps students to encouraging their speaking ability,
Because fishbowl can make students are more comfortably than others
speaking in a public forum, ask for volunteers, etc. Fishbowl technique is a
group discussion that separated into two groups, there are the inner circle and
the outer circle and each circle have important role, where student that sit at
the inner circle students have debates and actively whereas the outer circle
students pay attention, listen and take notes. So students are more confident
and fearless to straightforward their arguments. By using fishbowl technique,
it can improve student’s speaking ability and useful for teacher as well, when
teacher want to make sure all students participate in a discussion class,
fishbowl is effective way to make group discussion even kinds of discussion
controversial or difficult topics. from previous explanation above by some
experts the researcher assumes that fishbowl technique is very useful
especially in teaching speaking, however fishbowl have many disadvantages
but fishbowl can enhance the students’ interest in learning speaking which can
give effects on their speaking in some aspects (fluency, pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary and comprehension).
O. The Hypothesis
Based on the theories and explanation above, the researcher made the
hypothesis as follows:
1. There is a significant influence of Fishbowl strategy towards students’
in speaking ability.
2. The average score of students speaking ability is taught through
Fishbowl technique is higher than which is taught through
conventional technique.
CHAPTER III
THE METHOD OF RESEARCH
A. Method of the Research

In conduct the research, the researcher used quasi experimental design. A
quantitative method was implemented with an experimental research design.
The quantitative method is only concerned with determining how the situation
in the field is and reporting what occurred experimental research is
comfortable and unpretentious, attempt anything occurs (Wallen, 2009). The
quasi- experimental design is commonly used by teachers and lectures in
education field. It involves selecting groups, upon which a variable is tested
without any random pre-selection processes. Quasi-experimental research
design attempt to determine causal relationship by applying a treatment or
condition to one group and comparing the outcome with a control group. It
uses a broader array of data collection techniques and statistical analysis. In
this case, the researcher used two classes in this research which were choose
randomly, First, the experimental class in which researcher used fishbowl
technique in teaching speaking. Second, the control class in which the
researcher used conventional technique in teaching speaking. The fishbowl
technique was used as an independent variable in this research and the
dependent variable was students’ speaking skills. For the explanation above
the researcher assumed that through this method the researcher made
compared between the experimental class and control class. The researcher
goal was to see whether the fishbowl technique substantially impacted
B. Population, Sample and Sampling Technique

1. Population
Population is group of elements (persons or objects) that possess some
common characteristic defined by the sampling criteria established by the
researcher; the data can be gathered and analyzed. The population of the
28
research eleventh grade students of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung is

shown in the table below:
Table 1
The Population of the Eleventh Grade at SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in
Academic Year 2022/2023
No SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung Male Female Total
1 Kimia Analisis 12 22 34
2 Teknik Kimia Industri 18 10 28
3 Pengembangan Perangkat Lunak & GIM 1 31 7 38
4 Pengembangan Perangkat Lunak & GIM 2 31 7 38
5 Desain Komunikasi Visual 1 28 7 35
8 Akutansi & Keuangan Lembaga 1 8 29 37
11 Manajemen Perkantoran & Layanan Bisnis 1 1 36 37
12 Manajemen Perkantoran & Layanan Bisnis 2 1 37 38
13 Busana 0 36 36
14 Kecantikan & SPA 0 38 38
TOTAL 195 305 500
2. Sample of Research
According to (Bacon, 2015:34), sample is the respondents selected
from population for study. In this research, the researcher took two
classes as the sample of the research. The first is used as an
experimental class in which the researcher applied fishbowl in teaching
speaking and the second is control class in which the researcher used
conventional technique in teaching speaking.
3. Sampling Technique
There are four types of probability sampling namely: simple
random sampling, systematic sampling, stratified sampling, and cluster
sampling. In this research the researcher used random sampling as a
technique to take the research sample. (Margono, 2004: 126) states that
simple random technique is a subset has an equal probability of being
chosen. A random sampling us meant to be an unbiased representation
of a group. Meanwhile (McMilan, 2001:173) states that in random
29
sampling the researcher identifies this technique is used when subjects

are selected from the population so that all members of the population
have the same probability of being chosen. The regional random
sampling technique is used when the population is small. In this case,
the researcher took two classes randomly as the sample from the
population of eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung.
C. Variable of the Research

In this research there were two variables:
1. The Independent variable was Fishbowl (X)
2. The Dependent variable was speaking ability (Y)
D. Operational Definition of Variable

The operational variable is to describe the characteristic of the variable
that investigated in order the researcher can collect some data of it. The
operational definitions of variables in this research are:
a. The fishbowl was a technique to make students more actively in thinking,
formulating and sharing their ideas. In fishbowl, have students can think
deeper and share their ideas, thought and feelings in speaking class in
forum discussion. Facilitation is focused on the core group discussion.
Fishbowls are useful for ventilating hot topics or sharing ideas or
information from a variety of perspectives. Fishbowl techniques capable
solve problems faced by students and makes progress in leaning learning
the language.
b. The students’ speaking ability was the students’ be able to express their
ideas, experience, thought and feeling orally and capability of students to
speak fluently, grammatically and have excellent pronunciation. It is
indicated by the scores and assessment that achieved from the test.
E. Technique and Data Collection Instrument

