M. Difa Alfarezi
Universitas Negeri Padang

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

ANALISIS RESPONS SISWA TERHADAP PENERAPAN METODE DISKUSI DALAM MENDUKUNG KETERAMPILAN BERBICARA SISWA KELAS III SDN 06 KUBANG TANGAH Putri Hidayatun Nisfu Sya’ban; Aufa Adiba Putri; Mesa Serlin; M. Difa Alfarezi
Didaktik : Jurnal Ilmiah PGSD STKIP Subang Vol. 12 No. 3 (2026): Volume 12 No. 3, September 2026 Release
Publisher : STKIP Subang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36989/didaktik.v12i3.16484

Abstract

This study aimed to describe students' responses to the implementation of the discussion method in supporting the speaking skills of third-grade students at SDN 06 Kubang Tangah. The study employed a quantitative descriptive approach. Data were collected from student questionnaires using a four-point Likert scale consisting of strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree options. Based on the available field documents, six complete and clearly readable questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively. One questionnaire was excluded from the analysis because several responses appeared unclear or contained multiple markings in the scanned document. The data were analyzed using total scores, mean scores, percentages, and response categories. The findings revealed that the students’ average score was 40.50 out of a maximum score of 60, equivalent to 67.50%, which was categorized as positive. The highest indicator was students’ confidence in expressing opinions, with a percentage of 72.22%. Meanwhile, the lowest indicator was clarity in expressing opinions, with a percentage of 58.33%. These findings indicate that the discussion method supports students’ confidence, fluency, questioning skills, and ability to respond to others’ opinions. However, teachers still need to strengthen students’ practice in expressing ideas clearly and systematically. This study does not conclude a causal improvement because the available data did not include pretests, posttests, or classroom action research cycles.