Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students

8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students

1/21

Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008

Improving EL 4 Students Mastery of Parts of Speech by Modifying Song Lyrics into

Their Own Versions

Parawati Siti Sondari

LB LIA BUAH BATU

ABSTRACT

This research was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of song lyrics to improve the

EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech. This research used pre-experimental design, the

intact group design, as the students were placed in classes on the basis of placement test

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982) and compared two groups; experimental (my EL 4 students who

modified the song lyrics into their own versions) and control group (another EL 4 class that

didnt use any songs). The data were gained from pre-test and post-test. Prior to starting the

treatment, a test was prepared as the pre-test and post-test. The test consisted of 16

multiple-choice items of 4 parts of speech (nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs) presented

in a text in order to provide context. After some treatments the result showed that the

experimental group had better progress than the control group. Hence, it was concluded

that the contribution of song lyrics in teaching parts of speech to elementary 4 students ledto a higher level of parts of speech mastery improvement.

BACKGROUND

The most difficult part of utilizing lexicon is in terms of form and function. Especially to

the elementary students as they discovered that knowing the meaning of the lexicon is

clearly insufficient. As teachers, we need to demonstrate that there is some order and

coherence in lexicalization (Quirk and Stein, 1990). Thus, teacher must come up with the

suitable means to teach the lexical items which meet the prerequisite for learning grammar

as proposed by Thornbury (1999); attention, understanding, memory, and motivation. One

of the means that meet such prerequisites is song lyrics.

1


2/21


Songs have good reputation as an effective teaching material. Lynch (2002) remarks,

songs are usually directed to the native-speaking population so they usually contain

contemporary vocabulary, idioms and expressions. Baoan (2008) also states, Songs not

only can motivate students but also contain rich linguistic information, including

pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, rhetoric and language sense.

According to Lynch (2005), EFL, English as a foreign language, ESL, English as a

Second language and foreign language teachers should all consider using songs as a regular

part of their classroom activities. Teachers need to come up with various methods in

teaching, and songs have so much to offer to be utilized in the classroom.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

In this research, the following questions are posed:

1. Are song lyrics effective to improve EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech?

2. Which parts of speech improves the most?

ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS

A. Assumptions

1. The test used as the pre-test and post-test is considered suitable to measure EL 4students mastery of parts of speech.

2. The experimental group and the control group are considered having relatively

similar ability in their mastery of parts of speech prior to the treatment.

B. Hypothesis

There are significant differences between the experimental group and the control group

METHODOLOGY/PROCEDURE

This research is aimed to investigate the effectiveness of song lyrics in improving EL 4

students mastery of parts of speech. It is also aimed to find out which parts of speech

improve significantly after the song lyrics are given. The parts of speech are limited only to

four parts of speech, namely noun, adjective, verb, and adverb in accordance with EL 4

grammar focus on lessons 7, 9, and 11.

2


3/21


A. Research Method

The method of this research is pre-experimental study, the intact group design (Hatch and

Farhady, 1982). The formula is:

G1

(Experimental group)

X

(Treatment)

T2

(Post-test)

G2

(Control group)

T2

(Post-test)

Pre-test (attached on the appendix) was administered to both groups before the treatment in

order to know the students schemata on parts of speech (on August 23rd for the

experimental group and the 26th for the control group). The experimental group, consisting

of 16 students, was given treatment, which is the song lyrics, and post-test (on September

13th). The control group, which consists of 25 students, only got post-test (on September

9th) without treatment.

According to Sujana (1989), the comparing test of mean between experimental and control

group, which is calculated by using statistical analysis (t-test) where the level of

significance () is 0.05, requires the investigation on the normal distribution assumption in

order to justify that the changes occurred are caused by the treatment. Homogeneity of

variances also needs to be calculated by using One-Way ANOVA in order to prove

whether both groups means population is homogenous or not. Conclusion was finally

drawn based on this t-test by comparing the improvements of both groups.

B. The Song Lyrics as the Treatment

The song lyrics utilized were taken from www.azlyrics.com. There song lyrics were

Nothing Really Matters by Madonna, My Heart Will Go On by Celine Dion, I Have A

Dream by Westlife,Im Like A Birdby Nelly Furtado (the sample of songs were attachedon the appendix). These songs were given some blanks on particular parts that enable the

students to change the original message of the songs, the titles were changed and the

context of the songs was also subjected to change.

