Subtitle in Teaching Pronunciation with Video

RokiRanjaniSanjadireja, [email protected], UniversitasPendidikan Indonesia, Bandung,

Indonesia

Abstract. Video has been a tool to improve learning outcomes, but many
teachers do not apply the correct procedure in using video as the medium of
teaching pronunciation. Pronunciation should have taken its fascination into
classroom teaching-learning. This research’s objective is to test the use of video
subtitles in teaching pronunciation and its impact on students’ pronunciation.
This research is a quantitative study with the design of a true experiment post-
test only. One group watches non subtitled video, and the other watches
captioned the video. The researcher has found that watching videos only, with
subtitles or no subtitles, does not improve students’ pronunciation. It suggested
that teachers may have to do another activity such as enhancement, repetition, or
scaling in teaching pronunciation rather than watching only.

Keywords: audio-visual, subtitle, teaching pronunciation, video

I. INTRODUCTION

Teaching pronunciation encounters with rapid technological development. The

technology enhances learning(Arjuna I. Ranasinghe & Diane Leisher, 2009). Technology, like
a visual aid, opens the opportunity to a new approach in teaching that provides a stimulus that
has a vital capacity to sustain learner’s attention(Celce-Murcia et al., 1996). Generally speaking,
the school syllabus rarely mentions video as a teaching pronunciation tool in English teaching.
The focus on the four language skills has led pronunciation into bias due to losing media in
education. It is also problematic because the moment students hear language from a native that
is becoming unfamiliar due to little amount of training in pronouncing English. The practice
should enable the learner to consolidate language on another aspect of its use like the intonation
and pronunciation(Ira Pratiwi, 2013).

Integrating pronunciation and listening has been proposed by many teachers to teach
pronunciation. Teaching pronunciation through listening to the audio, as the medium,
exhilarates joyous and comfortable atmosphere that smooth learning in delicate pronunciation
area (Ebong & Marta J. Sabbadini, 2016). Pronunciation is as a pivotal element of language
learning has also been a missing piece and an abandoned aspect in teaching English as a Foreign
Language (Haycraft, 1978). Students who learn English as a Foreign Language (EFL) often
mispronounce words due to the differences nature of English sound and their first
language(Haycraft, 1978). The student feels insecure, trying pronunciation as they speak heard
by other people(Muyskens, 1994).

One factor that influences students’ confidence in pronunciation practice is the

embarrassing experience when they make mispronunciation on a particular word. They are
afraid of making mistakes(M.Mustafa, 2014). Tanveer(2007) pointed out pronunciation as a
source of anxiety. Besides, he believes that pronunciation skills improvement requires listening
practice. Thus, the amount of time devoted to listening to native language causes low authentic
experience. It may lead to loss of opportunity in practicing target language and resulting in a
lower level of pronunciation(Tanveer, 2007). Teachers should analyze students’ pronunciation
problems to construct lessons regarding English phonological systems and students’ needs, and
67 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020
Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
then decide what to practice immediately (Ahmad Yani, 2012).

Video is also one of the most common tools to teach pronunciation. Perhaps one of the
most influential visual books is from Cooper et al. (1991). This ground-breaking book
introduced how to implement the principle of active watching rather than just passively
watching a video. The paper stated answer listening comprehension questions. The students
should drag into a much more active engagement(K.D Xerry, 2017)

New London Group coined ‘multiliteracies’ in the mid-1990s, a group of scholars that
argue literacy pedagogy, supposed to be interconnected to the rapidly changing cultural,
technological, and social environment. They say that the book was the dominant medium of
communication for a century. Otherwise, with the rapid growth of a technologically evolving
landscape and the ascendance of the image, especially the moving image, the screen has taken
that place (Gunther Kress & Theo Van Leeuwen, 2006).

Moreover, regarding those issues, subtitle in a video helps students learn from a visual
aid. Subtitle can improve students’understanding because it provides an opportunity for
numerous quantities of comprehensible and authentic language input (Robert Vanderplank,
1988). Using subtitles in teaching through media is supposedly under specific rules of usage
(Merry, 2015). However, many teachers do not know the rules for consideration of using such
a medium. The video usage needs follow up activity after watching activity; even subtitle has
less impact on learning in teaching the second language without the action after(M.S Merry et
al., 2016).

Subtitle benefits beginner students to adjust their capability to save sound memory.
Subtitle impacts students’ learning by providing clear direction and understanding of a broader
meaning in a video (Robert Vanderplank, 1988). Subtitle in the video is acting as scaffolding.
Scaffolding provides the guideline by the teacher to control elements that are beyond the child’s
capabilities(Emi Emilia, 2005). Scaffolding proposed to describe how children can perform
complex tasks with the help of a knowledgeable adult, which otherwise they would be incapable
of doing. Provision prepared when the student needs it to reach competencies in more effective
ways. In other words, they are scaffolded at the point they need it. Even more, the teacher must
be responsive to the needs of the students. The teacher has to be ready in serving the guideline
at the time it is needed (Wells, 1999)

Mukherjee and Roy (2003) found that the use of visual tools to contextualize spoken
speech led the students to 30% more understanding. It goes in line with Canning-Wilson's
(2000) research with a statement that emphasizes visual that enhances the meaning of the
message conveyed by the speakers. When a graphic is explained by subtitles in audio, learning
new information is faster than the words presented in a text-only medium(Clark & Lyons,
2004). One effective way to assure this immediacy of meaning is by the help of subtitles.
Canning-Wilson (2000) supported the benefit of subtitles in teaching English. He argued that
the images contextualized reinforced language learning so that the learner can comprehend the
meaning in terms of vocabulary recognition.

English multimedia, like a song or online video, can be used for a wide variety of EFL
learning and teaching activities, particularly in helping students’ awareness of how the way
English is produced (Ebong & Marta J. Sabbadini, 2016). Wilson (2001) mentioned the use of
visual images in foreign and second language classroom enhance the use of target language.
Audio media provides a sound that stimulates students’ listening practice. Native speaking

68 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
audio helps the students improve their pronunciation by imitating authentic pronunciation.
Students pronounce English utterances almost correctly close to native pronunciation by
imitating from what spoken in audio (Adela, 2017).

Some viewers have considered subtitles as a nuisance. By some argument, traditionally

believed that subtitles or captions are disturbing and the cause of feeling laziness(Zanon, 2006).
Despite, the use of subtitle does not disturb nor distract the student from learning the language.
Instead, it benefits students with the low-level skill of listening(Robert Vanderplank, 1988).In
addition to the merit potential of subtitled video in learning the second language, it is necessary
to be aware of the impact of visual associations on memory and the mnemonic power of
imagery(Danan, 1992).

There are noted benefits of using subtitles in language learning(Zanon, 2006). The user
can connect the gap in reading and listening. 2) Language learning the foreign can be achieved
rapidly by trying to keep up with the subtitles in the dialogues. 3) Learning how to pronounce
many words is acquired consciously and unconsciously during the interaction. 4) It is following
the plot in subtitles is easy. 5) Recognition skills also developed at the same time. 6) It reinforces
the understanding of English context-bound expressions from captions in the visual display.
Thus, it helps learners acquire new feelings. 7) Understanding humor would be more
comfortable with the help of the captions. It is difficult, but it is also rewarding the language
classroom(Lonergan, 1989). Subtitles enhance the massage, increasing the enjoyable character
of the activity. 8) Captions increase students’ focus. 9) Finally, subtitles motivate students to
study outside the classroom context, especially from watching TV and cinema, listening to the
original dialogues, etc.

It is acceptable that most of the language teachers agree the use of visuals aids can
enhance language teaching. It is because visual aids help teachers to present real-world
situations into the classroom where that makes learning a lot meaningful and exciting (Brinton,
2008). Mannan (2005) points out the merit of visual aids in the language classroom by stating
that visual aids help the teacher to establish, clarify, connect and coordinate contextually
accurate that makes interpretations and appreciations more practical, concrete, engaging,
motivating, and meaningful.

The same statement, also stated by Canning-Wilson (2000) explicitly by his speech that
describes visual display, can help students interpret an immediate meaning in the language. It
benefits the student and teacher by clarifying the message. These advantages suggest that visual
help make a task or situation more authentic (Christine Canning-Wilson, 2000).The other
benefit of using visual aids mentioned by researchers(Kemp & Dayton, 1985). They claim
visuals aid preserves in motivation and maintaining attention by adding variety and making the
learning more engaging(Katherine Bradshaw, 2003). Further, visuals can help raise the readers'
interest, curiosity, and motivation (Richard E. Mayer & Roxana Moreno, 1998).

