Cartoon Dubbing for Improving Students’ Speaking Ability in Transactional Conversation (a classroom action research into the eighth graders of SMP 5 Semarang in the academic year of 2011/ 2012)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The aim of this study was to know the effectiveness of using cartoon dubbing in teaching speaking of transactional conversations. Objectives of the study were: to know the implementation of cartoon dubbing used for improving students’ ability in transactional conversation, to find out the use of cartoon dubbing for improving students’ speaking ability in transactional conversation and, to find out advantages and disadvantages the cartoon dubbing for improving students’ speaking ability in transactional conversations. A classroom action research was conducted in this research. The subject of this study was the eighth graders of SMP 5 Semarang. The students were in class 8D and there were 22 students in the class. In this research there were five meetings were conducted. The first meeting was pretest. The second and third meetings conducted for cycle 1. The fourth meeting was used for cycle 2 and the last meeting was posttest and questionnaire. Based on the analysis of the students’ dubbing and performances that were recorded, it can be concluded that the students’ speaking ability improved. This improvement can be seen from the mean scores of each element of speaking, informal interview, observation notes, and questionnaires that was analyzed. The observation notes were made to analyze and see the students’ activity during the teaching process. According to the questionnaires and informal interview that I used, the students interested to the medium. Based on the result of the study, their average in pre-test was 68.9, then it became 73.4 in formative-test, and finally their average score obtained 79.2 on post-test. It indicates that the cartoon dubbing is an effective medium in helping students to improve their skill in speaking of transactional conversations. The advantages of cartoon dubbing were: reducing mispronunciation, improving the fluency, raising the awareness of intonation, linking the pronunciation with actual use and built learners’ perceptions. The disadvantages were: consuming time to prepare and demanding teacher to be skillful in making the cartoon dubbing. The suggestion is given to the teacher is that the teacher should use the cartoon dubbing for improving students speaking ability; it can be seen from the improvement of students’ score on the result above. It also helps for making the lesson interesting and fun.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,118 | 0,018 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».