Applying the English Simple Code to Improve Indonesian Students’ Communicative Speaking Ability and Their Motivation

Herlandri Eka Jayaputri, Muhammad Fahruddin Aziz MT


The study aims to improve students’ communicative speaking and motivation using the simple code theory. It was action research. The research procedure consisted of identifying the students’ problems, designing the plans, applying the classroom practice expression (suitable with simple code), observing, and reflecting on each cycle. The subject was 20 students who have the lowest mark in communicative speaking ability and motivation in the pre-observation. Data were collected through observation, tests, interviews, questionnaires, and documentation and were analyzed using the descriptive quantitative, and qualitative. The English Simple Code could improve students’ communicative speaking ability and motivation in grade VIII of SMP Yapis Biak. it is also supported by the result of speaking tests and questionnaires. There are some findings; 1) implementing the classroom practice expression can help the teacher to provide a simpler language for students; 2) teacher-talk and interlanguage-talk are useful for acquiring English at the low-intermediate level; 3) emphasizing the activities of repetition drill and acting from a script can provide a prefabricated routine to prefabricated pattern and develop their fluency simultaneously; 4) teacher‘s role can improve the communicative speaking in performance; 5) delayed feedback is very useful to encourage students’ low affective filter in the learning process, so they got the high confidence and motivation in the second language acquisition. Thus, Theoretically, the English simple code can provide a good contribution to learning strategy in the classroom. Then, the teacher can use classroom practice expression, various activities, and delayed feedback to acquire English as the target language.


English simple code; communicative speaking; motivation

Full Text:



Ahadiyah, S. R. (2013). Developing Communicative Speaking Tasks for the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Ma’arif NU 1 Ajibarang. Faculty of Arts and Languages.

Alahmadi, N. S. (2019). The Role of Input in Second Language Acquisition: An Overview of Four Theories. Bulletin of Advanced English Studies, 3(2).

Amanah, F. P., & Widodo, P. (2018). Utilizing Simple-Code in Language Teaching Process towards Students Speaking Achievement. In Proceedings of the 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference (BELTIC ), 408–415.

Bahrani, T., & Soltani, R. (2012). How to teach speaking skill? Journal of Education and Practice, 3(2), 22–29.

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2013). Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (1st Editio). Routledge.

Fabianto, E., & Hartono, R. (2015). Incomprehensible Input for Enhancing English Speaking. English Education Journal, 5(2), 63–71.

Fardhani, A. E. (2016). Teacher’s Language of Instruction and Student’s Second Language Acquisition. Pancaran Pendidikan, 5(1), 119–132.

Febriani, S. R., Wargadinata, W., & Arifin, Z. (2021). The Philosophy of Language Acquisition in Stephen Krashen’s Theory based Multiple Intelligences Classroom. International Journal of Arabic Language Teaching, 3(1), 1.

Gilakjani, A. P., Leong, L.-M., & Sabouri, N. B. (2012). A Study on the Role of Motivation in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. I.J.Modern Education and Computer Science, 7, 9–16.

Hartono, R. (2017). Acritical Review of Research on Negotiation of Meaning Insecond Language Learning. UIGM Jurnal Global, 6(1), 1–7.

Igolkina, N. (2021). Learners typology: language acquirers vs language learners. Focus on Language Educcation and Research, 2(2), 23–28.

Karima, N., Suherdi, D., & Yusuf, F. N. (2017a). Interactional Modifications for Comprehensible Input: A Case Study of Two EFL Teachers. Journal of English and Education, 5(2), 170–178.

Karima, N., Suherdi, D., & Yusuf, N. F. (2017b). Interactional Modifications for Comprehensible Input: A Case Study of Two EFL Teacher. Journal of English and Education, 5(2), 170–178. url:

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: doing critical participatory action research. Springer.

Kerr, P. (2017). Giving feedback on speaking. In Part of the Cambridge Papers in ELT Series. Cambridge University Press. Press_Whitepaper_Feedback_Speaking_2018.pdf

Krashen, S. D. (2002). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. University of Southern California.

Krashen, S. D. (2009). Principle and Practice in Second Language (First Internet edition). University of Southern California.

Lee, J. (2016). The Effectiveness of Comprehensible Input : A Case of English Curriculum Design. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 3(5), 112–120.

Liu, D. (2015). A Critical Review of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis: Three Major Arguments. Journal of Education and Human Development, 4(4), 139–146.

Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1–40.

Mackey, A., Park, I. H., & Ragarelli, K. M. (2016). Errors, corrective feedback and repair. In Hall, G (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. Routledge.

McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of Second Language Learning. Edward Arnold.

Min, X. (2016). The Application of Input Hypothesis and Affective Filter Hypothesis in Colleges English Listening Teaching. 2nd International Conference on Education Technology, Management and Humanities Science (ETMHS), 82–86.

Muho, A., & Kurani, A. (2014). The Role of Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. European Scientific Journal, 16.

Mustadi, A. (2013). Communicative competence based language teaching: an english course design for primary teacher education. UNY Press.

Ngatma’in, N., & Suhardi, S. (2015). Peran Simple Code dalam Koreksi Kesalahan Berbahasa Peserta Darmasiswa di Universitas Muhammadiyah Surabaya. LingTera, 2(1).

Permana, D. R. (2018). The Role of Input, Interaction, and Negotiation in Second Language Acquisition. LINGUIST Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching, 4(2), 32–39.

Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). Input and interaction in the communicative classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. M. Gass. & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Newbury House.

Pili-Moss, D. (2014). he role of timing and corrective feedback in L2 discussion activities. International Journal of Pedagogy and Curriculum, 19(4), 53–62.

Sahril. (2014). Pemerolehan Bahasa Anak (Studi Kasus Terhadap Pemerolehan Bahasa Anak Usia Dini). Medan Makna, 12(2), 187–195.

Sholihah, R. A. (2018). Attitude, Aptitude, Routines, Pattern, dan Simple Codes dalam Pemerolehan Bahasa. Al-Adabiya: Jurnal Kebudayaan Dan Keagamaan, 12(2), 171–184.

Tosuncuoglu, I. (2018). Place of Critical Thinking in EFL. International Journal of Higher Education, 7(4), 26–32.

Ying, S. (2019). A Study on the Application of Input Hypothesis in English Teaching of Junior High School. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(6), 364–367.

Zhang, J. L. (2014). EFL learners’ anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 42, 429–439.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

IJEFL (Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics); Email:; Web:

Creative Commons License
IJEFL (Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics) by is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Indexed and Abstracted BY: