the using of CTL to improve the students’ speaking skill at the Eighth Grade of MTs NW 2 Rensing in the School Year 2016/2017

This research aims to: (1) improve the teaching and learning process using the contextual approach , that is eligible for the eighth grade students of MTs NW 2 Rensing, (2) improve the students’ speaking skill in the form of transactional and interpersonal, and (3) describe to what extent the students’ speaking skill improve after the implementation the contextual teaching and learning. This research is classroom action research, which is adapted from the procedure formulated by Kemmis and McTaggart. The process was broken down into four essential steps, consisting of (a) planning, (b) acting, (c) observing, and (d) reflecting. The subject of this research is both the English teacher and students at the eighth grade of MTs NW 2 Rensing, whereas the teacher became the collaborator of teaching implementation, while the 23 students of the eighth grade were the main subject of research. The classroom action research was treated in three cycles, and the data of analysis was collected using questionnaire of students’ responses, interview guide, and observation sheet of implementing the contextual approach, the sheet of students’ attendance list, teaching evaluation, and speaking test. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistic and qualitative descriptive. The study reveals the three research findings. First, the contextual teaching and learning could improve the teaching and learning process. The students’ enthusiast in attending and the students’ participation knew it when teaching and learning activity was being conducted. Second, by using contextual teaching and learning approach, the students’ enthusiast to practice speaking was improved cycle by cycle; the participation of students to practice speaking in cycle I was 49%, in cycle II and cycle III were 71.44% and 91.4%. Third, the students’ speaking improvement can be seen from the increasing of means score and the category of students’ speaking ability, whereas mean score in pre-cycle was 33, then it was improved become 41 in cycle I, 52 in cycle II and 75 in cycle III. The last is the category of students’ speaking ability falls in very good, good and fairly categories