1. Data Collecting Technique
30
To know students’ speaking ability, there were some techniques that

can be used as a speaking test such as speaking comprehension,
conversational exchange, using picture to assessing oral production, the
oral interview and some other techniques for oral examining like the short
talk, group discussion and role playing. In this study, the researcher used
picture to assess students’ speaking ability.
2. Data Collection Instrument
Data collection instrument is the same as about evaluating. Evaluating
is obtaining data about the status of something compared to a
predetermined standard or size, because evaluating is also holding a
measure. In his book Arikunto, the researcher find out theories about data
collection instrument, here are some explanation (Arikunto S, 2013).
1) Test
A series of questions or exercises and other tools used to measure
skills, knowledge, intelligence, abilities or talents possessed by
individuals or groups. In terms of the target or object to be evaluated,
the test that was carried out in this study was speaking test.
2) Questionnaire
A number of written questions that are used to obtain information from
the respondent in the sense of a report about his personality or things
he knows.
3) Interview
A dialogue is conducted by the interviewer to obtain information from
the interviewer. In this study the researcher conducted interviews with
English teacher in order to data about variables, student’s background
and others find.
4) Observation
The researcher used the observation to get information about the real
condition in teaching learning activities. the researcher made
observation note about situation in the class while the teaching
learning process occur teaching speaking, and students’ speaking skills
31
there are pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, fluency, and

comprehension in speaking lesson.
5) Documentation
In carrying out this research method, the researcher investigates
written objects such as books, documents, meeting minutes and others.
F. Research Instrument and Research Measuring Instrument

1. Research Instrument
In this part of research instrument, the researcher discussed about
research measuring instrument, validity of the test and readability of the
test.
2. Research Measuring Instrument
As has been explained in the previous section, the researcher used
picture to assess the students’ speaking ability. In order to collect data of
this study, the researcher should observe the primer information before the
study to understand the characteristics of the students to choose the
experimental class and the control class. Furthermore, the researcher gave
an interview as secondary data. At the end of the learning activity, this
interview offers to the experimental class and control class, who were also
treatment with the fishbowl technique and conventional technique. The
research was performed using an oral test as the instrument. There were
two aspects of the test: a pre-test and a post test. The test was the same for
both classes, experimental and controlled.
In the pre-test, the researcher gave some questions to the students as
the pre-test to know the student’s speaking skill. Every student got the
questions and answers it then the researcher recorded the students’
answers. After giving the pre-test to the students, the researcher found out
the result of the students’ speaking skill based on the five criteria of
speaking skill which are: Pronunciation, Grammar, Vocabulary, Fluency
and Comprehension. Moreover, in the post test. The students are given a
picture to study for a few minutes in which they are have maximum three
32
minutes time. They are then inquired to describe the picture in a given
time. The number of word each student speaks is counted by one examiner
in the room in scoring the speaking test. During the test, the researcher
recorded students’ speaking ability. The researcher inputted the students’
oral presentation score based on the students’ performance and based on
the researcher’s rubric. David P. Harris states that in order to measure the
level of progress of students, the researchers used five oral proficiency
standards derived from the scoring scale (Harris, 1996).
Table 2
Oral Presentation Assessment Criteria
No Criteria Description
1 Pronunciation 5 Has few traces of foreign language.
4 Through there is a distinct accent, it is still
understandable.
3 The need for pronunciation problems is focused
on listening and occasionally causes
misunderstanding.
2 Because pronunciation problems are difficult to
understand, most often asked to repeat.
1 Speech is practically unintelligible due to a
pronunciation problem.
2 Grammar 5 Making few (if any) grammatical and word-
order mistakes.
4 Makes grammatical and/or word order mistakes
from time to time that do not obscure context.
3 Make regular grammatical and word-order
mistakes, which can also confuse context.
2 Incorrect grammar and word order make
comprehension difficult, and sentences must be
rewritten frequently.
33
1 Grammar and word order mistakes that are so

serious that speech is practically unintelligible.
3 Vocabulary 5 The vocabulary and idioms are almost similar
to those of a native speaker.
4 Because of lexical and equities questions,
he/she often uses the wrong word and must
rephrase his thoughts.
3 Due to the lack of vocabulary, some wrong
words are often used, which limits the
conversation to a certain extent.
2 Comprehension is difficult due to poor word
use and a restricted vocabulary.
1 The lack of vocabulary was so severe that
conversing was nearly impossible.
4 Fluency 5 Spoken fluently, not as laborious as native
speakers.
4 Language problems appear to have a minor
impact on speech speed.
3 Language issues have a significant impact on
speed and fluency.
2 Usually hesitant, and frequently silenced due to
a lack of language.
1 The speech was so paused and fragmented that
it was almost impossible to have a
conversation.
5 Comprehension 5 Seems to understand everything effortlessly.
4 Understand almost everything at an average
speed, although sometimes it may need to be
repeated.
3 Understand most of the content at a slower than
normal speed without repeating it.
34
2 Has a lot of trouble following conversation that

are spoken slowly and with a lot of repetition.
1 Not even a simple conversation can be said to
be understood.
G. Validity of the Test