This research is to answer the use of video for teaching pronunciation—the study of the
use of subtitles in teaching pronunciation conducted at the novice level. The external factors
that influence pronunciation like background knowledge, motivation, family tree, reading habit,
listening habit, speaking practice, and others will not be discussed in this paper unless it is
related to the finding. The research answers whether students internalize meaning or
pronunciation the most in the video with instruction of paying attention to pronunciation. For
further implementation, the teacher can use this research in teaching pronunciation. The teacher
can decide whether the subtitle should show or not. There are things to do and not to do in

69 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
pronunciation teaching, especially in the connection to using audio-visual multimedia.

Therefore, the research question for this research intended to find out the use of subtitles in
teaching pronunciation.

1. Does watching subtitled video improve the students’ pronunciation? And how
significant was the impact?
2. How do the students perceive learning with the subtitled video?

2. METHOD

The research started with an assumption that subtitles might help students in learning a
second language in building their understanding from watching clips, video, or film. But did it
affect pronunciation too? Departing from that issue, the researcher tried to conduct his research
by involving a novice level of language proficiency—the research site located in a junior high
school at Sumedang. The samples were grade 8th ranging from 13-15 years old with Indonesian
as their mother tongue. This research was a quantitative study. The group divided into control
and experiment. Class VIII B would be the experimental group, whereas class VIII D would be
the control group. This model is known as a quasi-experimental design(Sugiyono, 2010).

This research meant to answer these following questions:

1. Does watching subtitled video improve the students’ pronunciation? And how
significant was the impact?
2. How do the students perceive learning with the subtitled video?

The result of the instrument would be tested in several statistics measurements to find
the significance level of the research. Because the data was less than 50 normality tests with
Shapiro, Wilk would conduct to see the data distribution result so the further analysis could be
determined. The hypotheses were:

H0: the population normally distributed.

H1: the data did not normally distribute.

Then the two means in control and experiment was tested in further whether parametric
or non-parametric test. The procedure meant to answer the first research question. The test
hypotheses would state as follow:

1. If Sig. (2-tailed) score < 0.05, then there is a significant difference between the control
group and the experimental group.
2. If Sig. (2-tailed) score > 0.05, then there is no significant difference between the control
group and the experimental group.

The calculation would use SPSS software. The probability (P) of this test is 0.05 or 5%.

Parametric (t-test) or
Normality test
Non-parametric test 9 , Issue 1. July 2020
70 | IJET| Volume.
(Shapiro Wilk)is li censed under(Mann-Whitney
Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja Atrribut ion-ShareAlike 4.0
Creative Commonstest)
International License.
 The sample of the research divided into two groups consisting of 20 students for each
group. The total subjects were 40 students—data collection collected by providing treatment in
two different groups. Group determination was chosen equally in class VIII B and VIII D. The
equivalent grade ensured the same level of language proficiency. The data collection conducted
in a junior high school located at St. SimpangHauragombong, Pamulihan, Jawa Barat,
Indonesia.

The instruments of this research were the pronunciation of oral tests and interviews. The
pronunciation test items were displayed on card pieces to the students one by one to test their
pronunciation after watching a video. The words, phrases, and sentences test items based on the
video 91-Year-Old Grandma Guesses Pokemon Names (see appendix).

Before running the pronunciation test, the students guided to watch 5 minutes video.
The video is accessible at www.youtube.com entitled 91-Year-Old Grandma Guesses Pokemon
Names. The video’s difficulty level reviewed through matching with students’ experience in the
Indonesia English syllabus of the revised version 2017. The vocabulary used in the video was
fundamental. The words commonly used in daily conversation, and it checked on the corpus
that the words were widely expressed frequently in the native language. Based on the syllabus
also, the student should have studied the words and expressions in the previous grade.

Although written word frequency (Francis & Kucera, 1982)constituted a popular

measure of word familiarity, which was highly predictive of word recognition, the researcher
used spoken the only database from corpus to analyze the frequency level of test items. The test
was conducted objectively without intermixing the researcher’s belief and assumption onto
writing to find out the precise result of research.

