Abstrak. Sasaran pembelajaran bahasa Inggris di ~ era komunikatif adalah buat meningkatkan kemungkinan berkomunikasi. Kawanan usaha telah dilakukan melalui guru buat mencapai gawangnya ini. Menjadi tetapi, permasalahan besar muncul ketika berbicara circa bagaimana menilai kemampuan berbicara pembelajar. Item ini memuat permasalahan yang sering dihadapi dalam menilai pilihan berbicara, pemfitnahan pertimbangan batin membuat tes berbicara, dan memberikan beberapa anjuran teknik batin tes berbicara.

Anda sedang menonton: Pengumuman tes mandiri unram 2016

 Kata-kata kunci: berbicara, profisiensi berbicara, teknik ujian berbicara

 Abstract. Since the purpose of teaching bahasa inggris in the communicative era is to boost students’ capacity to speak English, plenty of teachers try to devote milik mereka teaching to achieving this target. However, problems arise as soon as they assess the students’ oral proficiency/achievement. This post discusses problems in trial and error oral proficiency, considerations in constructing oral capability test and provides part suggestions on elicitation approaches for assessing dental proficiency.

 Keywords: speaking/oral proficiency, elicitation techniques

INTRODUCTION

In communicative language teaching era, us all agree that the main membidik of learning english is to allow students to use the target language. To achieve this, countless language teachers have been devoting themselves to imparting and also improving students’ speaking capability by searching and applying variasi techniques to elicit students’ speak ability. However, the teachers’ efforts an outcome in frustration once coming to assessing students’ ability. The frustration might come indigenous the teacher himself once he has to conduct the speaking check or an outside body/institution when it conducts formal check (such as Ujian di atas Nasional, EBTANAS, and the like). The first problem relates to the challenges in conducting the check in kapak of time availability, class size, practicality, and setting make-sense criteria. The later relates come the miss-match between what the teacher melakukan in class (i.e. To boost students’ dental proficiency) and apa students face in the formal examination (i.e. Paper-pencil test). No wonder that the application of communicative language testing is left much behind the application of language teaching as result of the alam of speaking/communication check (see Sujana, 2000). In some method there is a tendency that the communicative language teaching is dragged right into the teaching apa is most likely to be experiment on the examination. Ironically, there is basic agreement among the language practitioners that trial and error students’ oral proficiency is one of the paling important elements of an all at once evaluation (see for example Morrow, 1982).

This article will further discuss some mungkin problems may arise in assessing oral proficiency, considerations need to it is in taken right into account in building the tests, and also some elicitation methods in experimentation oral proficiency.

DISCUSSIONProblems in experimentation Oral Proficiency

Due come the intricacy of facets involved in testing oral proficiency, numerous teachers often tend to stop assessing the speak skill. Madsen (1983) points the end that of all language exams experimentation speaking capacity is the most challenging in kapak of check preparation, administration, and scoring. Several of the reasons why the speaking test seems so complicated are the (1) the difficulty in defining the nature of speaking skill; (2) the challenge in selecting the criteria in trial and error speaking ability; (3) the joining of such other components as hear ability, menerjemahkan of tone, thinking ability, etc.; (4) the difficulty in getting students come speak (techniques to elicit students come speak).

Speaking ability ikut many facets which deserve to be analyzed right into the aspects of the speaking an abilities and the all at once speaking ability (speaking for practical purposes). In ~ the element tingkat of speak (primary level), the speaking might involve pronunciation, intonation, stress and other suprasegmental features. At this stage, the speaking also requires the correct use (structure), and also the correct idiomatic usage (vocabulary) that the membidik language (Vallette dikutip in Mukminatien, 1995). At the functional level, speaking berhubungan dengan the integration of the aspects of the language and the duty of melihat language either because that transaction or for interaction. Top top the mengurung of its role language deserve to be tangan kedua for sosial relationship (interactional function) and for giving information (transactional function) (Brown & Yule kutipan in Mukminatien, 1995). In testing, the interactive speaking deserve to be in the membentuk of interview, duty play, discussion and also the like, kapan the transactive speaking may take the membentuk of story telling, oral report, explicate object/person/thing, addressing speech, and so on.

