Ratu Yulianti Natsir


The objective of the research was to find out the improvement students’ speaking ability by using Synchronous Communication strategy at the second grade of SMA 1 Mappakasunggu. This research used Classroom Action Research that consisted two cycles. The research population was the second grade of SMA 1 Mappakasunggu academic year 2014/2015. The sample of this research consisted of 27 students. The researcher obtained the data by using speaking test and observation sheet. The findings of the student's speaking test in cycle I and cycle II had significantly different scores.  There was a better increase of gains by students at the end of action of the second cycle. The research findings indicated that the application of Synchronous Communication strategy was significant in improving the students’ speaking ability of accuracy which focused on vocabulary and fluency which focused on self-confidence. It was proved by the mean score of diagnostic test was 4.5 that classified poor, the improving in cycle 1 was 6 that classified fair and cycle 2 was 7 that classified good. It means that there was the improvement of the students’ speaking ability in SMAN 1 Mappakasunggu.

Keywords: Speaking Ability, Synchronous Communication Strategy

Full Text:



Bill Brandon. 2008 144 Tips on Synchronous e-Learning Strategy + Research.

Ellis, R. (1996). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fotos, S. 1998. Shifting the Focus from Forms to Form in the ELT Classroom. ELT Journal, 52(4), 605-628.

Gay, L.R, 1981. Educational Research; Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Columbus: Charcks, E. Merril Publishing Co.

Hamka.2011. Improving Students’ Speaking Proficiency Through Case Presentation Method At Class XI Ipa1 Of Sma Negeri 9 Makassar (A Classroom Action Research) Retrieved from August 2012. FKIP University of Muhammadiyah Makassar.

Harmer, J., 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London and New York Longman Group

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford University Press.

Herminingsih,D.I,2009. Forms-Focused and Meaning-Focused Istruction Model to Promote Speaking Ability in English Class. Dinamika Volume 9, (7778).Retrievedfrom [0n 21 July 2012 ]

Hornby. A.S. 1974. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English. Third Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. 1998. The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Prentice Hall International.

Larsen – Freeman, D. 1987. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2001. Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. 1990. Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 429-448.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. 1999. How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Long, H. L. 1983 Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of Research. TESOL Quarterly 17: (3) 359-382

Long, M. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.

Long, M., & Robinson, P. 1998. Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (Eds.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Long, M.H. 1981 Input, Interaction, and Second Language Acquisition. In Winitz, S. (Ed.) Native Language and Foreign Language Acquisition. New

York. New York Academy of Science.

Macías Diego Fernando. 2011. Towards The Use of Focus On Form Instruction In Foreign Language Learning And Teaching In Colombia. Íkala vol.16 no.29 Medellín. Retrieved From on 22 July 2012

Nishimura, K. 2000. Effective ways of communicative instruction in the Japanese EFL classroom: Balancing fluency and accuracy. Retrieved From on 21 July 2012

Nunan, D. (1998). Teaching Grammar in Context. ELT journal, 52, 101-109.

Office of information technology OIT. 2010 When, Why, and How to Use Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Communication.

Seedhouse, P. 1997. Combing form and meaning. ELT Journal, 51(4), 336-344.Retrieved from on 23 July 2012.

Sixia Gao. 2009. Focus on Form in College English Teaching. English language teaching volume 2 (46-48). Retrieved from

Tom Worthington.2013 Synchronizing Asynchronous Learning Combining Synchronous and Asynchronous Techniques Australian National University Canberra, Australia

Wallace, C. 1988. Action Research for Teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Widdowson, H. G. 1979. Teaching language as a communication. Oxford: Oxford University press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

© All rights reserved 2019. Exposure: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris (ISSN Print: 2252-7818), (ISSN Online: 2502-3543)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.