Herlina Herlina, Melati Melati


The aim of this research was to find out whether or not it was significantly effective to teach speaking by using curiosity box strategy to vocational level students. The subject of this research was the eleventh grade students of Vocational High School Number 2 Lubuklinggau. In this research, the writer formulated two hypotheses. There were null hypothesis (Ho) and alternative hypothesis (Ha). In this design, the writer used pre-experimental method. The total population was 297 students and sample of the research was 32 students taken through cluster random sampling. The writer used oral test as a technique for collecting the data. The data was analyzed through four techniques: 1) students’ individual score; 2) comparison to minimum mastery criteria; 3) normality test and 4) paired t-test. Based on data analysis, it showed that the  student’s average score pre-test was 53.21 while the post-test was 72.14. Thus, the result of paired t-test calculation was 14.02 which was higher than 1.697 as critical value with degree of freedom 31 (32-1) with 95% significant level for one-tailed test. Finally, the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and alternative hypothesis was accepted. It means that it was significantly effective to teach speaking by using curiosity box strategy to vocational level students at Vocational High School Number 2 Lubuklinggau.


teaching, speaking, and curiosity box strategy

Full Text:



Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pedekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta

Astanniah. (2009). Concept of Speaking. Retrieved from http://jufry2u.blogspot.com/2012/03/concept-of-speaking-usingdyned.html

Brassell, J. (2011). Multisensory Language Instruction: Guidelines and Activities. Retrieved from http://www.Idonline.org/article

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive approach to Language Pedagogy, (2nd ed). New York: Longman.

Coultas, V. (2002). Second Language Learning in Children: A Model of Language Learning in Social Content. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dalton, S.S. (2008). How to Succeed with All Learning: Five Standards for Effective Teaching. America: Jossey Bass Press.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1990). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, (2nd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Greer, R.D. (2002). Designing Teaching Strategies. New York: Academic Press.

Hatch, E.H., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research Design Statistic for Applied Linguistics.Cambridge: Newbury House Publisher.

Heaton, J. B. (1989). Writing English Language Test. New York: NY. Longman Group. UK Limited.

IKAPI. (2015). Zamrud SMK/MAK: Pegangan Guru. Surakarta: Putra Nugraha.

Isaac, S., & Michael, W. B. (1985). Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego, California: EDITS Publisher.

Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language. Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/techniques/kayi-teachingspeaking.html.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Method and Techniques. New Delhi: New Age International (P).

Latief, M. A. (2014). Research Methods on Language Learning: An Introduction. Malang: UM Press.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching.New York: MC Grow Hill Companies.

Subana, M., & Sudrajat. (2001). Dasar-dasar Penelitian. Bandung: Pustaka Setia.

Tarigan, H. G. (1985). Berbicara Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan Berbahasa. Bandung: Angkasa.

Turk, C. (2003). Effective Speaking: Communicating in Speech. French: Spon-Press.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Proceedings of ISELT FBS Universitas Negeri Padang

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

This Proceedings is Currently indexed by:

Google Scholar.

The Proceedings of International Seminar on English Language and Teaching is registered at LIPI