The two levels of assessment in speaking test cause problems in selecting criteria in assessing students’ ability. The problems relate to the decision to determine the aspects to it is in looked for: perform the examiners emphasis on the aspects of speaking an abilities or the in its entirety speaking capability (speaking for sensible purposes). The test designers, therefore, should determine the purpose of conducting tests, which can be obtained from the objectives of language learning. From the purpose and also objectives the the test, they deserve to employ the appropriate jenis and philosophies of testing procedures whether to employ discrete-point, integrative or pragmatic test. A discrete-point test mengacu pada to a test the attempts to evaluate a certain element of language in ~ a time kemudian as pronunciation, stress, intonation, structure, and also vocabulary. One integrative test attempts to assess learners’ capability to use plenty of bits of anda skills at a time. A pragmatic test suku to a procedure or task that requires learners to procedure sequences of elements in a language the conforms come the tangga contextual limit of that language and also to relate sequences the linguistic facets to extra linguistic contexts in a meaningful way (Hughes, 1993).

Other awareness come be maintained in mental by the test developers is the kebenaran that the kesuksesan of communication much counts on such other factors as hearne ability, capacity to interpret tones and other suprasegmental functions of expressions, to plan for asking for clarification, turn-taking, etc. The is not difficult that the failure in the speaking aktivitas may be because of the weakness on this factors. In this case, the test designer needs to anticipate the possibilities of those problems ketika assessing dental test.

In speak test, the is not always easy to acquire students come speak. Occasionally the tasks we expect to be qualified of motivating students come speak perform not work-related as expected. To get rid of this situation, in enhancement to the careful design of the speaking jobs to accomplish students’ level and to meet speaking elements to be assessed, the examiner can duty himself as a companion in stimulating the students to speak.

In line to the opinion above, Morrow (1982) adds the there space some various other reasons why it is difficult to assess speaking ability, which buatlah the check be avoided in practice. Itu reasons space (1) oral experimentation is an extremely time-consuming. It appears that us all agree that the disregard of the implementation the speaking check in Indonesian educational definisi kertas is because of this reason. The average course size in SMA/SMK/SMP is 40-45 college student in a class and also a teacher have to teach parallel class of 4 or 5. How long carry out the teachers need to spend to conduct the test? as a result, a paper-pencil communicative check — one indirect means of testing interaction — is tangan kedua to change the indirect way of testing oral proficiency/achievement; (2) the is complicated to gain students come say something interesting; although, together Morrow says, it melakukan not average to mean them to game the examiner with brilliant conversation or witty anecdote, yet it, at least, fulfills one of seperti criteria as: (a) the college student must have a opportunity to present that he can use the language for a variety of objectives (describing, narrating, apologizing, etc.); (b) that must have a chance to show that that can bawa pulang part in voluntary conversation, responding appropriately to apa is said to that and membuat relevant contribution; and also (c) that must have a opportunity to show that he can perform linguistically in a range of situations, adopting berbeda roles and also talking about berbeda topics. (3) The other reason relates come the melepaskan of noting oral proficiency tests. What sort the criteria deserve to we usage to assess students’ performance? Is there any kind of standard reminder to be digunakan in setup up the criteria?

To eliminate those problems, Morrow (1982) lebih jauh suggests (1) the designing of jobs or tasks which the students perform through using language. The jobs designed must be as close together the genuine world; (2) setup group work. The group work can at least solve the troubles related to the moment consuming melepaskan and give a possibility to student to use the language spontaneously, including a selection of functions; (3) setting clear criteria. There must be clean idea for the examiner of apa is being looked for in a specific test.

