THE USE OF CHAIN DRILL TECHNIQUE IN TEACHING SPEAKING

Dira Permana and Nurul Hafizah

Faculty of Language and Art Education, IKIP Mataram
[email protected]
[email protected]

Abstract: This study aims at finding out the effectiveness of Chain Drill technique
in teaching speaking. This study applied quasi experimental research method. The
population of this research was all the eighth grade students of SMPN 4 Praya in
academic year 2017/2018 which consisted of four classes. Samples used were two
classes taken by using cluster random sampling technique; VIII C as experimental
class, and VIII A as control class. To determine the sample which belonged to
experimental class treated by using Chain Drill technique and control class treated
by using Presentation, Practice, and Production technique (PPP), a lottery was
used. The instrument used was speaking test in the form of instruction. The
technique used to collect data was pre-test and post-test of speaking test. Data
gained were analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistics analysis.
Based on analysis, it was found that the mean score of post-test was higher than
mean score of pre-test (64≥37). While in control class, the mean score of post-test
was also higher than the mean score of pre-test (50≥30). From the data obtained,
it was found difference in score both in post-test from pre-test between the two
classes; experimental class 14≥7 for control class which showed experimental
score was higher than control class. Based on the t-test, it was found that t-test
score (2.52) was higher than t-table (1.671) with the degree of freedom 42. In
other words, Ha was accepted and Ho was rejected in which there was significant
difference in scores between experiment and control class. Thus, it can be
concluded that the use of Chain Drill technique is effective in teaching speaking.