Interview around teaching-learning conducted for building an argument on finding and

discussion as additional data and underlying assumptions. A few students were interviewed
personally after doing pronunciation test to find out their background knowledge about English.
They would interview in their mother tongue. The questions asked the learner’s background
and their perception around the video as follow:

1. What’s your difficulty in learning pronunciation from the subtitled video?

2. Are you familiar with watching the English subtitled video?
3. Do you prefer the video with subtitles or not? Why?
4. What do you think about the video duration?
5. Does the subtitle help your pronunciation improved?

The data collection of the research came from the control and experiment group:

Control group Experiment group

Treatment 1 (video Treatment 2 (video with

without subtitle) subtitle)
71 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020
Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
The study was to measure subjects’ pronunciation in the level of word, phrase, and sentence
with these steps:

1. The students had clear instructions about the video we were going to watch. They were
allowed to take notes, mumble, or do any strategy to remember pronunciation as much
as they could.
2. Samples watched five minutes humorous video entitled 91-Year-Old Grandma
Guesses Pokemon Names.
3. Then after watching the video, the pronunciation was measured by doing oral
pronunciation checks. The measurement test took from the expression on video. The
test instrument conducted to measure ability, knowledge, or performance(Brown,
2004). The researcher then showed some words, phrases, sentences from the video
watched. The test consisted of 5 items: words, phrases, and penalties (see: appendix).
The details of the trial were analyzed through word frequency in the corpus before
running the test to see frequency usage of the words in the native speaking language
as additional data.

After collecting the data, an analysis conducted using SPSS software version 16. The
collected data from the oral test would be scored into an interval number from 1 to 5 inserted
in the software—data analysis conducted by comparing two means in the control and
experiment group with T-Test. The result would be described further and analyzed based on
related theories and sequence of events on the field.

Alpha of the research is 0.05 or 5% in two-tailed design with null hypothesis statement as
follow:

Ho = There is no significant difference between the control group and the experimental
group.

The scoring instrument and the rubric used in this research appended in the enclosure.
The data copied into a table with three scoring divisions: words, phrases, and sentences.

72 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 3. RESULTS

A normality test conducted to see if the two groups equal. This procedure was the
preparation to ensure that the students had an equivalent level of English proficiency. This
research expected to have a normal distribution, which means that one group had no
difference compared to the other group. Normal distribution was considered essential
since the comparison between the two groups would be described quantitatively.

The result of the normality test displays as follows:

Table III.I. Normality Test Table

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Control .239 20 .004 .915 20 .081
Experiment .173 20 .118 .931 20 .161

As seen in the table, the significant values both in the control and experiment groups
are 0.081 and 0.161. The data distribution of the groups is higher than zero point zero
five (>0.05). It means the data has a normal distribution in both the control and
experiment groups. H0 rejected, H1 accepted.

Then, after conducting the treatment, the researcher tested the students with the
pronunciation test to measure their pronunciation by the words, phrases, and sentences
produced after watching the video. The control group watched the video without
subtitles, and the experimental group watched the video with subtitles.

Here is the mean table of the control and experimental group from oral pronunciation
test from the students in SMPN 1 Pamulihan:

Table III.II. Mean Table

Word Phrase Sentence
Control group mean 1.65 1.85 1.6
Experiment group mean 1.65 1.95 1.7

Score interval 1 to 5

The students also have a problem with necessary English communication because
they hardly ever had speaking practice to deal with. Most of English teaching-learning
in a class conducted by reading and writing. Speaking and listening were the least held
in teaching and learning.

As shown in table III, II, the control group got a slightly better result in phrase and
sentence by margin difference at 0.1. It seems that the treatment almost does not affect

73 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 the students’ progress, virtually no improvement. Then, the researcher did the statistic
calculation by comparing the two means in the t-test. The result of the SPSS calculation,
the significance of the two ways, was 0.634. It means that there was no significant
difference between the treatment in the control and experimental group. The t-test table
displays as follow:

Table III.III. T-test table

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Std. 95% Confidence
Mean Error Interval of the
Sig. (2- Differen Differen Difference
F Sig. T Df tailed) ce ce Lower Upper
NIL Equal
-
AI variances 5.608 .023 -.480 38 .634 -.20000 .41675 .64368
1.04368
assumed
Equal
-
variances not -.480 32.759 .634 -.20000 .41675 .64813
1.04813
assumed

From the data collected, the discussion to answer the first research question is as follow:

1. The video does not affect much on the improvement of student’s pronunciation. As
seen in the table, the development only raises 0.1 from the control group mean,
almost does not affect. 0.634 significant value, which is more than 0.05 shows that
control and experiment group result has no significance between means. Instead,
many students confidently said that they could understand better when watching
videos with subtitles. It could mean that the footage tended to improve
understanding rather than pronunciation. Even the instruction before the test had
emphasized recognition of articulation, and students were still focusing on
interpreting the intention of moving images rather than the pronunciation.

2. Several factors influence pronunciation improvement directly, like speaking practice

and perhaps drilling. It goes along with Doff's(1990) statement that said repetition
on drilling is useful to get students familiar with a specific structure or formulaic
expression.

Based on the interview, students prefer watching videos with subtitles without
subtitles. Most of them are satisfied, actively interacted with visual content, and enjoy
learning. Some of the students may experience flow during watching videos as they
were attracted to the video. In other words, visual aids like subtitles had acknowledged
as a powerful tool in learning a second language.

At some stage of learning second language development, as mentioned by

Zanon(2006), the use of subtitles or captions should be removed gradually because of
feeling safe and confident. It recommended combining the use of caption or subtitle with

74 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
viewing without it or other activity that makes students independently capable without
the support of caption or subtitle. Little by little, the aids can be removed like Bruner’s
scaffolding theory until the students are entirely able to stand by themselves.

Overall, the students said that they received a positive experience with the video.
As the researcher stood to observe learning, the students were also able to concentrate
on the video. The students also liked the duration of the video, which they mentioned
not too short and not too long. It was five minutes humorous video with the topic they
had been familiar with.

They did not find it difficult learning with video’s subtitled. In contrast with the
no improvement of the pronunciation, the students may feel learning was fun. Though,
it may improve in other areas of English, such as vocabulary and contextual
understanding. However, this research is not a conclusion that said learning with
subtitles will not improve pronunciation. Long term research may be leading to a
different outcome, and advanced school with technology-based learning is also
interesting to dig.

1. Level of engagement. In teaching pronunciation with video, engagement is

necessary to improve students’ level of participation. The engagement is to promote
students to be proactive in participating in the learning process. A passive
environment does not significantly improve student's ability to speak in, which will
influence their pronunciation too. When talking about the engagement, the approach
necessarily took action. A suitable approach to make a different outcome, to draw
not only attention but also participation, is required.

2. They are learning background. Based on the interview, many of the teaching
processes conducted in three languages: Indonesia, English, and Sudanese. As
mentioned in the literature review, listening influences a student's
pronunciation(Tanveer, 2007). It highly recommended using the target language in
language teaching-learning. Some students might find it difficult to follow the lesson
for the first time, but it will be beneficial for the long run.

3. Familiarity with technology. The visual tool is a potent tool to learn the language
(Arjuna I. Ranasinghe & Diane Leisher, 2009). Unfortunately, many teachers, even
they are aware of the potential, they do not make the use of technology to support
learning. In the interview section, the researcher found that the English teacher at
that school had never used a projector for teaching nor the speaker for supporting
listening practice. At this rate, students will fail to understand spoken English
conducted by a native speaker whose pronunciation is authentic.

4. Learning approach. The model of education with the lack of exposure can waste
critical age for learning pronunciation. Passing a significant period seems to affect
pronunciation’s mastery (Lanneberg, 1964). Children imitate what spoken in
audio(Adela, 2017). Pronunciation acquisition and children development of second
language occupying advantages (Cameron, 2001). By providing the right method,
students at a young age have a high potential to learn a second language better in the
perfection of pronunciation.

75 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
4. CONCLUSION

This research has concluded that watching videos only does not improve students’
pronunciation significantly at the novice level. Instead, students focus on interpreting
meaning even though the instruction was clear enough to pay attention to pronunciation.
Therefore, the use of other techniques like drilling might be beneficial in internalizing
pronunciation after watching. Follow up activity after watching visual aid is the key to
learning pronunciation in the classroom. The instructional task given like to speak,
pronounce, identify (orally), read, mime and say, chant, say together, discuss, present
will implicitly improve student pronunciation.