C. Procedures or Techniques of Teaching Parts of Speech by Using Song Lyrics

3
http://www.azlyrics.com/http://www.azlyrics.com/http://www.azlyrics.com/


4/21


The followings are the techniques in using the song lyrics to teach parts of speech.

The first treatment on Saturday, August 30th The second treatment on Saturday, August 30th

Pre-writing activity

Analyze the parts of speech in a song

entitledBad Actress by Def leppard(attached on the appendix) while

listening to the song.

Fill out the derivational chart of those

words.

Discuss the analysis result.

Whilst-writing activity

Analyze the original songNothing

Really Matters in pairs.

Fill out the blanks on the song while

listening to the song in pairs.

Post-writing activity

Give feed back and correction to the

modified lyrics.


Listen to the songNothing Really Matters

and fill out the blanks. Analyze the parts of speech of the words

in the blanks.


words.

Discuss the analysis result.

Whilst-writing activity

Analyze the original songMy Heart WillGo On individually.

Fill up the blanks on the song while


Post-writing activity Give feed back and correction to the

modified lyrics.

The third treatment on Saturday, September 6th The fourth treatment on Saturday, September 6th


Listen to the songMy Heart Will Go

On and fill out the blanks.

Analyze the parts of speech of the

words in the blanks.


words.

Discuss the analysis result.Whilst-writing activity

Analyze the original songI Have A

Dream in pairs.

Fill out the blanks on the song while

listening to the song in pairs.



modified lyrics.

Ask the students to read aloud their

modified songs.


Listen to the songI Have A Dream and fill

out the blanks.

Analyze the parts of speech of the words

in the blanks.


words.

Discuss the analysis result.Whilst-writing activity

Analyze the original songIm Like A Bird

individually.

Fill up the blanks on the song while




modified lyrics.

RESULT OF THE STUDY

In testing the hypothesis, several steps need to be undertaken. The first is to figure out the

normality of distribution of the data, the second is to find out the homogeneity of variances

and the last one is the t-test. These steps are inferential statistics which is intended to prove

4


5/21


the hypothesis. Due to the limitation of the number of pages, the detailed steps are attached

on the appendix.

A. The Pre-test and Post-Test between The Experimental and The

Control Group

A. 1. The Experimental Group and Control Group Pre-test

The normality distributions of the pre-test results of the two groups were calculated using

Kolgomorov-Smirnov on SPSS program. The pre-test results of both groups, as shown on

table 1, are normally distributed as the value of probability is more than the alpha level

0.05.

Table 1. The Normality Distribution of Pre-test Scores

Group P-Level Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) Data Distribution

Experimental 0.05 0.627 Normal

Control 0.930

The homogeneity of variances of the pre-test scores were calculated by using One-Way

ANOVA and Ho (the scores of both groups have the same variances) was used.

Table 2. The Homogeneity of Variances of Pre-test Scores

Source DF SS MS F ratio FcriticalBetween Groups 1 6.244 6.244 1.230 4.08

Within Groups 39 198.000 5.077

The table showed that the variance is homogenous, as F ratio is less that F critical (1.230 0.05). It shows that there is still no difference between both groups. However,

this result does not indicate that the treatment utterly fails. In order to see the effect of the

treatment clearly, a comparison between the pre-test and post-test scores of each group

need to be conducted.

B. Comparing the Experimental and Control Group Means

B. 1. The Experimental Group Means

The pre-test and the post-test results of the experimental group are compared in order to see

the effect of the treatment towards parts of speech mastery.

Table 7. Experimental Group Means Scores

Group N Means

Pre-test Post-test

Experimental Group 16 8.00 9.31

Based on the table above, we can see that there is a significant difference between the two

means scores, which indicates that the treatment works. In order to see whether the increase

of the mean scores is significant or not, paired t-test was conducted.

Table 8. The Paired T-test of the Experimental Group

7


8/21


Paired Samples Statistics

8,0000 16 1,71270 ,42817

9,3125 16 1,66208 ,41552

before treatment

after treatment

Pair

1

Mean N Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Paired Samples Correlations

16 ,047 ,863before treatment

& after treatment

Pair

1

N Correlation Sig.