According to Weir (1990), trial and error speaking capacity should be designed for pertemuan the criteria that communicative testing kemudian as (1) tasks emerged should it is in purposive, interesting and motivating through a confident washback impact on teaching that comes before the test; (2) interaksi should be a crucial feature; (3) there need to be a melakukan of intersubjectivity among the participants; (4) the output need to be come a certain extent unpredictable; (5) realistic konteks should it is in provided; and also (6) processing have to be done in actual time.

Constructing oral Proficiency Tests

Testing, follow to Bachman (1990), is defined as a procedure designed to elicit certain behavior from which one can make inferences around characteristics of one individual. Thus, maafkan saya is experiment or observed in a check is samples the behavior. Indigenous the performance of those samples, the examiner paint, etc inferences the the testee’s capability and kemudian interprets the performance into score criteria. In speak test, one’s performance of a ten-fifteen minute speaking job is often tangan kedua to referee the testee’s all at once speaking ability.

as a sample that behavior, i beg your pardon will kemudian be tangan kedua to stand for the testee’s overall performance, the speaking jobs must be designed closely in bespeak to get valid and also reliable summary of the testee’s ability. There space a numberi of mempertimbangkan that must be taken into account in constructing the speak or dental test. Itu considerations are, among others, the goals of the test, the length of the test, the representativeness the the sample, the testee’s language level, and the applications of lot of formats.

The missions of the speak test must be specified first before constructing tasks. There are two kepala objectives of a speaking test: come measure details aspects of speak skill such as structure, vocabulary, pronunciation, intonation, and also stress; and to measure up the overall speaking ability (i.e. Speaking tests for functional purposes). The determination of the goals of the check will influence the procedure that a speaking check whether to apply discrete-point, integrative or pragmatic trial and error procedures. The form of speaking test at functional tingkat — interactive or transactive — will determine the tasks of speaking test. Interaction speaking means that speak interpersonally (i.e. The participants (the speaker and the hearer) communicate each various other in conversation)). The tasks to elicit the speaking ability might it is in in the form of interview, function play, discussion, and the like. Transactive speaking, on the other hand, method one-direction speaking (i.e. The pembicara gives details to the hearer without questioning for a response). The tasks tangan kedua in this kind of speaking can be in the formulir of giving speech, explicate things/people, cerita telling, oral presentation, and also the like.

The 2nd consideration is the length of the speaking test. Hughes (1993) argues that a speaking test must be do as long as is feasible. The tasks should provide the learner with enough time come show anda speaking ability. The long layout of the speaking check will be able to assess learners’ consistencies in penampilan language. In addition, it is mungkin to include much more samples that behavior. In other words, the longer the speaking test is, the much more reliable and also valid information can be obtained.

The third consideration is the representativeness that the sample gift taken in the test. Trial and error cannot be separated native sample sejak it is impossible to encompass all the materials taught or as whole aspects the language capability in one test. The speaking check should encompass as vast a sample the specified content as possible in the moment available. The an ext samples contained in the speak test, the an ext chance for the testee to display his speaking ability, hence the much more valid and reliable the test will be. The melakukan of test validity and reliability will lot depend ~ above the representativeness that samples consisted of in the test. In this sense, the check designer must select apa is pertained to as a representative sample that the specified content, and kemudian the an ext important one is exactly how to elicit the important behavior. This can be achieved by lihat more 보다 one format/task.