The video played both with subtitle and without subtitle and both in control and
experiment group does not improve student pronunciation. The researcher tends to
correlate five principles of listening by Harmer that are related to what students will
gain during learning. One of the principles stated that only watching is not enough.
Students need multiple times to construct and obstruct pronunciation information.

Watching a video does both with subtitle and without subtitle, and both in control
and experiment group does not improve students’ pronunciation. But enhancement does
the task.

For the novice level, it recommended getting used to visual display. Theoretically
described by many researchers, subtitles, or captions can help students extract learning
information—the subtitle built as learning to scaffold. But eventually, the scaffold
should be lessened until the student can independently pronounce without visual aids.

Although the video gain students’ attention and their impression were also attracted,
however, it is not enough to only play the video for once. It could mean the need to
follow up activity to enhance the students’ learning. The implication of the finding
suggests that watching tasks, whether in online education or offline learning, should be
prepared with the enhancement activity. Thus, it indicates that watching alone does not
provide significant improvement in students’ pronunciation ability.

Five principles behind teaching listening by Harmer(2007)with modification to the

video must be taken into consideration when doing teaching pronunciation. Principle
one and two already carried out during the research, but the outcome is still not
significant. The result must be different if teaching is associated with all five principles
bellow, especially when teaching pronunciation through audio-visual:

Principle 1: The audio is just a medium. Not what makes learning happens.
Principle 2: Using digital tools requires preparation.
Principle 3: Once time played, the video will not be enough. A further
enhancement is required.

There is almost no improvement when a teacher plays the video only

once. Students might need to play it again to pick up the things they
missed. The first time often used just to give students an idea of what the
pronunciation material sounds.

76 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 Principle 4: Responding to the content is necessary, not just passively listen or
read.

Along with reading subtitles, the teacher could provide practice to draw
out the pronunciation. Meanwhile, teaching how the sound produced like
phonics also encourages students to actively watching rather than
passively listening.

Principle 5: Different listening tasks for the different listening stage.

The teacher needs to set different tasks that follow up listening in various
stages. Example: for the first listening, the task needs to be reasonably
straightforward so that the students can improve their general
understanding and response. In the next stage, however, we may focus
on the detail of information language use like pronunciation.

In addition to the five principles, students’ scaffolding by using subtitles

removed until the student can independently produce the right
pronunciation in English.

Still, in the EFL context, linguistic factors such as lack of vocabulary,

grammatical, and pronunciation also become the source of student’s problem for being
reluctant to participate in the class. The other study suggested by Smith (2011) in Juhana
(2011)for students who encounter difficulty in learning a second language to do these
tips: taking non-formal classes, using mass media, practicing, joining conversation club,
and joining toastmaster international. Philosophically spoken, if we do something, there
might be improvement or reduction. But speaking, if we do nothing, there will be an
absolute degradation.