Validity is the extent to which a test, accurately measures what it is
supposed to measure. Validity refers to the degree to which evidence and
theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of
tests. Validity is a measure that shows the levels of validity of an instrument
(Arikunto S, 2013). The five validity criteria are democratic validity, outcome
validity, process validity, catalytic validity and dialogic validity. In this
research, to measure whether the test had good validity or not, the researcher
was content and construct validity.
Content Validity
Content validity is a test actually samples the objects matter about which
conclusion are to able draw, and if it requires the test-taker o perform the
behavior that is being measure (Brown, 2004: 22). This research used a
speaking test that will be supposed to be comprehended by the first year of
vocational high school students. The test was being considered as valid in
content validity since the test of speaking, an instrument must be valid as the
test. It means that the test was designed based on the current curriculum.
In this research the researcher will apply the material about identifying in
the text of oral and written explanations by giving and asking for information
related to natural or social symptoms.
Construct Validity
Construct validity is the degree to which the research adequately captures
the construct of interest (Mackey and Gass, 2005: 352). In this research, the
researcher measured the students’ ability in Fishbowl by using speaking tests.
35
In those tests, the students are asked to create some theme for them discussion.
The scoring criterion is also based on speaking theory.
H. Data Analyzing Technique

To find out wheter there was influence of fishbowl strategy towards
students speaking ability, the researcher used some process namely: finding
normality of the test, finding homogeneity of the test and hypothesis test.
1. Normality of the test
Before figure out the hypothesis, the researcher try to know wheter the
data normal or nor. Normality of the test was pre requirement to used test
formula.
The researcher used Chi square ratio (X2ratio).
Ho = The data have normal distribution
Ha = The data do not have normal distribution
The formula of Normality of the test as follows
k
X2ratio = ∑ ¿¿ ¿ ¿
i=1
Notes:
Oi = Observed Frequency
Ei = Expected Frequency
With the criterion test:

Ho is rejected if X2ratio ≥ x2 (1 – α) (k – 3)
With α for signiicant level of 5% (0.05) and 1% (0.01)
If the sample has normal distribution, it means H o hyphotesis is
eccepted.
Before knowing the normality data by using Chi Square ratio (X 2ratio)
formula, the researcher tries to count some points from the data test:
1) The span from the calculation the biggest data minus the smallest
Span = the Highest Data – The Lowest Data
2) Total Number of Interval Class (K) = 1+3.3 log n with n = Sample
36
R
3) Length of Interval Class (P) =
K
With
R = Span
K = Total number of Interval
2. Homogeneity Test of Variance

It is to know whether the data are homogeneous or not. The
homogeneity test of variance is pre requirement to used t tes formula.
The formula of homogeneity test as follows.
2
S (The Highest Variace)
F= 2
S (The Lowest Variace)
F = the homogeneity of variance
S = Standard Deviation
The Hypotheses are:
Ho = the variance of the data are homogeneous
Ha = the variance of the data are not homogeneous
The Criteria is accepted Ho if F cal < Ftab ½ α (v1.v2)
3. Hypothesis Test
It used to prove the hypotheses proposed by the researcher whether
they are accepted or not. The formula of test as follows:
X 1− X 2
ttes=
S
√ 1 1
+
n1 n2
With :
2 2
(n¿ ¿1−1) s 1 +(n 2−1) s2
S =
2
¿
n1 +n2 +2
Note:
X1 = Mean of experimental class
X2 = Mean of Control Class
n1 = the total students from experimental class
n2 = the total students from control class
37
S1 = the standard deviation from experimental class

S2 = the standard deviation from control class
S = the Combination Standard Deviation
4. Equality Test of Two Average

Ho1:µ1=µ2 (There is no influence of fishbowl strategy towards students
speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in academic year 2021/2022).
Ha1:µ1≠µ2 (There is an influence of fishbowl strategy towards students
speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in academic year 2021/2022).
The testing criterion:
H0 is accepted if t < t (1-α) with dk = n1 + n2-2 beside H0 that is
rejected, with the mistake level 5% (α=0 01) (sudjana, 2005: 239).
5. Different Test of Two Average