Keywords: Chain Drill Technique, Teaching, Speaking

INTRODUCTION spoken in the world. One of them was

Thornbury (2005:1) states that English. It was used as a native
speaking is so much part of daily life language by people who live in the
that we take for granted. Speaking is a British, the United States, Australia,
tool for communication to send Canada, and some other places.
messages from speaker to listener. Heretofore, English plays an important
Speaking facilitates speakers to role in the world communication
express what they want to convey. where people have to acquaire it
Speaking is the most natural way to including people in Indonesia. In the
communicate. Speaking is needed by process of learning English, there are
the teacher and students to talk to one many problems encountered by
another for their lesson purposes. The Indonesians. Those are caused by
important thingwas that we have to interference of Indonesian as the
know there are many languages
official language and their mother Based on the observation,the
tongue. researcherfound some problems
English includes four kinds of thatwere faced by students in thier
skill, those are reading, speaking, learning speaking in the class in which
listening, and writing. Speaking is one students still had low ability in
of the important skills that should be speaking skill. This low ability was
mastered by students in teaching and reflected in the students’ difficulties in
learning process. Speaking is one of pronuncing the words, costructing
skills in English that the students must sentences in which words were used to
be good at pronunciation, vocabulary, express ideas to speak, using good
and grammar. To be a good speaker structure to form sentences
they need to improve their speaking grammatically, and having low
english. The best way to improve understanding towards the other
speaking English is byhaving more students’ speeches when learning to
practice. They have to speak a lot in speak in the class. Besides, the
English language. But in there are who teaching technique used by the teacher
still fact many students are poor in in teaching students to learn speaking
practicing speaking English. As result was still not relevant to the students’
they can’t speak English well. ability and level of knowledge. In this
Students of senior high school case the teacher was used to using old
were commonly able to speak and teaching tehnique which presentation,
pronunce the word good enough. They practice and production. The learning
were also able to understand the facility which was not supporting was
meaning of the word that they speak. also becoming another problem
Unfortunately, there were some influencing the students’ low ability in
students in a school that still had low learning good speaking. To solve
ability to speak and pronunce the word these problems, the researcher was
well. This be effect because of many interested to teach the students by
factors, one of the factor was the using Chain Drill technique in
teachers still used in interesting teaching technique that is created from
methods or techniquesin teaching. the Audio Lingual Method firstly
Teaching speaking as a foreign applied by Charles Fries (1995) of the
language to Junior High School University of Michigan .
students was not easy. Teachers According Larsen (2000 : 48)
present not only teach how to speak A Chain Drill is an alternative
but also pay much attention to their technique that teacher can use in
students’ pronunciation, grammar, teaching speaking. By using a Chain
vocabulary, and fluency. Occasionally, Drill, all students have the same
teachers’ faults were in choosing opportunity to ask and answer
teaching appropriate technique which questions to one another. It is started
makes students feel bored and not by the teacher. Who prepares
interested in the speaking learning questions to be asked to the students
class. Morever, teachers do not nearest with the teacher. Then the
explore students’ potential in teacher begins the chain by asking
speaking. questions to the students nearest with
the teacher. That student responds,
then him turn to ask students get a of communication. It means that
chance to ask and answer the speaking is very important. Speaking
questions. The last students are is the interaction between two people
directed to ask questions to the or more in getting information where
teacher. In this opportunity the there is speaker and listener.
students’ pronunciation, grammar, Speaking is an interactive process
vocabulary, and fluency can be of constructing meaning that involves
evaluated by the teacher. producing, receiving and processing
This teaching technique is information. Its form and meaning are
really fun and makes students enjoy depending on the context in which it
the learning. Teaching by using chain occurs, including the participants
drill technique will make students themselves, their experiences, the
motivated and understand more the physical environment, and the
point of the material given. Moreover purposes for speaking. It is often
it will improve students’ speaking spontaneous, openended, and
skill. Then can speak English fluently evolving. However, speech is not
ans informal field. That is why in this always unpredictable. Speaking
research the writer tries to identify the requires that learners not only know
effectiveness of chain drill technique how to produce specific points of
in speaking english at the eighth grade language such as grammar,
students of SMPN 4 Praya in the pronunciation, or vocabulary
academic year 2017/2018. ("linguistic competence"), but also that
they understand when, why, and in
what ways to produce language
("sociolinguistic competence")
REVIEW OF RELATED (Nunan,1999:216). Speaking is the
LITERATURE process of building and sharing
Speaking meaning through the use of verbal and
Speaking is one of the skills that non-verbal symbols, in a variety of
should be learnt by students in contexts (Chaney, 1998, p. 13).
learning English. Through speaking, Richard (2008: 19) states that
they can express their ideas and the mastery of speaking skill in
communicate with others. In speaking, English is a priority for many second-
the students learn how to organize the language or foreign- language
idea, express the language in spoken learners. Consequently, learners often
form with good pronunciation and evaluate their success in language
stressing. According to Cameron learning as well as the effectiveness of
(2001: 40), speaking is the active use their English course on the basis of
of language to express meanings so how much they feel they have
that other people can make sense of improved their spoken language
them. In speaking someone is required proficiency.
to be able to use the spoken language Brown (2004: 140) states that
well that can be understood by the speaking is a productive skill that can
others or listener. Richards and be directly and empirically observed;
Renandya (2002:210) say that those observations are invariably
speaking is one of the central elements collared by the accuracy and fluency.
While, they also stated that speaking is e) Comprehension
the product of creative construction of Understanding a normal rate
linguistic strings, the speakers make of speech, can understand
choices of lexicon, structure, and questions and statement with
discourse. paraphrase, can get the gist of
Based on the definitions above, most conversation of non-
it can be inferred that speaking is a technical subject.
basic of person skill to produce
language that has meaning and be Chain Drill
understood by other people about what A chain drill is a technique that
the speaker says. It is a skill of speaker teacher can use in teaching speaking in
to give information to a listener or a foreign language learner or second
group of listeners by transferring it language learner class. In teaching
effectively and speaking activity must speaking using a chain drill, all
be set on fun situation. To conclude, students have the same opportunity to
speaking is an activity that can express ask and answer questions with each
thoughts, idea, and opinions orally to other. A chain drill can controlled
responds to the verbal and non verbal communication among students.
information. Either teacher or students can correct
According to Hughes themselves or their friend’s oral
(2003:100) in Imran and Sumarni sentences. Any mistakes that probably
(2016: 34), there are five indicators in occur can be corrected direcly as soon
assessing speaking, those are: as possible. The use of chain drill can
a) Grammar encourage the improvement of
Confident control of the students’ listening and speaking skill.
grammar is able to speak the They get listening skill from listening
language with sufficient structural to their friends questions. Moreover,
accuracy. the way they ask questions or answer
b) Vocabulary the questions drives students to
Vocabulary has speaking practice speaking.
vocabulary sufficient to express The activity is really fun and
him simply with some makes students enjoy the lesson. It
circumlocutions. Able to speak also creates a new habit to use English
the language with sufficient in communicate with others. Teaching
vocabulary in conversation. by using chain drill technique will
c) Pronunciation make students motivated and
Pronunciations can be understand more the point of the
intelligible though good spelling, materian given; moreover it will
dealing with foreigners attempting improve students’ speaking skill.
to speak his language. Then, they can speak English fluently
d) Fluency in formal and informal field. The
Fluency can discuss Chain Drill is one of the technique
particular interest of competence, used in Audio-Lingual Method. The
able to use the language fluently use of Chain Drill in teaching
on all levels. Can participate in speaking give some advantages for the
any conversation with fluency. students and teachers.
 According to Larsen-Freeman that froms around the room as
(2000:37), “A Chain Drill gives students, one-by-one, ask and
students an opportunity to say the lines answer questions of each other.
individually. The teacher listens and The teacher begins the chain by
can tell which students are struggling greeting a particular student, or
and will need more practice. A chain asking him questions. That
drill also lets students use the student respons, and than turms to
exspression in communication with the students sitting next to him.
someone else, even though the The first students greets or asks a
communication very limited”. By question of the second student and
using a chain drill, the teaching and the chain drill continues. A chain
learning speaking is more effective. drill allows some controlled
The teacher immediately correct the communication, even though it is
students’ mistakes. He is able to give limited. A chain drill also gives
more attention and positive feedback the teacher an opportunity to
to the students in order to give them check each student’s speech.
more knowledge and motivation in According to Larsen
practicing speaking. As a result, the (2000:48), there are some steps
students are more interested in in conducting Chain Drill.
learning speaking. They can improve a. The teacher begins the chain
their speaking skill through the chain by greeting students or
drill activity. asking some questions.
According to Freeman (2000) in b. The students respond, then
Dani (2016: 30) The kinds of drill that turn to students next to him
commonly used in teaching speaking, c. The first greets or ask
according to Larsen-Freeman, as question of the second
follows: student and chain
a) Backward build-up drill continuous.
This is used when a long line of d. The teacher checks
dialog is giving students trroble. The students’ speak.
teacher breaks down the line into
several part. The students repeat a part Handayani (2011: 52) states
of the sentence, usully the last phare or that there are five advantages of
line. Then, following the teacher’s chain drill technique in speaking,
cue, the students expand what they are those are:
repeating part by part until they are a. A chain drill as alternative
able to repeat the entire line. technique
b) Repetition Drill b. A chain drill technique made
Students are asked to repeat students more interested in
the teacher’s model as accurately learning speaking
and as quickly as possible. This c. Chain drill technique made
drill is often used to teach the the teacher easier in checking
lines of the dialogue. and correcting the students
c) Chain Drill speaking aspect
A chain drill gets its name
from the chain of conversation
 d. Chain drill technique made belonging to experimental and control
students practice speaking group, lottery was used. VIII-C
English effectively consisting of 22 students used as the
e. Chain drill technique made experimental class while VIII-A
students could speak English consisting of 22 students used as the
communicatively control class. The experimental group
received a new treatment by using
Chain Drill technique. Meanwhile, the
RESEARCH METHOD control class was treated by using
Research design plays an Presentation, Practice, Production.
important role towards the quality of a Detailed picture on the research design
research. This research used can be displayed below:
quantitative approach by using
experimental research. Experimental R O1 X O2
research seeks to find the casual
relationship between two factors R O3 O4
which are raised by the researchers in
the purpose of reducing or eliminating In which:
any distracting factors. Nunan (…..), R: Random Sampling
states, “experimental is designed to O1: Pre test value of
collect data in such a way that threats experimental
to the realibility and validity of the O2: Pre test value of
research is ministered”. The design of experimental class
the research used was pretest-postest O3: Pre test of control class
control group design. O4: Post test of control class
Population of the research were the X: Treatment
eighth grade students of SMPN 4
Praya in academic year 2018/2019
consisting of four classes; VIII-A, RESEARCH FINDINGS AND
VIII-B, VIII-C, and VIII-H with the DISCUSSION
total number of the students were 87 This session leads to discuss the
students. According to Encyclopedia finding of the investigation and
of Educational Evaluation, population discussion of the investigation result
was a set of all elements prossesing and the interpretation of the
one or more attributes of interest. investigation.
Sugiyono (2013) states that population
is generalization areas which consist 1. Data Description of Experimental
of subject or object that has certain Group
characteristic and quality. The result of data analysis
There were two groups used to be showed that the highest score was 76
researched as samples namely and the lowest score was 36. The
experimental and control group taken mean score was 64, the median was
through cluster random sampling. 84.5, mode was 45.3, range was 40,
Arikunto (1998) states that “sample and standard deviation was 90. Then
represents a part of research the frequency distribution, histogram,
population. To determine the group
and polygon of the data were shown in table of kolmogorov-smirnova
the table below: columns because the sample of the
research was more that fifty.
Histogram and Polygon of Post test The Normality Test of Post-test
8 Result
Frequency

4
Based on the table 4.6 it
Histogram
showed that the result of normality
Polygon
0
36 - 43 – 50 – 57 – 64 – 71 – test from the pretest was p ≤ a ( 003
42 49 56 63 70 77 ≤ 0.05 ) and ( 200 ≤ 0.05). The data
Class limit of posttest were not in normal
distribution and it was beyond the
ability of the researcher. The score of
2. Data Description of Control p could be seen from sig in the table
Group of kolmogorov-smirnova columns
The result of data analysis because the sample of the research
showed that the highest score was 68 was less than fifty.
and the lowest score was 35. The
mean score was 50, the median was The Homogenity test of Pre-test
42.8, mode was 41.7, range was 33, experimental and control class.
and standard deviation was 1.00. Based on the table 4.8 it showed
Then the frequency distribution, the result of the test showed the
histogram and polygon of the data probability value (p) of the data from
were showen in the table bellow: the experimental and control group
pretest score is 0.65. It means p of the
data higher than d. (0.65 ≥ 0.05). It
Histogram and Polygon of Post test can be conclude that the sample data
Frequency

8 comes from population which has

4 homogenous variance.
Histogram Based on the table 4.9 it showed
0 the result of the test showed the
Polygon
32 39 46 53 60 67
– – – – – – probability value (p) of the data from
38 45 52 59 66 73 the experimental and control group
Class limit posttest score is 188. It means p of the
data higher than d. (188 ≥ 0.05). It can
be conclude that the sample data
Normality and Homogenity comes from population which has
Exsperimental and control group homogenous variance
pretest and posttest score. .
Based on the table 4.6 it Testing Hypothesis (t-test)
showed that the result of normality Testing hypothesis is procedure
test from the pretest was p ≥ a ( 138 for deciding if the null hypothesis
≥ 0.05 ) and ( 033 ≥ 0.05). Its means should be rejected or the alternative
that the pretest data of this research hypothesis should be accepted. The
was in normal distribution. The score hypothesis was tested by using t-test.
of p could be seen from sig in the The hypotheis of this research is t-test
by comparing t-table value at the were not working individually in the
significance level of 0.05 (95%) with class room but working together or by
44 sample. Based on the result of their pairs of students. Therefore,
hypothesis testing, it was found that to( every students can share the problem
t-obtain ) ≥ Tt ( t-table ) or 2.52 ≥ to find out good solution. Chain Drill
1.671 which meant t-test score was technique in teaching speaking that
higher than t-table. This result showed make student easy in understanding
that the use of Chain Drill Technique the test given and than could achieve
in teaching Speaking effective. good result score.
The first, a thesis written by
Discussion Kusuma Utami Hamdayani (2011).
In control class students were Her title is Using a Chain Drill to
taught by using conventional Improve students’ Fluency in speaking
teachnique, so there was not new English (The case of seventh Grade
exsperience to students. Students’ Students of “SMP N” 5 Sragen in the
could not enjoy in speaking class. Academic Year of 2010/2011).The
Before getting treatments, the students result after the treatments by using the
experimental classgave the pretest, chain drill, the students’ in speaking
students’in speaking was low. Not English improved. It is proved by
only the way they convey their idea improving mean score from the pre-
was not clear but also there were many test into the second cycle test. It
difficulties in grammar and improved from 1.3 to 3.5. it shows that
vocabulary. And the comparisions of this technique effectively help the
average score between experimental students to improve their teaching in
and control class was homogeneous. It speaking English.
meant before the treatments the The second, a thesis written by
students had same condition, they still Mila Januar Widyaningsih (2014).
low in speaking ability. Her title is Improving Speaking Skill
Based on the analysis students’ By Using Chain Drill Technique at the
ability in posttest, it was found that Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 1
after getting treatment, students’ Amlapura in Academic Year 2013-
ability in experiment class were taught 2014.The result study proved that
by using Chain Drill. The result of this chain drill technique could improve
researcher showed that after teaching speaking skill, it showed by the
speaking by chain drill technique was improvement of mean score in cycle I
effect on students speaking, because (70.28) and cyle II (80.68). In
Chain drill technique was one of the addition, the subjects also responded
strategies applied in the class room for positively the implementation of chain
teaching learning process that was able driil technique in speaking activity.
to create vivid atmosphere that The different change of score
encourage the students develop their for both group because Experimental
ideas. group was treated by using Chain Drill
Chain drill technique does not technique, while control group was
focus on one part of indicator in treated by using conventional
speaking but also it covers all technique. Then, the degree of
indicators of speaking. The students freedom (df) that was used in this
research were interpreted to compare Based on the data analysis and
the two critical values; t-test. In the discussion in previous chapter, the
experimental group, the mean score of researcher came to the conclusion:
post-test was higher than the mean Based on the application of t-
score of pre-test (64>37), and the test, the difference was effect
difference was statistically significant statistically significant because
because of the t-test of post-test, where probability value was higher than
probability value was lower than alpha alpha (.2.52> 0.05).Ha is accepted and
(0.00 < 0.05). While in control group, Ho is rejected. Teaching technique
the mean score of post-test was also Chain Drill produces much greater
higher than the mean score of pre-test change in students speaking. In other
(50>30), but the difference was word, teaching technique Chain Drill
statistically significant because has significant effect of students
probability value was higher than speaking.
alpha (2.52> 0.05).values; t-test and t-
table. So, the degree of freedom (df) of Suggestion
this research got from formula: As the end of this thesis, the
( Nx + Ny ) – 2 = ( 22 + 22 ) writer would like to give some
– 2 = 42 suggestions for teacher and students,
From the comparison above, it as follows:
was clear that the t-test. It indicated of 1. For theTeacher
degree of difference of the mean score a. English teacher should
was significant in both confidence prepare media as teaching
level 0.05, thus the researcher would especially using Chain Drill
like to state that this research was technique students speaking
effective Chain Drill technique in can run effectivelly in the
teaching speaking. classroom.
Based on the result above, the b. English teacher also should
researcher concluded that Chain Drill be creative in preparing
was effective. From the data found, it materials for the instuction
was found difference in score obtained and try to apply different
in the post-test from pre-test between technique of teaching.
the two classes; experimental class c. The teacher should give the
14≥7 for control class which showed students more motivation in
experimental score was higher than English learning, especially
control class.It was approved by the to improve their speaking by
result of score analysis by using t-test using Chain Drill technique
formulate, when the result of t-test was for students.
2.52 and t-table 1.671. it means that t- 1) The students had to learn
test was higher than t-table at the Chain Drill technique to
significant level 42. So, alternative improve their speaking.
hypothesis accepted and null 2) The students should had
hypothesis was rejected. high motivation and
encourage themselves to
CONCLUSION mastery in speaking
especially by using Chain
 Drill, because Thornbury, S. (2002).How to Teach
thestudent’s English Speaking. Edinburg Gate harlow
Essex England: Pearson
proficiency can be seen Education limited.
from his ability to Brown. 2004. Assessing
mastery in speaking. Speaking.Cambridge
3) The students should Language Assessment
always practice in Series. Series Edition:
Cambridge University
speaking after learn Chain Press.
Drill Technique. Syakur. 1987. Language Testing and
2. For the Future Researchers Evaluation. Surakarta:
The researcher hope that the SebelasMaretuniversity Press
result of the study is useful for Tarigan, H. Guntur. 1990.
BerbicarasebagaiSuatuKetrampi
those who are interested in lanBerbahasa Bandung:
english and for those who wants PenerbitAngkasa
to conduct further researcher Wilid, D. 1990. The Lexical Syllabus,
about toward students speaking Colins CO BUILD, London and Glasgow,
and in other skill such as reading, 8 Grafton Street London W 1X 3LA
Wikipedia online The Free Encyclopedia
listening and vocabulary.
At:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
communicative_Langua
BIBILIOGRAPHY ge_teaching (16Jumat
Thombury, scott. 2005. How To 2018)
TeachSpeaking . England.Logman. Londan: Sudijono, Anas. 2008.
Pearson. PengantarStatistisPendidikan. Jakarta: P.T
Brown, H. Dougles. 1989. A Practical Guide Raja GrafindoPerdo.
to Language Learning McGraw-Hill, Richards, J.C. 2008. Teaching Listening
Inc, 1221 avenue of the americas, and Speaking. Cambridge:
New York, NY 10020, 1989 CambridgeUniversity Press.
Diane Larsen-Preeman-Techniques and . Di akses 01-01-2018 pukul 11.15
principles in language Teaching- Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur
Oxford University Press (2000) Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
Principle. Second Edition. San .
Francisco:
San Francisco University.
H. Douglas Brown, Languange Assessment:
Principle and Classroom Practices, (San
Fransisco, Claifornia: Pearson Longman,
(2003), p.287.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language
Assessment Principle and
Classroom Practices.San Francisco
state University.
Imran Fathurrahman and Sumarni. 2016.
Handout of ELT Material
Development.
Unpublished.IKIP.Mataram.
Cameron, Lynne. 2001. Teaching language to
young Learners. Cambridge:
Cambridge University press