Paired S amples Test

-1 ,3125 2,330 0 6 ,58251 -2,5541 -,0709 -2,253 15 ,040before t reatment

- after treatment

Pair

1

M ea n Std . D ev ia tio n

Std. Error

Me an Lowe r Upp er

95% Conf idence

Interval o f the

Dif ference

Paired Dif ferences

t d f Sig . (2-ta iled)

If the probability score is less than the alpha level 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis

(there is no difference between the experimental and the control group) and accept the

alternative hypothesis (there are differences between the experimental and the control

group). Based on the table above, we can see that the probability score is less than the

alpha level (0.040


9/21


Paired Samples Statistics

8,80 25 2,533 ,507

9,80 25 1,848 ,370

test before treatment

test after treatment

Pair1

Mean N Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Paired Samples Correlations

25 ,400 ,047test before treatment

& test after treatment

Pair

1

N Correlation Sig.

Pai red S amples Test

-1 ,0 0 2,4 6 6 ,4 93 -2,0 2 ,0 2 -2,027 24 ,0 54test before trea tmen t

- test after treatment

Pair

1

M e an S td . D e via tio n

Std. Error

Me a n Lo w er Up p e r

95 % C o n f id en c e

Interval of the

D i f ference

Pa i red D i f ference s

t d f S ig . (2-ta ile d )

The table above showed that the probability value is higher than the alpha level (0.054>

0.05), so the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that in the control group there is no

difference between the two means scores.

C. Comparing the Parts of Speech

In order to answer the second research question, the means scores of the pre-test and post-

test of each parts of speech of the experimental group are compared. The parts of speech

are ranked based on the mean difference of the two tests.

Table 11. The Comparison of the Means Scores of Each Part Of Speech

No. Parts of Speech Means Scores Mean Difference

Pre-test Post-test

1. Adverb 1.63 2.06 1.43

2. Adjective 2.31 2.88 0.57

3. Noun 1.81 2.38 0.57

4. Verbs 2.19 2.50 0.31

As it is shown on the table above, adverb has the highest increase, while adjective

and noun have the same mean difference. Verb is at the bottom of the table as it has the

lowest increase.

9


10/21


CONCLUSION

This research is aimed to improve EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech in terms of

using the right form of the words in accordance to the function and the meaning. The

research was conducted by giving song lyrics as the treatment and utilized pre-test and

post-test to measure the improvements. In order to see whether the treatment works,

another class was chosen as the control group which they didnt get any treatment. The

result was there is a difference between the experimental and the control group. Therefore,

the hypothesis is accepted and the first research question is answered that the song lyrics is

considered effective. The difference is in terms of the improvement that both groups

achieved. Despite the fact that both groups had almost the same means scores on the post-

test and that both groups were considered equal in proficiency based on the pre-test, theexperimental group achieved significant improvement as the paired t-test value is less than

the alpha level (0.040.05). This fact explains that modifying song lyrics into different version can help

EL 4 students to improve their analytical skills in using parts of speech. Another result is

the song lyrics mostly help the students in improving their analysis and use of adverbs.

In a nutshell, modifying song lyrics into different version is considered a pretty much

helpful aid to improve El 4 students morpho-syntactic skills. It offers loads of fun,

creativity, and critical discussion along the process. Expectantly, this research will spark

teachers willingness to apply this treatment in the classroom.

REFERENCES

10


11/21


Baoan, Wang. (2008). Application of popular English Songs in EFL Classroom

Teaching. Available at http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htm.

Explore 1 Book (2006). Who Would Have Thought

Hatch, Evelyn and Farhady, Hossein. (1982). Research Design and Statistics for Applied

Linguistics. London: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

M Lynch, Larry. (2005). 9 Reasons Why You Should Use Songs to Teach English as a

Foreign Language. Available at http://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com

M. Lynch, Larry (2002). Using Pop Songs to Improve Language Listening

Comprehension Skills. Available at http://EnzineAarticles.com

Quirk, Randolph and Stein, Gabrielle. (1990). English in Use. England: Longman.