77 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
REFERENCES

Adela. (2017). The influence of Using Audio-Visual Media towards Students’ Pronunciation
Mastery. Indonesia: Institut Agama Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung.
Ahmad Yani. (2012). Teachers’ Incorrect Pronunciation and Its Impact on Young Learners: (A
Review on Linguistic Aspects of EFL Classroom Practices). TEYLIN 2: From Policy to
Classroom.
Arjuna I. Ranasinghe, & Diane Leisher. (2009). The Benefit of Integrating Technology into The
Classroom. Department of Mathematics, Alabama A & M University.
Brinton, L. J. (2008). The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic
development (Studies in the English Language). Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Ernst Klett Sprachen: Cambridge
University Press.
Celce-Murcia, Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (1996). Teaching
Pronunciation: A Reference for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Christine Canning-Wilson. (2000). Practical Aspects of Using Video in the Foreign Language
Classroom. Abu Dhabi: The Center of Excellence for Research and Training.
Clark, R. ., & Lyons, C. (2004). Graphics for Learning: Proven Guidelines for Planning,
Designing, and Evaluating Visuals in Training Materials. California: Pfeiffer.
Danan, M. (1992). Reversed subtitling and dual coding theory: New directions for foreign
language instruction. Houghton, Michigan: Language Learning.
Deb Roy, & Niloy Mukherjee. (2004). Towards situated speech understanding: visual context
priming of language models. Ames Street, Cambridge: ELSEVIER,Computer Speech
and Language.
Doff, A. (1990). Teach English: A Training Course for Teachers. Cambridge University: British
Council.
Ebong, B., & Marta J. Sabbadini. (2016). Developing pronunciation through songs.
TeachingEnglish|BritishCouncil|BBC.https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/devel
oping-pronunciation-through-songs
Emi Emilia. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach To Teaching Academic Writing In A
Tertiary EFL Context In Indonesia. Melbourne: Department of Language, Literacy and
Arts Education Faculty of Education The University of Melbourne.
Francis, W. ., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency Analysis of English Usage. Houghton Mifflin:
Oxford University Press.
Gavin T. L. Brown. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment: implications for policy and
professional development, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000304609
Gunther Kress, & Theo Van Leeuwen. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design.
Routledge.
Harmer, J. (2007). How to Teach English. Edinburg: Pearson Longman.
Haycraft. (1978). An Introduction to English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Ira Pratiwi. (2013). Improving The Speaking Skill Through Communicative Activities of The
Eighth Grade Students of MTsN 1 Mlati in The Academic Year of 2012/2013. Yogyakarta
State University Press.
Juhana. (2011). Investigation the Difficulties Encountered by Students in Practicing Speaking
in English Class. Indonesia: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
Katherine Bradshaw. (2003). Coin-Operated Machines Change Single Copy Sales. Green State
University: Newspaper Research Journal.
K.D Xerry. (2017). The Image in English Teaching. University of College London: Guttenberg

78 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 Press.
Kemp, J. ., & Dayton, D. (1985). Planning & producing instructional media (5th ed.). Harper
& Row, Publishers.
Lanneberg. (1964). A biological perspective of language. In E. H. Lenneberg (Ed.), New
directions in the study of language. MIT Press.
Lonergan, B. (1989). Les voies d’une théologie méthodique: Ecrits théologiques choisis. Revue
thomiste.
M.Mustafa. (2014). Penang Matriculation College Students’ Opinions on the Use of Online
Forums. Forum Komunikasi Mahasiswa.
M.S Merry, M Van Houtte, & O Agirdag. (2016). Teachers’ Understanding of Multicultural
Education and the Correlates of Multicultural Content Integration in Flanders.
Education and Urban Society.
Muyskens. (1994). Priorities for Intermediate-Level Language Instruction. The Modern
Language Journal.
R Cooper, M Lavery, & M Rinvolucri. (n.d.). Video. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richard E. Mayer, & Roxana Moreno. (1998). A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning:
Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory. Journal of Educational
Psychology.
Robert Vanderplank. (1988). The Value of Teletext Sub-titles in Language Learning. ELT
Journal.
Sugiyono. (2010). Metode Penelitian Ilmiah. Indonesia: Alfabeta.
Tanveer, M. (2007). Investigation of the Factors That Cause Language Anxiety for ESL/EFL
Learners in Learning Speaking Skills and the Influence It Casts on Communication in
the Target Language. Glasgow University.
Vissa, U. (1994). Teaching a unit of educational psychology to B.Ed. Students. Islamabad,
Pakistan: The Progress of Education.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education.
Cambridge University Press.
Zanon, N. (2006). Using Subtitle to Enhance Foreign Language Learning. Universidad
Nacional de Educación a Distancia: Porta Linguarum.

79 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
APPENDICES: INSTRUMENTS

TESTING ITEM

PRONUNCIATION PHONEMES IN VIDEO

TEST TIMING
Word
Animal ‘ænɪməl 00.04’
Strawberry ‘strɔ:bəri 00.11’
Newspaper ‘nju:zpeɪpə 02.09’
Unusual ʌn’ju:ʒʊəl 02.26’
Pieces ‘pi:sɪz 03.06’
Phrase
Battle people ‘bætl ‘pi: pl 00.33’
Beautiful animal ‘bju:təfʊl ‘ænɪməl 00.38’
Very important ‘vɛriɪm’pɔ:tənt 01.38’
Big tail bɪgteɪl 02.51’
Blast water blɑːst‘wɔ:tə 03.27’
Sentence
You tell me ju:tɛlmi: 00.13’
What’s so funny about 01.19’
wɒtssəʊ
that?
‘fʌniə’baʊtðæt?
You’re ridiculous jʊərɪ’dɪkjʊləs. 01.58’
What’s your name? wɒtsjɔ:neɪm? 02.54’
Two pairs of arms tu:peəzɒvɑːmz 03.14’