The next consideration in constructing oral proficiency test is the use of many formats. The application of the multiple formats in speaking check will provide the testee as plenty of “fresh starts” as possible (Hughes (1993). The testee will have the ability to show his/her ability in penampilan various language functions. In ~ the same time, the will help the testee in order no to get stuck ~ above the test as result of his/her i can not qualify to talk about one details topic or function. One good example that the applications of multiple formats in oral proficiency check is IELTS speak Tests. The IELTS Speaking test is divided into 5 steps in 11 – 15 minutes: melangkah 1 development (1-2 minutes). The examiner will present himself, inspect the testee’s identity and also may juga check through an individual Details form which should be fill out before entering the test room; panggung 2 prolonged Discourse (3-4 minutes). The examiner asks the testee to talk on a acquainted topic, which may be linked to details on personal Details form. The topics deserve to cover a wide range including home country, neighborhood custom, festival, elements of life in the negara where the testee is going to study, etc; phase 3 Elicitation (3-4 minutes). The testee asks the examiner questions based upon a basic role-paly situation. Over there is one “information gap and also the testee needs to finish his pengetahuan of the case by asking appropriate questions; fase 4 Speculation and Attitudes (3-4 minutes). The examiner asks the testee around his masa depan plans, which may involve the conversation of riset and career options, etc.; panggung 5 Conclusion (1 minute). The examiner will lug the interview come an end, wish him luck, and also leave-taking (Deakin, 1994). This wide variety of speaking test provides a many chances because that the testee to display his capability in melihat various functions of spoken language in perbedaan topics. Besides, the test will be effective due to the fact that it will certainly not untuk mengambil too much time, especially if the testee gets an obstacle on one details topic or language function.

Suggestions for Elicitation approaches in Assessing dental Proficiency

The choice of sesuai elicitation approaches in speaking tests will count on the specifications of the speaking test (testee’s level, objectives, language facets to be assessed, time availability, etc.). There is a wide variety of methods which can be digunakan to elicit one’s speaking ability. Indigenous a untuk mempelajari on speaking tests right now in use, including 121 respondents, Jones and also Madsen (cited in Madsen, 1981) uncovered that much more than two dozens elicitation approaches currently digunakan in dental proficiency tests. However, these techniques deserve to be group into tahun broad categories, varying from question jenis designed to generate communicative language to techniques to facilitate discrete measurement of specific subskills. Itu categories room Communicative Discourse, Pseudo-Communicative Discourse, linked Discourse, managed Response, and Linguistic Skills. The complying with is the conversation of the elicitation techniques tangan kedua within the large categories. The conversation will awal from the really mechanical techniques to the paling communicative elicitation techniques.

Linguistic Skills. These dental tests effort to measure certain linguistic skills sebagai as grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation. Back the tests intend to measure up the linguistic aspects, they can be designed from communicative come mechanical.

These type of test in today’s dental tests are less common. Testing on individual suara (or other discrete-point tests) was really popular in audio-lingual period, which emphasized top top the learners’ ability to develop native-like pronunciation. In communicative language era, in i m sorry the main purpose that learning bahasa inggris is to have the ability to communicate effectively, the language components are generally evaluated in conjunction with listening and speaking; therefore, the contents tend to be included with definisi kertas and meaning. Madsen (1983) criticized the it is not abundant to invest time evaluating small points that also native speakers pay small attention to.

At certain levels, the oral etymological skill tests space still in use to measure particular points. Because that this purpose, there space some elicitation techniques that can be applied: (a) sentence Completion (in i beg your pardon the testee repeats and also completes a kalimat orally, e.g. “I to be born in _____________ ~ above __________”/”I was born in Mataram ~ above 27 June 1975“) ; (b) grammar Manipulation (the testee manipulates grammatical points by an altering the given sentence into the needed response, e.g. Do a pertanyaan out that this sentence: “She speaks English”/”Does she speak English?”); (c) Elicited Imitation (mimicry of talked words, phrases, or sentences); (d) the sport of the elicited imitation deserve to be in the form of reading Aloud (the testee reads aloud the printed kalimat or passage); (e) dipol Response (the testee cepat the minimum pairs of oral utterances by just saying that the words are the “same” or “different”); (f) command translation (the testee equates the aboriginal words or a phrases, or a kalimat into target language or vice-versa top top the examiner’s direction; e.g. “What is the bahasa inggris word that “matahari”?”/”Sun”); (g) Picture-Cued Vocabulary (such item can range from separation, personal, instance sketches of an object or yes, really realia to rumit sketches seperti as building, streets, etc.); (h) oral Cloze production (it memerlukan the testee to administer response to deleted words); (i) Synonym/Antonym manufacturing (it meminta the testee to carry out synonym or antonym expression because that stimulus words; lainnya way of eliciting dental production is by request the testee to respond on hear task. The solution can it is in in the membentuk of (i) photo Identification; (ii) bruto Physical solution (TPR); (iii) printed Multiple selection Response; (iv) Memory; and also (v) indigenous Language response.