Ho2:µ1<µ2 The average score of students’ speaking ability which is
taught through fishbowl is lower than the average score of
students’ speaking ability which was taught through
conventional at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in academic year 2021/2022.
Ho2:µ1>µ2 The average score of students’ speaking ability which is
taught through fishbowl is higher than the average score of
students’ speaking ability which was taught through
conventional at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8
Bandar Lampung in academic year 2021/2022.
The testing criterion:
H0 is accepted if t < t (1-α) with dk = (n1+n2-2) beside H0 that is rejected,
with the mistake level 5% (α=0.05) and 1% (α=0.01) (Sudjana, 2005:
239).
38
REFERENCES
Anakotta, R., Nursalim, N., & Latuheru, R. J. (2020). Fishbowl Technique

towards the Students’ Speaking Skill. INTERACTION: Jurnal Pendidikan
Bahasa, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.36232/jurnalpendidikanbahasa.v7i1.445,
Accesed on January 13rd, 2022 at 11 Am.
Andika, A. (2019). The Effect of Fishbowl Technique and Students’ Interest

Toward The Eight Grade Students’ Speaking Ability of Smp Xaverius 1
Palembang. English Community Journal, 2(2).
https://doi.org/10.32502/ecj.v2i2.1316, Accesed on December 30th, 2021 at 3
Pm.
Arikunto S. (2013). Prosedur Penelitian : Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. In Jakarta:

Rineka Cipta.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles An Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy. In Newr York: Pearson Education.
Burns, A. (2019). Concepts for Teaching Speaking in the English Language

Classroom. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research
Network, 12(1), Accesed on January 4th, 2022 at 9 Am.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of english language teaching. In England:

Pearson Longman.
Hughes, A. (2002). Testing for language teachers. In English.
Hussain. (2017). Teaching Speaking Skills in Communication Classroom.

International Journal of Media, Journalism and Mass Communications, 3(3).
https://doi.org/10.20431/2454-9479.0303003, Accesed on December 3th,
2021 at 9 Am.
Kurniasih, E. (2011). Teaching the four language skills in primary EFL

classroom: some considerations. Journal of English Teaching, 1(1), Accesed
on January 19th, 2022 at 9 Pm.
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. In United state: Mc

Graw Hill.
39
Okar, N., & Shahidy, S. H. (2019). Using pictures of movie conversations with
input enhancement in subtitles for developing speaking of Iranian EFL
intermediate learners. International Journal of English Language and
Translation Studies, 07(03), Accesed on January 19th, 2022 at 10 Pm.
Pakula, H.-M. (2019). Teaching speaking. Apples - Journal of Applied Language

Studies, 13(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.201903011691,
Accesed on February 3rd , 2022 at 5 Pm.
Rahma, D. M. (2015). The Fishbowl Method to Improve the Students’ Speaking

Skills. Register Journal, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v8i2.705, Accesed
on February 2nd, 2022 at 5 Pm.
Sreena, S., & Ilankumaran, M. (2018). Developing Productive Skills Through

Receptive Skills – A Cognitive Approach. International Journal of
Engineering & Technology, 7(4.36).
https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.36.24220, Accesed on December 3th, 2021
at 9 Am.
Thornbury, S. (2005). How To Teach Speaking By Scott Thornbury. In England:

Pearson Longman.
CHAPTER IV
REPORT AND DISCUSSION
A. Report of the Research

The report students’ speaking ability test in experimental class which was
taught by Fishbowl Strategy higher than with the result students’ speaking ability
test of control class which was taught by using Conventional Strategy. The data in
the experimental and control class were counted by using SPSS (Statistical
Product and Service Solution) version 25.0 and the description of the students’
scores as follows:
1. The Data Pre-Test of Experimental and Control Class

The researcher gave pretest both in experimental and control class. Based
on the data computation of descriptive analysis by using SPSS. In pre-test data of
experimental class, the score was 32 up to 68 while in control class the score was
40 up to 72. The mean score of pre-test in experimental class was 46.67 while in
control class obtained 53.73. The result of SPSS output for pretest experimental
the mean was 46.67, std error mean was 1.465, median was 48.00, mode was 40,
standard deviation was 8.023, variance was 64.368, range was 36, minimum 32,
maximum 68 and sum 1400. Meanwhile in control class the mean was 53.73, std
error mean was 1.457, median was 52.00, mode was 52, standard deviation 7.978,
variance was 63.651, range was 32, minimum was 40, maximum was 72 and sum
was 1612. Those data can be seen on the table below:
41
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 12 and 13)
2. The Data Post-Test of Experimental and Control Class

The researcher gave posttest both in experimental and control class. Based on the
data computation of descriptive analysis by using SPSS. In post-test data of
experimental class, the score was 48 up to 88 while in control class the score was
52 up to 80. The mean score of post-test in experimental class was 69.60 while in
control class obtained 64.53. The result of post-test in experimental class showed
that N was 30, mean was 69.60, std. error mean was 1.517, median was 70.00,
mode was 72, standard deviation was 8.311, variance was 69.076, range was 40,
minimum score was 48, maximum score was 88 and sum was 2088. Meanwhile,
the result for post-test control class was obtained N 30, mean was 64.53, std.error
mean was 1.896, median was 64.00, mode was 52, standard deviation was 10.385,
variance was 107.844, range was 28, minimum score was 52, maximum score was
80 and sum was 1936.
42
The result of SPSS output for posttest experimental and control class were
as follows:
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 14 and 15)
3. The Data of Normality Test