Thornbury, Scott. (1999). How to Teach Grammar. England: Longman

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 The test as pre-test and post-test

Appendix 2 The pre-test and post-test results

Appendix 3 The pre-test and post-test calculations

Appendix 4 Parts of speech calculations based on pre-test and post-test results

Appendix 5 Song samples; song lyrics as analysis tools and modified song lyrics

Appendix 1 The test as pre-test and post-test

11
http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htmhttp://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com/http://enzineaarticles.com/http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htmhttp://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com/http://enzineaarticles.com/


12/21


Steven SpielbergA Director with Numerous Achievements

Steven Spielberg is surely one of the most [1] (a) successive movie directors of all

(b) succeed

(c) successfultime. He has been directing various kinds of moviesfrom science fiction to heavy drama.

Of course, [2] (a) succession never comes to a person overnight. It has to be

(b) success(c) successful

built over years, with [3] (a) patient and persistence.

(b) patiently

(c) patienceAs a boy, Spielberg was [4 ] (a) actual a slow reader. However, he had a gift for

(b) actually

(c) actuality

storytelling. He just loved telling stories. That is probably why he was [5 ] (a) eager to(b) eagerly

(c) eagerness

make his own films. Spielbergs parents were not aware of their sons talent. All the

probably knew was how much he enjoyed spending time in front of the television set and

playing around with a camera.Spielberg made his first film with script and actors at age 12. Who starred in it? His

three sisters did! He liked using them in his films because he could [6] (a) exploitation

(b) exploit(c) exploited

the purpose of telling a good story. After making around four homemade movies, he themin any way. He could kill them over and over, all for learned how [7] (a) powerful a film

(b) powerfully

(c) power

could be. So, he began to take his hobby [8] (a) serious. Somehow, he knew it could(b) seriously

(c) seriousness

become his future career.

Spielbergs parents [9 ] (a) divorce when he was still a teenager. Although(b) divorcee

(c) divorced

he was really hurt, he was not discouraged. In fact, he made use of the tragedy as sadthemes in many of his films.

Later, Spielberg moved to Northern California. There, he continued making his

movies. He made Firelight at age 16. It had one showing in a Phoenix movie-house.However, making that film made him neglect his studies, so his [10] (a) graduation were

(b) graded

(c) grades

really bad.

12


13/21


After graduating from high school, Spielberg studied at Cal State, Long Beach.

During his studies, he made Amblin. It was a small project, but it changed his [11](a) live.

(b) life.(c) lives.

Amblin won awards at the Venice and Atlanta film festivals. For this success,

Spielberg[12 ]

(a) signature a seven-year contract with Universal Studios. He then(b) signing

(c) signed

[13] (a) professionally made movies like Jaws, raiders of the Lost Ark, The Goonies(b) professional

(c) profession

and E.T..

After setting up his own film company, Dreamworks, Spielberg [14](a) continuous(b) continued

(c) continuously

making more successful movies, such as A.I., Hook, Jurassic Park, Schindlers List, and

The Terminal. Spielberg got an Oscar and The National Society of Film Critics Award asbest director for Schindlers List. It was a masterpiece! Saving Private Ryan was another

masterpiece [15] (a) brilliance made by Spielberg.(b) brilliant

(c) brilliantly

Besides being an outstanding moviemaker, Steven Spielberg is alsoa [16] (a) wonder , loving father. For him, directing a movie is easier than managing

(b) wonderfully

(c) wonderful

a family.

Appendix 2 The pre-test and post-test results

13


14/21


A. The pre-test results

The Experimental GroupNo. Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tota