The elicitation methods on linguistic skill room more sesuai to experimentation language components involved in communication including grammar and pronunciation to measure exactly how well every component has been mastered individually. The applications of these elicitation approaches should be readjusted with the function of the test, the testee’s age and language ability, and the type of ability or subskills being focused.

Controlled Discourse/Limited Response. These testing techniques deserve to be tangan kedua for testees with restricted speaking skills. Over there are few elicitation approaches which can be used to generate testee’s dental production. Itu are Visual description Item, directed Response, analysis Aloud, and also so on.Visual + description Item. From pertanyaan point of view, it have the right to consist of prolonged description the the items or activities represented in the lay out or it could constitute a one-sentence explanation of a basic line drawing, depending on the levels of the testees. At the progressed levels, the testee might be forced to describe an object or teknis drawings. It can ambil a visual + college student items and a intuitive + examiner questions.Elicited Imitation. This berhubungan dengan the control of reading aloud, particularly for start students. This kind of test deserve to be one sentence read at the time or a team of sentence which are review by the teacher and the student repeat them.Directed Response. The teacher gives the student statement or situation and then asks the students come restate melihat other expressions. A fairly simple membentuk of this check is that the teacher states such simple sentences as “Tell me the you space a student; and the student responds “I am a student”. For an ext advanced students, the teacher gives situations and the students rephrase them right into sentences; because that example, the teacher says: “An urgent letter her secretary has actually typed is penuh of mistakes: there is no offending her, persuade her to do it again”, the expected an answer is “There are one or two kecil errors in this letter, do you think you could perhaps do it again?”Connected Discourse. This testing method is commonly tangan kedua as guided oral communication test, yet it is felt to typify genuine communication. That can bawa pulang the membentuk of giving a talk, providing narration native pictures, or retelling analysis passages, etc.Oral Presentation. It is approximate communication of real life; the students space asked come prepare a talk and present that in former of class or an examiner.Retell Story. This meminta the student to read a passage and retells maafkan saya he/she has read. Occasionally the test memerlukan the testee to retell a cerita presented to him/her orally. Lainnya version of this check is the the testee retells the story from ideographs or many sketches. This have the right to reduce the memory troubles (Madsen, 1981).Explanation and Description. These associated discourse approaches require the testee to define the cases or events and describe things. The previous can be sebagai items together “Explain how Moslem in Lombok memory Idul Fitri”, “Explain how teens in Lombok storage Valentine’s Day.” The latter deserve to involve seperti descriptions as “Describe a cow”, “Describe a durian.” The work in this techniques can vary in the melakukan of control and also difficulty, yet both require varying in lot of connected speech.Pseudo-Communicative Discourse. This sort of method is used to provide somewhat more control over the use of language created by the testee, yet still maintains communicative formulir (Madsen, 1981; Madsen, 1987).Role Play. This method is widely used in experimentation oral communication. The testee theatre the function based on cases given. That can take a range of situations and the testee choose one randomly. In a classroom context two or an ext students can ambil part in ~ the exact same time, and also the teacher is simply as one observer or a rater. Top top IELTS speak test, the rater at the very same time i do not care a companion in the duty play.Directed Request. This technique memerlukan the testee to rebuild the case given into other expressions. For instance the testee will be provided “Would you you re welcome ask the man if we could look at his telephone brochure a moment? The meant answer is “Excuse me. Can we usage your dictionary for a few minutes.”Interpreter Task. This technique memerlukan the testee come report to the second orang who pretends to speak just the language gift tested. The testee is required to engage in a two-way translation: aboriginal Language to international Language and also Foreign Language to native Language. This method is tangan kedua in FSI dental Interview.Communicative Discourse. The paling frequently tangan kedua testing procedure in assessing oral proficiency is melihat direct measure of speak ability. The techniques have the right to vary straightforward Questions and Answers to rumit Oral Interview.Conversation approaches are really common in experimentation speaking. These techniques deserve to vary from such simple concerns as “What is her name?”, Where menjadi you born?” Where carry out you live?”, “Why space you discovering English?” to ore cost-free conversation on particular topics to promote actual interactions. The paling complex one is interview.Dyad Interaction. The testees exchange details with peer in activities ranging from examining one object to problem solving.Group Evaluation. A group of testees (4-6) are offered a object to be discussed. To provide topic, the tester can awal by mendemonstrasikan video or tape.CONCLUDING REMARKS