The data normality of this research was tested by using SPSS with the
result as follows:
Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Class Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Students' Pre Test Experimental .197 30 .004 .936 30 .073
Score Class
Post Test .157 30 .057 .942 30 .102
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control .153 30 .072 .951 30 .181
Class
Post Test Control .135 30 .168 .884 30 .003
Class
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
(Full SPSS output can be seen on appendix 16)
43
The criteria of acceptance or rejection of hypotheses for normality test as follows:

H0 is accepted if sig < α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if sig > α = 0.05
Based on the result of normality test, it can be seen that Pvalue (Sig.) for
pre-test experimental class was 0.073, post-test experimental class was 0.102, pre-
test control class was 0.181 and Pvalue (Sig.) for post-test control class was 0.003.
Because Sig. (Pvalue) of pre-test and post-test experimental and control class > α
0.05. So, Ho is accepted. It concludes that the data in the experimental and control
class had normal distribution.
4. The Homogenity Test of Variance

After population data that had been proven that have normal distribution.
Therefore, the researcher also conducted the examination the test of homogenity
variance from both samples. Below the result of homogeneity test by using SPSS:
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Students' Score Based on Mean 2.094 3 116 .105
Based on Median 1.919 3 116 .130
Based on Median and with 1.919 3 115.800 .130
adjusted df
Based on trimmed mean 2.029 3 116 .114
The hypotheses as follows:

Ho = the variances of the data are homogenous
Ha = the variances of the data are not homogenous.
The criteria of the test as follows:
Ho is accepted if Sig. > α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if Sig. < α = 0.05
Based on the results obtained in the test of homogeneity of variances in the

column, it could be seen that Sig. (Pvalue) = 0.105 > α = 0.05. It demonstrated
44
that Ho was accepted because Sig. (Pvalue) > α = 0.05. It means that Ho was
accepted and the variance of the data in experimental class and control class are
homogeneous.
5. The Hypothesis Test

5.1 First Hypothesis Test
The formula for testing hypothesis, the researcher used Paired Sample t-
test formula from SPSS.
The hypothesis formulas are:
Ho : There was no influence of using questioning the author (QTA) strategy
towards students’ speaking ability of recount text at the tenth class of
SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2021/2022.
Ha : There was an influence of using questioning the author (QTA) strategy
towards students’ speaking ability of recount text at the tenth class of
SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2021/2022.
The criteria of acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis for hypothetical test
were:
Ho is accepted if Sig. (Pvalue) > α = 0.05
Ha is accepted if Sig. (Pvalue) < α = 0.05
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Interval of the
Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair Posttest 5.067 11.552 2.109 .753 9.380 2.402 29 .023
1 Experimental
Class - Posttest
Control Class
Based on the results obtained in the Paired Sample t-test, that the value of
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.023 < α = 0.05. So, Ha was accepted and
Ho was rejected. Based on the computation, it can be concluded that there was
45
significant influence of using Fishbowl strategy towards students’ speaking ability

at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
There was significance difference between the result of Paired Sample Test of
experimental and control class. It can be seen that from sig (2-tailed) in
experimental class obtained 0.000 with the mean 22.933 while sig (2-tailed) in
control class obtained 0.000 with the mean 10.800. Therefore, there was
significant difference between two classes. The result can be seen as follows:
Paired Sample Test for Experimental Class.
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Pair Pretest - 10.127 1.849 -26.715 -19.152 - 29 .000
1 Experimental 22.933 12.404
Class - Posttest
Experimental
Class
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.000 < α = 0.05. Therefore, Ha was
accepted and Ho was rejected.
Paired Sample Test for Control Class
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Pair Pretest Control - 11.891 2.171 -15.240 -6.360 - 29 .000
1 Class - Posttest 10.800 4.974
Control Class
46
significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.000 < α = 0.05. So, Ha was accepted and
Ho was rejected.
5.2 Second Hypothesis Test

