The use of Talking Chips Technique in Cooperative Learning Models to Increase Language Ability for Visual Impairment Students

: This research aims to gain information from various written sources related to the cooperative learning model of talking chips types in improving the oral language skills of students with visual impairments. This research was conducted using a content analysis-based literature review, involving 25 articles and 12 books. The research data used is in the form of secondary data taken from printed books, a collection of journals, previous researches, and relevant websites. The results of the literature review show: (1) cooperative learning model of talking chips types can improve oral language skills in composing simple sentences of students with visual impairments; (2) there are differences in the oral language skills between students with visual impairments low vision and blind; (3) the use of cooperative learning model of talking chips types becomes an innovation in the learning process of students with visual impairments. The results of this research implied that the cooperative learning model of talking chips types could serve as an alternative to improve the oral language skills of students with visual impairments.


INTRODUCTION
Language is also one of the most important aspects of communication. Through language, humans can communicate with each other, share experiences with various purposes that touch all aspects of life. Spoken language includes a variety of languages spoken through oral media, related to sound production, carried out by speech organs such as ears, lips, tongue, and teeth. Spoken language is more expressive than written language because it requires expressions, intonation, and body movements that can be mixed into one to support the communication (Achmad, 2012). A variety of spoken language requires the listener to interact directly and strongly tied to the condition, situation, space, and time (Landau &Gleitman, 1985).
Skills in spoken language are very important in learning activities (Andersen et all, 1984). Unskill in speaking means a decline in spoken language, this can affect written language skills. All these aspects are closely related to one another, if one is not fulfilled it will affect the next aspect. Therefore, learning that prioritizes skills in spoken language is very influential in optimizing other learning processes.
In the learning process, spoken language is an important factor in the effectiveness of the quality of learning. Spoken language in the learning process is said to be effective if there is a two-way flow of information between educators and students and the information is equally responded to according to the expectations of both. Educators play a very important role in developing students' oral language skills which include language components, namely: phonemes, morphemes, semantics, syntax, pragmatics, and lexicon.
Syntax or sentences become one of the language components that need to be mastered in learning oral language skills, the pronunciation of words that are strung together into a sentence according to the context being discussed. About sentence structure, standard Indonesian is required to use effective sentences, which are supported by the use of appropriate, common words or terms, and according to the SPOK pattern structure (Subject, Predicate, Object, and Adverb) in a sentence. This is done in conveying the message, the intent to be conveyed can be well received.
The development of oral language skills for students with visual impairments is based on the needs of students. The ability in spoken language is used to overcome verbalism (Aldriani,2017). Proper development of oral language skills in visually impaired students will improve thinking skills by providing stimuli according to their developmental tasks (Pujaningsih 2010). Their courage will also develop when conveying ideas and feelings to others.
The results of the observation of the preliminary study found one of the facts that there was one class at Special School X Jakarta which consisted of four students (2 low vision and 2 blind students). There is a difference in the mastery of spoken language between totally blind and low vision students. It can be seen that blind students tend to be passive, in contrast to low vision students who appear to be more active.
The learning model used by the teacher includes lectures and questions and answers. according to the teacher's confession, the learning model used has not been able to provide students with the opportunity to optimize oral language skills. Another problem, totally blind students lack the encouragement to interact with their peers in class.
It is necessary to develop an interesting oral language learning model so that it can facilitate all students to get the same opportunity in speaking. Therefore, the researchers examined the effect of the use of a cooperative learning model with the talking chips technique to improve the oral language skills of students with visual barriers. Talking chips use simple media, namely chips or cards are used as a tool to talk (Munajah, 2019). This model is also designed to overcome the barriers of equal opportunity to speak in expressing the ideas of each student in a group. Visually impaired students also get the same opportunity to be active in expressing their ideas and thoughts to contribute to them and listen to the opinions and thoughts of other friends to create social interaction with their classmates (Handoyo, 2016). This cooperative learning model with the talking chips technique is rarely studied for students with visual impairments. From the results of research that has been done, this learning model is very appropriate to use to make students without disabilities active in spoken language in learning. Based on the explanation above, the researcher further analyzed the effect of using the cooperative learning model with the talking chips technique on improving the oral language skills of students with visual impairments.