In communicative language teaching era, evaluate of one’s capacity in penampilan language in real interaction becomes the key concern. However, the intricacy of the facets involved in speaking test buatlah the teachers have tendency to avoid lihat direct experimentation for trial and error oral proficiency, instead they usage indirect or semi-direct testing, that is, experimentation oral ability melihat paper-pencil dialogue tests. No wonder the the applications of communicative language experimentation is dragged far behind the applications of communicative language teaching. The is due, on one side, come the difficulty of conducting the speaking test and the other is because of the evaluation of speaking check in pendidikan contexts, in which tertulis test is an ext dominant in determining learners’ accomplishment than the speak test.

In the masa depan with the applications of Authentic assessment in Contextual Teaching and also Learning (CTL) in 2004’s nationwide Curriculum, in i beg your pardon the assessment of students’ performance will be done at the exact same time as the teaching and also learning activities, the assessment as intended in communicative language trial and error will be more accommodated. (But it needs mindful preparation and also objectivity demands the readiness of the teacher to provide objective marks).

The consist of of practicum in national Examination for SMP and SMA, one of which is speaking because that English, will kekuatan the teachers to find bugar techniques come elicit students’ speaking. Teachers have the right to apply various elicitation approaches for speaking test depending on the objectives, time availability, students’ levels, the proportion of raters and students, and also some various other considerations.

REFERENCES

 Alderson, J. Charles, nama gadis Clapham, and also Diane Wall, 1995. Language check Construction and also Evaluation. Cambridge: CUP.

Bachman, Lyle F., 1991. Fundamental considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: OUP

Brindley, Geoff (ed), 1995. Language assessment in Action. Sydney: NCELTR.

Heaton, JB, 1990. Classroom Testing. London: Longman group Ltd.

Heaton, JB., 1991. Writing bahasa inggris Language Test. London: Longman team Ltd.

Hughes, Arthur, 1993. Trial and error for Language Teachers. Oxford: OUP

Madsen, Horald S, 1987. Techniques in Testing. Oxford: OUP

Madsen, Horald S., 1981. “Selecting appropriate Elicitation methods for dental Proficiency Tests” in man A.S. Read. Directions in Language Testing. Singapore: RELC, pp. 87-99.

Morrow, Keith, 1982. “Testing talked Language” in JB Heaton (ed.). Language Testing. Great Britain: modernis British publishing Ltd, Pp. 56-58.

Mukminatien, 1999. “The Scoring steps of speaking Assessment”, English Language Education, nada 1 sourse 1, July, 1995.

Lihat lainnya: Sejarah Lomba Panjat Pinang 17 Agustus, Lomba Panjat Pinang 17 Agustus 2021

Underhill, Nic, 1982. “The an excellent Reliability/Validity Trade-off: difficulties in assessing oral productive skills”, in JB Heaton (ed.). Language Testing. Good Britain: modernis British publication Ltd, pp. 17-23.