The second hypothesis was about whether the students who were taught by
using Fishbowl strategy better than the students who learned reading by using
Conventional Strategy. The result as follows:
H o 2: μ1 < μ2 (The average score of students’ speaking
ability who learn through Fishbowl strategy lower than who
learn through Conventional Strategy at eleventh grade of
SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023).
H a 2: μ1 > μ2 (The average score of students’ speaking
ability who learn through Fishbowl strategy higher than
who learn through Conventional Strategy at eleventh grade
of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023).
Average Score
Experimental Class Control Class Experimental Class Control Class
Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test
46.67 64.53 53.73 69.60
The result showed that the average score of students’ speaking ability who
learn through Fishbowl strategy higher than who learn through Conventional
Strategy at eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar Lampung in 2022/2023.
The average score in experimental class higher than control class. It was
obtained after teaching by using Fishbowl strategy. The result of posttest in
experimental class was 69.60 while in control class after teaching by using
conventional strategy obtained 64.53 (69.60 > 64.53).
47
B. Discussion
1. Equality Test (Influence)
Based on the data analysis by using t-test and testing of hypothesis. The
researcher got the result that Ha was accepted. It showed that the independent
sample t-test, that the value of significant generated Sig (2-tailed) = 0.023 < α
= 0.05. It means that there was an influence of Fishbowl strategy towards
Speaking is much more complex than this and it involves both a command
of certain skills and several different types of knowledge. It means that the
important things to accomplish objective of communication as being taught
through grammar and vocabulary is to produce high quality understanding of
communication in which each of the communicating agents understands each
other and be understood by others.
The use of Fishbowl strategy was effective for teaching speaking. It
supported by (Yabarmase, 2013) stated that the fishbowl technique is a
learning technique that can help students conduct oral debates in small groups
in classroom. It means that the fishbowl technique is very useful for teaching
learning process, especially teaching learning speaking.
2. Difference Test (Average Score)

The use of Fishbowl strategy better than conventional strategy. It was
proved by the average score in experimental class which was taught by using
Fishbowl strategy obtained 69.60 while in control class which was taught by
using conventional strategy obtained 64.53. For the pre-test in experimental
class obtained 46.67 while in control class obtained 53.73.
The researcher conducted the research at 2 classes namely experimental
and control class. In experimental class, the researcher conducted the research
by using Fishbowl Strategy. Fishbowl strategy is one of collaboration teaching
technique. It is an active activity, where the student’s will be guided to make a
circle which content of inner and outer group. Thoose types of group
48
discussion that can be utilized where there are separated into two groups inner
and outer.
In control class, the researcher conducted the research by using
Conventional Strategy. It was an old strategy that usually applied by the
teacher at the school. The researcher wanted to compare between the strategy
that she brought and the strategy that usually taught by the teacher. The result
in control class showed that students’ speaking ability was lower than
experimental class.
The successful of Fishbowl strategy is in line with a theory stated by
(Wulandari, 2015) that the fishbowl technique could be an efficacious
teaching method such as a grouping process that can impact students’
speaking skill in classroom activity.
In the end of dicussion, the researcher would say that the use of Fishbowl
strategy could be effective for teaching learning speaking because it enables
students to be brave enough to start speaking and training their mind to be able
in doing debate. It is good for the students to practice their speaking because
English is international language and speaking might enable them to
communicate with whoever they want.
49
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
The result can be seen from sig. (2-tailed) of the equal variance assumed in
the independent sample test table where the sig. (2-tailed) was 0.023. It was
lower than α = 0.05 and it means that Ha was accepted. Then, the mean score
of post-tests in experimental class higher than control class (69.60 > 64.53).
Therefore, the conclusions were as follows:
1. There was significant influence of using Fishbowl strategy towards
students’ speaking ability at the eleventh grade of SMK Negeri 8 Bandar
Lampung in 2022/2023.
2. The average score of students’ speaking ability who learn through Fishbowl
strategy was higher than who learn through Conventional Strategy.
B. Recommendation
Based on the result of the research, the researcher would like to give some
suggestions, as follow
1. For the Teacher
a) The teacher is suggested to use media in teaching speaking, so that the
classroom would be interested. For example, teaching speaking by
using audio.
b) The teacher is suggested to be able to make the students want to
practice speaking, because speaking is very important in this modern
era.
2. For the Students
50
a) The students should not be lazy to practice speaking in daily life. They
could find partner for practicing speaking.
b) The students should clarify to the teacher if there is a confusedness
during the lesson, so that the material would be clearer.
3. For the School

a) The school is suggested to provide many reference at library to
enhance the students’ learning activity.
b) The school is suggested to facilitate the classroom with some media,
for example a Projector to make the learning process delivered clearly.
4. For Further Research
a) The further research can use the findings and theory as reference.
b) The further research is suggested to use Fishbowl strategy in other skill
such as writing, reading or listening as long as there is a theory to
support the research.
Appendix 11
Students’ Speaking Score
Experimental Class [Fishbowl]

Control Class [Conventional]
No

Pre-Test Post-Test Pre-Test Post-Test
1 56 64 48 52
2 52 72 60 56
3 68 80 72 80
4 56 68 48 72
5 32 48 40 52
6 40 72 40 80
7 40 88 68 52
8 48 88 52 52
9 48 60 44 52
10 48 72 48 76
11 48 68 56 60
12 40 68 52 52
13 48 72 56 56
14 48 72 60 76
15 40 72 56 60
16 40 72 60 64
17 40 60 40 52
18 52 76 60 80
19 48 68 56 60
20 36 60 52 56
21 40 68 60 68
22 48 76 48 76
23 52 60 52 64
24 40 60 52 60
25 48 64 52 64
26 36 76 60 64
27 40 76 48 68
28 60 68 52 80
29 52 68 52 80
30 56 72 68 72
Averag
e 46.67 69.60 53.73 64.53
52
Appendix 12
Statistics
Pre Test Experimental Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 46.67
Std. Error of Mean 1.465
Median 48.00
Mode 40a
Std. Deviation 8.023
Variance 64.368
Range 36
Minimum 32
Maximum 68
Sum 1400
a. Multiple modes exist. The
smallest value is shown
Pre Test Experimental Class