METHOD
The research method used is a literature study. In this study, the researcher used a non-interactive qualitative approach in the form of content analysis. This content analysis or content analysis is an indepth discussion of the contents of written information sourced from literature studies/books, scientific works/ thesis, a collection of journals, or relevant websites.
The research procedure in this literature study goes through three processes, namely the orientation stage, the implementation stage, and the report writing stage. The data analysis technique used in this research is descriptive qualitative data analysis with three stages, namely data reduction, data presentation a,nd conclusion drawing.
The steps of the study include: (a) collecting data, sourced from preliminary studies; (b) formulating and limiting the problem based on the research background, determining the research objectives and research benefits; (c) interpretation of the data, describing the theoretical reference of the focus of the study, limiting the relevant study results according to the focus of the study; (d) collect relevant research literature, then conduct a review of several important terms in the study. Important terms in this research are cooperative learning model with Talking Chips technique, spoken language, simple sentence,s and visually impaired students; (e) conduct an in-depth analysis based on all the literature that has been obtained by compiling the discussion. Discussion of the results of descriptive analysis, comparative analysis, interpretation, then the conclusion of the analysis carried out to conclude the effect of using cooperative learning models with the Talking Chips technique on oral language skills in compiling simple sentences for visually impaired students; (f) draw conclusions based on the results of the overall analysis, implications and propose suggestions which will be used as input and useful for further researchers and readers.

Findings
The results of the literature study in this study were sourced from 25 articles and 12 books. In the discussion of descriptive analysis, researchers look at the results of each corpus analysis. Researchers grouped into 3 large corpus according to the problems in this study, namely MPKTC (Talking Chips Cooperative Learning Model), BLMKS (Oral Language in Composing Simple Sentences), and PBSHP (Language Development of Students with Visual Impairments).
In the MPKTC corpus (Talking Chips Cooperative Learning Model) the researchers analyzed based on the grouping of research methods used by previous researchers, namely, Classroom Action Research (CAR), experimental methods, and qualitative methods. The results of the Classroom Action Research (CAR) method can be seen in Figure 1.
Furthermore, the results of experimental research are described in the data tabulation in Table 1.
In studies that have used qualitative research methods (Novilia Mita Sari, Siti Bakdiyah) it is stated that Talking Chips have two important processes, a social process and a material mastery process. The results showed that after the application of Talking Chips, students had oral language skills and skills so that it would affect their speaking ability.
Based on a study on the MPKTC corpus (Talking Chips Cooperative Learning Model) it can be concluded that there is a significant increase seen from the average percentage of 60% (initial ability) increasing to 90% in the application of the talking chips type cooperative learning model in improving language skills. oral for students without disabilities. In its application, optimizing several language components, such as phonemes, morphemes, semantics, syntax, and pragmatics, to improve students' oral language skills.   Language Development findings Language mastery of visually impaired students the higher the level of vision, the more likely they will have difficulty in an initial communication Phoneme Difficulty distinguishing "d" from "dhe", 'l and r', "f and ep" sounds at an early stage despite being able to produce similar sounds. Vocabulary/ Morpheme Low vision has more vocabulary mastery than totally blind. The use of words is slower to form hypotheses about the meaning of words, tends to be past language, about events that have happened.

Semantics
Treats the word as if it were the right name. Do not build hypotheses about the nature and meaning of words, use words without understanding their true meaning. Only 2 to 3 words, students use themselves as a reference using words. Sentence/Syntax Tend to reverse or incomplete use of words in composing sentences to be spoken. Pragmatics It is difficult to define and maintain a topic and in producing a coherent and cohesive discourse (combination of form and meaning) when there are words that have their meaning in the context being discussed.
In the BLMKS corpus (Oral Language in Composing Simple Sentences) the results of the study obtained data in table 2. In the PBSHP corpus (Language Development of Students with Visual Impairments,) the results of the study obtained data in table 3.