80 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 TEST ITEM: SPOKEN CORPUS FREQUENCY

PRONUNCIATION SPOKEN CORPUS

TEST FREQUENCY
Animal 3,973
Strawberry 348
Newspaper 8,109
Unusual 4,973
Pieces 4,634
Battle 71,144
people 2,931,328
Beautiful 13,021
animal 3,973
Very 269,903
important 44,514
Big 68,862
tail 1,094
Blast 1,504
water 20,156
You 1,926,798
tell 80,552
me 257,406
What 617,144
is 1,391,234
so 500,232
funny 9,304
about 481,228
that 2,279,194
You 1,926,798
are 629,092
ridiculous 3,107
What 617,144
is 1,391,234
your 245,638
name 28,630
Two 126,563
pairs 385
of 2,347,641
arms 6,640

81 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 PRONUNCIATION RUBRIC

PRONUNCIATION LIKERT SCALE RUBRIC SCORE

Errors in pronunciation are frequent but can Very bad 1
understand by a native speaker used to deal with
foreigners attempting to speak his language. Unable to be
understood.
The accent is intelligible though often quite faulty. Bad 2

Mistakes in
pronunciation
make word/
phrase/ sentence
hardly recognized.
Errors never interfere with understanding and Average 3
rarely disturb the native speaker. The accent may
be foreign. Understandable,
but stress and
intonation is not
incorrect order
Errors in pronunciation are quite rare. Good 4

Understandable.
Very little error in
stress and
intonation.
Equivalent to and entirely accepted by educated Very good 5
native speakers.
Understandable.
The stress,
intonation is well
pronounced.

SCORING TABLE I

SMPN 1 PAMULIHAN

Jl. SimpangHauragombong, Kec. Pamulihan (022) 7914184

GRADE VIII D (CONTROL GROUP)

NO NAME WORD PHRASE SENTENCE

1 Ai 2 1 2
2 Akbar 1 1 2
3 Aldi 2 1 2
4 Arif 2 2 2
82 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020
Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
5 Dea 1 2 1
6 Dewi 2 2 1
7 Dina 3 2 2
8 Evi 3 2 1
9 Feby 2 2 1
10 Gilar 2 2 2
11 Hanusa 1 2 2
12 Ilyas 2 2 2
13 Karina 1 1 1
14 Kiki 1 2 1
15 Maya 1 2 2
16 Peni 2 2 1
17 Ridwan 2 3 2
18 Sendi 1 2 1
19 Siti 1 2 2
20 Yosep 1 2 2
Total 33 37 32
Mean 1.65 1.85 1.6

83 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 SCORING TABLE II

SMPN 1 PAMULIHAN

Jl. SimpangHauragombong, Kec. Pamulihan (022) 7914184

GRADE VIII B (EXPERIMENT GROUP)

NO NAME WORD PHRASE SENTENCE

1 Addia 3 3 2
2 Anisa 1 1 1
3 Chandra 1 2 1
4 Ilham 2 2 2
5 Ismi 1 2 3
6 Kamilah 2 2 2
7 Kristina 3 2 1
8 Messa 1 1 1
9 Mia 1 2 1
10 M Ridwan 2 3 2
11 NengEvi 1 1 2
12 Novi 1 1 2
13 Risfa 1 1 1
14 Risma 1 2 2
15 Sindi 2 2 2
16 Sri Ayu 3 3 1
17 Wandi 2 2 2
18 Winda 2 2 1
19 Wisnu 2 3 3
20 Yayan 1 2 2
Total 33 39 34
Mean 1.65 1.95 1.7

84 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
 TEST ITEMS INSTRUMENT

An animal A newspaper Strawberry Unusual

Pieces Very important Battle people Beautiful animal

What’s so funny
Blast water Big tail You’re ridiculous.
about that?

You tell me Two pairs of arms What’s your name?

85 | IJET| Volume. 9, Issue 1. July 2020

Copyright 2020 RokiRanjaniSanjadireja is licensed under Creative Commons Atrribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.