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 32 1 3.3 3.3 3.3
36 2 6.7 6.7 10.0
40 9 30.0 30.0 40.0
48 9 30.0 30.0 70.0
52 4 13.3 13.3 83.3
56 3 10.0 10.0 93.3
60 1 3.3 3.3 96.7
68 1 3.3 3.3 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
53
Appendix 13
Statistics
Pre Test Control Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 53.73
Median 52.00
Mode 52
Variance 63.651
Range 32
Minimum 40
Maximum 72
Sum 1612
Pre Test Control Class

Cumulative
Valid 40 3 10.0 10.0 10.0
44 1 3.3 3.3 13.3
48 5 16.7 16.7 30.0
52 8 26.7 26.7 56.7
56 4 13.3 13.3 70.0
60 6 20.0 20.0 90.0
68 2 6.7 6.7 96.7
72 1 3.3 3.3 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
54
Appendix 14
Statistics
Post Test Experimental Class
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 69.60
Median 70.00
Mode 72
Variance 69.076
Range 40
Minimum 48
Maximum 88
Sum 2088
Post Test Experimental Class

Cumulative
Valid 48 1 3.3 3.3 3.3
60 5 16.7 16.7 20.0
64 2 6.7 6.7 26.7
68 7 23.3 23.3 50.0
72 8 26.7 26.7 76.7
76 4 13.3 13.3 90.0
80 1 3.3 3.3 93.3
88 2 6.7 6.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
55
Appendix 15
Statistics
Post Test Control
N Valid 30
Missing 0
Mean 64.53
Median 64.00
Mode 52
Variance 107.844
Range 28
Minimum 52
Maximum 80
Sum 1936
Post Test Control

Cumulative
Valid 52 7 23.3 23.3 23.3
56 3 10.0 10.0 33.3
60 4 13.3 13.3 46.7
64 4 13.3 13.3 60.0
68 2 6.7 6.7 66.7
72 2 6.7 6.7 73.3
76 3 10.0 10.0 83.3
80 5 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 30 100.0 100.0
56
Appendix 16
Normality Test
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
Class N Percent N Percent N Percent

Students' Pre Test Experimental 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Score Class
Post Test 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Class
Post Test Control 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
Class
Descriptives
Std.
Class Statistic Error
Students' Pre Test Experimental Mean 46.67 1.465
Score Class 95% Confidence Lower 43.67
Interval for Mean Bound
Upper 49.66
Bound
5% Trimmed Mean 46.37
Median 48.00
Variance 64.368
Minimum 32
Maximum 68
Range 36
Interquartile Range 12
Skewness .493 .427
Kurtosis .294 .833
Post Test Mean 69.60 1.517
Experimental Class 95% Confidence Lower 66.50
57
Upper 72.70
Bound
Median 70.00
Variance 69.076
Minimum 48
Maximum 88
Range 40
Skewness -.009 .427
Kurtosis 1.197 .833
Pre Test Control Class Mean 53.73 1.457
95% Confidence Lower 50.75
Upper 56.71
Bound
Median 52.00
Variance 63.651
Minimum 40
Maximum 72
Range 32
Skewness .273 .427
Kurtosis .063 .833
Post Test Control Mean 64.53 1.896
Class 95% Confidence Lower 60.66
Upper 68.41
Bound
Median 64.00
Variance 107.844
Minimum 52
Maximum 80
Range 28
58
Skewness .261 .427
Kurtosis -1.387 .833
Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Class Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Students' Pre Test Experimental .197 30 .004 .936 30 .073
Score Class
Post Test .157 30 .057 .942 30 .102
Experimental Class
Pre Test Control .153 30 .072 .951 30 .181
Class
Post Test Control .135 30 .168 .884 30 .003
Class
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Students' Score
Stem-and-Leaf Plots
Students' Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot for

Class= Pre Test Experimental Class
Frequency Stem & Leaf
1.00 3 . 2
2.00 3 . 66
9.00 4 . 000000000
9.00 4 . 888888888
4.00 5 . 2222
3.00 5 . 666
1.00 6 . 0
1.00 6 . 8
Stem width: 10
Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Class= Post Test Experimental Class
1.00 Extremes (=<48)

59
7.00 6 . 0000044
7.00 6 . 8888888
8.00 7 . 22222222
4.00 7 . 6666
1.00 8 . 0
2.00 Extremes (>=88)
Stem width: 10

