PENILAIAN SPEAKING

Kemampuan berbicara (speaking) dan menulis (writing) dalam pelajaran bahasa Inggris
merupakan dua kemampuan yang hampir sama sulitnya dirasakan oleh sebagian besar siswa di
sekolah.

Kesulitan speaking biasanya disebabkan:

1. Sulitnya mengungkapkan ide secara lisan. Sehingga siswa bingung untuk berbicara.

2. Terbatasnya kosakata (vocabulary), sehingga siswa sulit berbicara lancar dan lama.

3. Terbatasnya kemampuan tata bahasa (grammar). Sehingga sulit berbicara dengan aturan
yang benar.

4. Terbatasnya melafalkan kata-kata (pronounciation). Sehingga sulit mengucapkan kata yang

diucapkannya dengan benar.

5. Kurangnya keberanian untuk berbicara karena takut salah.

Demikian pula dalam menulis (writing) pada dasarnya mempunyai penyebab yang hampir
sama dengan berbicara (speaking). Hanya bedanya pada masalah lisan dan tulisan.

Agar para siswa dapat berbicara dan menulis dalam bahasa Inggris, bisa dicoba pembelajaran
melalui drama.

Tekhnis pelaksanaannya dapat mencoba sbb:

a. Terlebih dahulu menerangkan semua hal yang berkaitan dengan drama. Mulai dari cara
membuat naskah, setting panggung, dll.

b. Membagi siswa dalam kelompok. Setiap kelompoknya terdiri atas 5-6 orang secara
heterogen berdasarkan kemampuan.

c. Setiap kelompok di tugaskan membuat drama yang temanya bebas, dan durasi drama
maksimal 10 menit. Serta setiap anak dialognya minimal 5 dialog.

Masing-masing kelompok setiap minggunya harus berkonsultasi tentang hasil tulisannya.

Naskah yang sudah di konsultasikan dan diperiksa oleh guru, dikembalikan pada siswa untuk
diperbaiki dan di tulis ulang.

Penilaian speaking dilakukan secara individual dengan aspek-aspek penilaian:

*. Intonasi (intonation)
*. Pengucapan (pronounciation)
*. Tata bahasa (grammer)
*. Kelancaran bicara (fluency), dan
*. Gaya bicara (diction).

Sedangkan penilaian writing dilakukan secara kelompok, dengan aspek penilaian:

*. Kemampuan mencurahkan ide / gagasan.
*. Tata bahasa (grammer)
*. Kosakata (vocabulary), dan
*. Tanda baca (punctuation)

Metode ini telah diterapkan oleh SMAN-1 Cimahi, dan ternyata para siswanya memiliki

Options
Disable

Get Free Shots

JADIGURU
Just another WordPress.com weblog
« Hello world!

Rubric of Speaking Assessment

untuk melakukan penilaian pada speaking skill, kita memerlukan instrument penilaian berupa
rubrik. alat ini digunakan untuk memberikan penilaian yang lebih measurable dan observable

beerikut ini contoh rubrik yang bisa digunakan sebagai acuan penilaian speaking. dan semoga
bermanfaat…..!

Name :

Class/semester :

Number :

Proficiency 1 2 3 4 5 6
Description
Accent 0 1 2 2 3 4
Grammar 6 12 18 24 30 36
Vocabulary 4 8 12 16 20 24
Fluency 2 4 6 8 10 12
Comprehension 4 8 12 15 19 23
Total Score

Note:

Conversion Table

Total Score FSI Level

16 – 25 0+

26 – 32 1

33 – 42 1+

43 – 52 2

53 – 63 2+

63 – 72 3

73 – 82 3+

83 – 92 4

93 – 99 4+

Speaking Proficiency Scale

(Oller)
1. Able to satisfy routine travel needs and minimum courtesy requirements. Can ask and
answer question on topics very familiar to him; within the scope of his very limited language
experience can understand simple questions and statements …

2. Able to satisfy routine social demands and limited work requirements. Can handle with
confidence but not with facility most social situations including introductions and casual
conversations about current events, as well as work, family, and autobiographical information
…

3. Able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy and vocabulary to participate
effectively in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social and professional
topics. Can discuss particular interests and special fields of competence with reasonable ease;
comprehension is quite complete for a normal rate of speech; vocabulary is broad enough that
he rarely has to grope for a word; accent may be obviously foreign; control of grammar good;
errors never interfere with understanding and rarely disturb the native speaker.