1. Syifa 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 7

2. Sisca 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 9

3. Siti 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7

4. Nuraida 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8

5. Ahdiyanti 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 12

6. Silmi 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 8

7. Juniar 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 9

8. Tiur 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7

9. Lulu 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7

10. Vicky 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 10

11. Aini 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8

12. Ahsan 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 10

13. Raja 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5

14. Wandi 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 8

15. Relo 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 6

16. Aji 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7

N Total 6 11 10 10 8 4 12 13 15 1 8 11 4 4 0 11

The Control GroupNo. Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tota

1. Widianti 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 9

2. Fahmi H 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8

3. Ryan M. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7

4. Diani D. 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 8

5. Yasmin 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14

6. Miral M. 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 6

7. Inggi 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 6

8. Frida P. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 8

9. Aulia G. 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 7

10. M. Aliyana 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6

11. Disha M. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 9

12. Rizki J. S. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 9

13. Fahreza L. 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6

14. Mutiara 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4

15. Chita F. A. 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 6

16. Rindu P. 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 10

17. Juniko K 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 11

18. Delsita Y. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 11

19. Andreas N 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 10

20. Okeu A. P. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 12

21. Ira Melyani 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 13

22. Ratna D. 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 12

23. Rika P. E. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 9

24. Indriani D. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 8

25. Gilang A. 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 11

N Total 13 15 8 23 21 8 25 33 29 14 23 28 30 29 22 35

B. The post-test results

14


15/21


16/21


Appendix 3 The pre-test and post-test calculations

A. Pre-test calculations

The Experimental Group- The Normality distributions

16


17/21


One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

16

8,0000

1,71270

,188

,188-,155

,750

,627

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Normal Parameters a,b

Absolute

PositiveNegative

Most Extreme

Differences

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

PRETEST

Test distribution is Normal.a.

Calculated fromdata.b.

- The Homogeneity of variances

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

pretest result

3,556 1 39 ,067

Levene

Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

ANOVA

pretest result

6,244 1 6,244 1,230 ,274

198,000 39 5,077

204,244 40

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total

Sumof

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

The Control Group

- The Normality distributions


25

8,8000

2,53311

,109

,109

-,095

,543

,930

N

Mean

Std. Deviation


Absolute

Positive

Negative

Most Extreme

Differences



PRETEST


Calculated from data.b.


17


18/21



pretest score

3,315 1 40 ,076

Levene


ANOVA

pretest result

6,244 1 6,244 1,230 ,274

198,000 39 5,077

204,244 40

Between Gro ups

Within Groups

Total

Sum ofSquares df Mean Square F Sig.

B. Post-test calculations

The Experimental Group



16

9,3125

1,66208

,223

,155

-,223

,892

,404

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Normal Parametersa,b

Absolute

Positive

Negative

Most Extreme

Differences


Asymp. Sig. (2-taile d)

POSTTEST





POSTTEST

,281 1 39 ,599

Levene


18


19/21


ANOVA

POSTTEST

2,319 1 2,319 ,733 ,397

123,438 39 3,165

125,756 40

Between Groups

Within Groups

Total


The Control Group



25

9,8000

1,84842

,187

,187

-,163

,937

,344

N

Mean

Std. Deviation


Absolute

Positive

Negative

Most Extreme

Differences



POSTTEST





POSTTEST

,281 1 39 ,599

Levene


ANOVA

POSTTEST

2,319 1 2,319 ,733 ,397

123,438 39 3,165125,756 40

Between Groups

Within GroupsTotal


Appendix 4 Parts of speech calculations based on pre-test and post-test results

19


20/21


Adjectives, items number 1, 5, 7, 16

Nouns, items number 2, 3, 10, 11

Verbs, items number 6, 9, 12, 14Adverbs, items number 4, 8, 13, 15

No. Name Pre-test Post-test

Adj N V Adv Adj N V Adv

1. Syifa 3 - 3 1 3 4 3 -

2. Sisca 3 1 2 2 3 3 - 1

3. Siti 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 2

4. Nuraida 1 3 2 2 4 3 1 3

5. Ahdiyanti 4 2 3 3 3 2 3 2

6. Silmi 2 2 2 2 3 1 - 2

7. Juniar 2 3 2 2 4 3 1 3

8. Tiur 1 3 2 1 1 2 3 2

9. Lulu 1 3 2 1 4 3 2 2

10. Vicky 4 3 3 - 3 2 3 3

11. Aini 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 3

12. Ahsan 3 2 3 2 3 1 4 1

13. Raja 2 1 1 1 4 2 - 2

14. Wandi 2 1 3 2 3 - 3 1

15. Relo 2 - 3 1 2 3 3 3

16. Aji 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 4

N Total 36 29 35 26 48 38 32 34

Appendix 5 Song samples; song lyrics as analysis tools and modified song lyrics

20


21/21


Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students

Documents

Transcript of Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students