Class= Post Test Control Class
7.00 5 . 2222222
3.00 5 . 666
8.00 6 . 00004444
2.00 6 . 88
2.00 7 . 22
3.00 7 . 666
5.00 8 . 00000
Stem width: 10
Normal Q-Q Plots

60
61
Detrended Normal Q-Q Plots

62
63
64
Appendix 17
Homogeneity Test
Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Students' Score Based on Mean 2.094 3 116 .105
Based on Median 1.919 3 116 .130
Based on Median and with 1.919 3 115.800 .130
adjusted df
Based on trimmed mean 2.029 3 116 .114
ANOVA
Students' Score
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 9668.667 3 3222.889 42.276 .000
Within Groups 8843.200 116 76.234
Total 18511.867 119
65
Appendix 18
T-test
Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Posttest Experimental Class 69.60 30 8.311 1.517
Posttest Control Class 64.53 30 10.385 1.896
Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Posttest Experimental Class 30 .252 .179
& Posttest Control Class
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Pair Posttest 5.067 11.552 2.109 .753 9.380 2.402 29 .023
1 Experimental
Class - Posttest
Control Class
66
Appendix 19
Paired Sample t-test Experimental Class

Pair 1 Pretest Experimental Class 46.67 30 8.023 1.465
Posttest Experimental Class 69.60 30 8.311 1.517

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Pretest Experimental Class 30 .232 .218
& Posttest Experimental
Class
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Pair Pretest - 10.127 1.849 -26.715 -19.152 - 29 .000
1 Experimental 22.933 12.404
Class - Posttest
Experimental
Class
67
Appendix 20
Paired Sample T-test Control Class

Pair 1 Pretest Control Class 53.73 30 7.978 1.457
Posttest Control Class 64.53 30 10.385 1.896

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Pretest Control Class & 30 .182 .337
Posttest Control Class
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Pair Pretest Control - 11.891 2.171 -15.240 -6.360 - 29 .000
1 Class - Posttest 10.800 4.974
Control Class
Appendix 21
Research Documentation
69
70

Skripsi Iin Oktaviani

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skripsi Iin Oktaviani

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skripsi Iin Oktaviani

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’

SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF

(Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

SEKOLAH TINGGI KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

THE INFLUENCE OF FISHBOWL STRATEGY TOWARDS STUDENTS’

Keywords: Fishbowl Strategy, Speaking Ability

1. Approval Letter of the Paper Title................................................................54

1. The Population of Eleventh Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung...............28

Influence of Fishbowl Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh

Grade of SMKN 8 Bandar Lampung in Academic Year 2022/2023” I took some

declaration, I am ready to accept any judgement if found there is scientific ethnic

Bandar Lampung, September 2022

Alhamdulillahhirobbil’alamin. Asshalatu wassalamu’ ala Muhammad wa’ala alihi

The researcher would like to express her gratitude to :

Bandar Lampung, September 2022

the couple named Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih. She is a Muslim.

This paper is dedicated to :

1. My beloved parents, Mr. Haryanto and Mrs.Suminingsih.

2. My beloved brothers, Abdan Sakuro and Atma Aditya S.

3. My beloved big family.

“I would Rather be Optimistic and Wrong rather than Pessimistic and

CHAPTER II FRAME OF THEORIES, THINKING AND HYPOTHESIS

CHAPTER III THE METHOD OF RESEARCH

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Background of the Problem

Strategy towards Students’ Speaking Ability at the Eleventh Grade of

B. The Identification of Problem

C. The Limitation of Problem

D. The Formulation of Problem

E. The Objectives of Research

F. The Uses of The Research

G. The Place of The Research

A. The Frame of Theories

students to use English in the classroom as much as possible without being

speaking is person’s ability how to use language to convey meaning and to

D. Problems in Speaking Performance

teaching and learning how to speak. When someone wants to convey a

student’s will be active to acquire the information around them by the

G. Problem in Teaching Speaking

students but also influenced by external factors that the effectiveness in

H. Principles of Teaching Speaking

1. Be aware of the differences between second language and foreign

someone has understood your meaning. By asking for clarification,

I. The Role of Teacher Teaching Speaking

Based on explanation from previous study the researcher concludes that

K. The Advantages and Disadvantages

c. Some students may have difficulty expressing themselves, and

L. Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Fishbowl Technique

The Students of SMK N 8 Bandar Lampung

Interactional Speaking Skill

Pronunciation Vocabulary Grammar Fluency

TEACHER PROCESS LEARNERS

1. The teacher explained about the materials and the rules of

Students’ Speaking Ability

M. Related Research Study

Second, a researcher conducted by (Anakotta et al., 2020). The research

The differences : The differences in the researcher’s research and

The differences : The differences in the researcher’s research and Anakotta

strategy or technique precisely. Fishbowl technique of course, one of teaching

Arikunto S. (2013). Prosedur Penelitian : Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. In Jakarta: