Fadila Taslim


This study was an action research aiming at revealing the students’ Participation in communcating ideas in Grammar course. Sometimes, Communicating idea become an uneasy work. The difficulties commonly found in relation to the lackness of vocabulary. Yet, the learners makes some efforts in overcoming their problem called communicative strategies. The Subject was 25 students of Grammar IV subject of English Study Program at STKIP Yayasan Abdi Pendidikan. The data were collected by using observation sheet, recording and lecturer’s journal. This study ran for two cycles. In the second cycle, it was shown that there was gradual improvement of the participation shown the increase of the students’ participation in communicating their ideas. It was significant because the aspects of the participation such as the students’ enthusiasm in finding the answer arose untill 76 % (very active); discussing actively was 56%(active), asking question was 60%(active), answering question was 52%(active) and noting down was 92%(very active). It means that the students enjoyed and were not reluctant  in transfering their ideas anymore. The most frequence strategies in communicating their ideas was fillers and literal translation respectively. So, these strategies was a motivation for them to communicate their thoughts eventhough they were up against some problems on vocabulary. 


Students’Participation, Commuincative strategies, Grammar course

Full Text:



Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:Rineke Cipta

Berdine, R. (1986). Why some students fail to participate in class. Marketing News, 20, 23_24.

Celce-Murcia 1995. Communicative Competence : A Pedagogically Motivated Model With Content Specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Vol 6 no 2. ISSN 1050-4273. 5-35

Corder, S. Pit.1983. “Strategies of Communication”. In C Faerch & G Kasper (Eds) .Strategies in interlanguage communication (p15-19). London : Longman

Fassinger, P. A. (1995a). Professors’ and students’ perceptions of why students participate in class. The Journal of Higher Education, 66, 82_96.

Ferguson, N. B. L. (1986). Encouraging responsibility, active participation, and critical thinking in general psychology students. Teaching of Psychology, 13, 217_218.

Fritschner, L. M. (2000). Inside the undergraduate college classroom: Faculty and students differ on the meaning of student participation. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 342_362.

Halliwel, Susan. 1992. Teaching English in the Primary Classroom. England: Longman Group UK Limited.Teaching Sociology, 24, 25_33.

Gleason, M. (1986). Better communication in large classes. College Teaching, 34, 20_24.

Siti Maziha Mustapha, Nik Suryani Nik Abd. Rahman & Melor Md. Yunus. (2010). Factors influencing classroom participation: a case study of Malaysian undergraduate student. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 9: 1079- 1084. WCLTA 2010.

Sudjana, nana. 1996. Metode Statistika. Bandung: Tarsito

McCroskey, J. C., & McVetta, R. W. (1978). Classroom seating arrangements: instructional communication theory versus student preferences. Communication Education Journal, 27, 99_111.

Richards, J.C. and R. Schmidt. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (3rd Ed). London: Pearson Education Limited

Weaver, R. R., & Qi, J. (2005). Classroom organization and participation: College students’ perceptions. The Journal of Higher Education, 76, 570_601.

Zaremba, S. B., & Dunn, D. S. (2004). Assessing class participation through self-evaluation: Method and measure. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 191_193.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 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