4. Able to use the language fluently and accurately on all levels normally pertinent to
professionals needs. Can understand and participate in any conversation within his range of
experience with a high degree of fluency and precision of vocabulary; would rarely be taken
for a native speaker, but can respond appropriately even in unfamiliar situations; errors of
pronunciation and grammar quite rare; can handle informal interpreting from and into the
language.

5. Speaking proficiency equivalent to that of an educated native speaker. Has complete fluency
in the language such that his speech on all levels is fully accepted by educated native speakers
in all of its features, including breadth of vocabulary and idiom, colloquialisms, and pertinent
cultural references.

Rating on Scale

a. Accent

1. Pronunciation frequently unintelligible.

2. Frequent gross errors and a very heavy accent make understanding difficult, require frequent
repetition.

3. “Foreign accent” requires concentrated listening and mispronunciation lead to occasional

misunderstanding and apparent errors in grammar or vocabulary.

4. Marked “foreign accent” and occasional mispronunciations which do not interfere with
understanding.

5. No conspicuous mispronunciations, but would not be taken for a native speaker.

6. Native pronunciation, which no trace of “foreign accent”.

b. Grammar

1. Grammar almost entirely inaccurate except in stock phrases.

2. Constant errors showing control of very few major patterns and frequently preventing
communication.

3. Frequent errors showing some major patterns uncontrolled and causing occasional irritation
and misunderstanding.

4. Occasional errors showing imperfect control of some patterns but no weakness that causing
misunderstanding.

5. Few errors, with no patterns of failure.

6. No more than two errors during the interview.

c. Vocabulary

1. Vocabulary inadequate for even the simplest conversation.

2. Vocabulary limited to basic personal and survival areas (time, food, transportation, family,
etc.)

3. Choice of words sometimes inaccurate, limitation of vocabulary prevent discussion of some

common professional and social topics

4. Professional vocabulary adequate to discuss special interest; general vocabulary permits

discussion of any non-technical subject with some circumlocutions.

5. Professional vocabulary broad and precise; general vocabulary adequate to cope with
complex practical problems and varied social situation.

6. Vocabulary apparently as accurate and extensive as that of an educated native speaker

d. Fluency

1. Speech is so halting and fragmentary that conversation is virtually impossible.

2. Speech is very slowly and uneven except for short or routine sentences.

3. Speech is frequently hesitant and jerky; sentences may be left uncompleted.

4. Speech is occasionally hesitant, with some unevenness caused by rephrasing and grouping
for words.

5. Speech is effortless and smooth, but perceptibly non-native in speed and evenness.

6. Speech is on all professional and general topics as effortless and smooth as a native
speaker’s.

e. Comprehension

1. Understand too little for the simplest type of conversation.

2. Understands only slow, very simple speech on common social and touristic topic; requires
constant repetition and rephrasing.

3. Understand careful, somewhat simplified speech directed to him, with considerable

repetition and rephrasing.

4. Understands quite well normal educated speech directed to him, but requires occasional
repetition and rephrasing.

5. Understands everything in normal educated conversation except for every colloquial or low-
frequency items, or exceptionally rapid or slurred speech.

6. Understands everything in both formal and colloquial speech to be expected of an educated

native speaker.

Scoring Rubric for Writing

NO COMPONENTS RANGE DESCRIPTION

1 CONTENT 30 – 27 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: related ideas

26 – 22 GOOD: occasionally unrelated ideas

21 – 17 FAIR TO POOR: very often unrelated ideas

16 – 13 VERY POOR: irrelevant ideas

2 ORGANIZATION 20 – 18 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: effective and well
organized
17 – 14
GOOD: occasionally ineffective, weak transition and
13 – 10 incomplete organization

9–7 FAIR TO POOR: lack organization

VERY POOR: little or no organization

3 VOCABULARY 20 – 18 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: effective word choice

17 – 14 GOOD: mostly effective word choice

13 – 10 FAIR TO POOR: frequently error in word choice

9–7 VERY POOR: mostly ineffective word choice

4 LANGUAGE USE 25 – 22 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: grammatically correct

21 – 18 GOOD: mostly grammatically correct

17 – 11 FAIR TO POOR: frequently error in grammar

10 – 5 VERY POOR: very often error in grammar

5 MECHANICS 5 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: few errors in spelling,
 punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing

4 GOOD: occasionally errors in spelling, punctuation,

capitalization, paragraphing
3
FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors in spelling,
2 punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing

VERY POOR: dominated by errors in spelling,

punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing
TOTAL SCORE