Discussions
The analysis of Laba (2018Laba ( : 2003 states that spoken language is a language that is spoken directly by the speaker to the listener, related to intonation, when the intonation used is clear, the meaning to be conveyed is by its meaning. Stahl in Isjoni (2016: 50) says "The cooperative behaviors and attitudes that contributed to the success and or failure of these groups".
In cooperative/group learning, students are not only a collection of individuals but a strong work team. A group member depends on other group members, those who have advantages will certainly share their advantages with others. One of the cooperative learning models developed by Spencer Kagan (1992) is Talking Chips. Derived from the words talking and chips (cards), so talking chips are cards used to talk. According to Darmani (2017), talking chips cooperative learning is carried out in small groups, each group member gets the same number of cards as a marker if they have an opinion. Dunlea (1989) found that children with visual impairments or visual impairments tend to use words to describe self-referential actions as a characteristic of the visually impaired. Effendi (2008) mentions visual impairment students' language skills as nonverbal reality, only recognize names without directly understanding the shape of the object, interpretation only according to hearing, and tends to be verbalized.
In Supena (2015) it is stated that visually impaired students also experience language barriers in terms of gesture and body language.
From the sources that have been analyzed, the researcher concludes that the talking chips type cooperative learning model is very related to overcoming obstacles in spoken language, it is also seen from the language component that can be optimized. The purpose of this learning model can also be seen from the existence of equal opportunities in speaking to develop components in spoken language.
From the sources that have been analyzed, the researcher concludes that the talking chips type cooperative learning model is very related to overcoming obstacles in spoken language, it is also seen from the language component that can be optimized. The purpose of this learning model can also be seen from the existence of equal opportunities in speaking to develop components in spoken language.
Reviewing the development of visually impaired students' language skills, the obstacles they have to make it possible to apply the talking chips type cooperative learning model (Mosca and Jeannie, 2015). Students with visual impairments who have a good sense of hearing can use it to increase their vocabulary (Pijnacker et all, 2012). Fluency in word pronunciation and understanding of words will also develop if the application of the talking chips type cooperative learning model is carried out optimally.
In the comparative analysis of the MPKTC corpus (Talking Chips Cooperative Learning Model) and PBSHP (Language Development of Students with Visual Impairments), it can be compared to see the application of the talking chips type cooperative learning model to general students and if it is applied to visually impaired students according to their language development, the comparison is in table 4. The difficulty of distinguishing the sound of "d" with "dhe", 'l and r "," f and ep "in the early stages though capable of producing a sound similar sound.
the same opportunity to speak, all students can distinguish the sound of the letters mentioned by their friends.

Morpheme
Students' vocabulary includes all nouns, adjectives, and verbs according to their abilities.
The vocabulary of visually impaired students is mostly noun specific, they speak fewer adjectives and verbs.
the same opportunity to speak, students with visual impairments will add new vocabulary expressed by other friends. students can understand the use of spatial terms (this, here, that, there), location terms (inside, outside and the use of pronouns. The use of spatial terms (this, here, that, there), location terms (inside, outside), and the use of pronouns such as 'I' and 'you' require awareness of role relationships.
Teachers can facilitate visually impaired students in understanding the use of terms and personal pronouns.
Can use words to describe actions referring to oneself and actions taken by others Using words to describe actions that only refer to oneself, tends to lack understanding of the actions of others unless the actions are directed at themselves.
During the discussion, low vision and totally blind students could understand each other's actions.

Semantics
Can use words according to their true meaning.
Treats words as if they were proper names. Do not build a hypothesis about the nature and meaning of words, using the word without understanding its true meaning.
Teachers can facilitate students with visual impairments in understanding the use of words according to their true meaning.

Syntax
In compiling sentence structure, some students still need to understand the proper arrangement of SPOK sentence patterns.
Tend to reverse or incomplete use of words in composing sentences to be spoken.
All students with the teacher as a facilitator can learn to structure sentences with the SPOK pattern.

Pragmatics
Still less able to define and maintain a topic, but has been able to produce a coherent and cohesive discourse (cohesion of form and meaning) It is difficult to define and maintain a topic, resulting in a coherent and cohesive discourse (combination of form and meaning) when there are words that have meaning in the context being discussed.
Students and teachers as facilitators can maintain the topic in the discussion and can optimize the mastery of coherent and cohesive discourse.
Differences in language development become a reference for the application of the same learning model to improve oral language skills for visually impaired students. When the talking chips cooperative learning model can be applied to students without disabilities, the result is a significant improvement in their spoken language skills. If applied to students with visual impairments, their language development is likely to be successful as well.

CONCLUSION
There is an effect of using the talking chips cooperative learning model if it is applied as a learning model in a classical setting for students with visual impairments because the learning model does not have to require vision. Talking Chips can also improve spoken language skills in compiling simple sentences with SPOK patterns. The application combines blind and low vision students in one group. It is better able to optimize the oral language skills of students with visual impairments.