• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

APPENDIX 1 Students English Score in Daily Test Science Class of Senior High School 6 Padang

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2018

Membagikan "APPENDIX 1 Students English Score in Daily Test Science Class of Senior High School 6 Padang"

Copied!
27
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

APPENDIX 1

Students English Score in Daily Test Science Class of Senior High School 6 Padang

NO X IPA 1 X IPA 2 X IPA 3 X IPA 4 X IPA 5

1 44 49 50 71 49

2 49 49 55 73 46

3 45 46 50 73 50

4 50 40 57 74 56

5 54 49 48 77 50

6 49 47 54 74 49

7 41 54 50 69 44

8 45 50 58 70 47

9 42 47 48 63 49

10 39 49 49 65 54

11 43 45 46 67 50

12 50 50 49 68 49

13 54 54 58 69 47

14 47 49 62 74 45

15 44 43 50 61 49

16 46 45 52 68 54

17 44 55 50 63 56

18 42 47 55 70 57

19 45 56 54 72 55

20 40 60 50 65 48

(2)

22 41 63 56 63 59

23 46 51 50 82 60

24 49 50 53 76

25 55 48 49 76

26 53 54 57 75

27 47 64 77

28 56 54 75

29 47 50 61

30 55 63 74

(3)

APPENDIX 2

Test Normality and Homogeneity Population

Tests of Normality VAR000

02

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

VAR000 01

1 .142 31 .111 .954 31 .207

2 .172 26 .047 .963 26 .457

3 .238 30 .000 .904 30 .010

4 .127 31 .200* .961 31 .305

5 .222 23 .005 .931 23 .117

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance. a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Test of Homogeneity of Variance Levene

Statistic

df1 df2 Sig.

VAR0000 1

Based on Mean .303 4 136 .875

Based on Median .266 4 136 .899

Based on Median and

with adjusted df .266 4 130.396 .899

Based on trimmed

(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)

APPENDIX 3

Post-test Scores of Experimental Class (class X IPA3) in Term of Content, Organization, Vocabulary, Language Use, and Mechanics

Name of

Aspects Total

NO Student s

(8)

22

SFP 21 17 15 18 3 74

23

UDA 25 18 19 20 4 86

24

WD 26 10 18 20 4 78

25 22 17 18 18 3 78

26 22 16 17 20 3 78

27 23 17 18 19 3 80

28 19 18 18 15 4 74

29 25 18 19 20 4 86

30 18 18 17 17 4 74

Mean 22.9 18.03 17.36 18.9 3.7 80.23

SUM 687 521 521 567 111 2407

Min 18 16 15 15 3 67

(9)

APENDIX 4

Post-test scores of Control Class (class X IPA1) in Term of Content, Organization, Vocabulary, Language Use, and Mechanics Name

of

Aspects Total

NO Student s

(10)

22

SFP 17 18 18 17 2 72

23

UDA 18 17 16 16 2 69

24

WD 24 20 19 19 3 80

25

RRE 22 20 19 18 2 81

26

RRT 20 19 18 17 2 76

27

YU 17 17 16 17 2 69

28

IPU 18 17 17 16 2 70

29

IU 21 19 18 17 2 77

30

WE 24 17 18 16 3 78

Mean 19.33 17.2 17.1 16.53 2.16 72.33

SUM 580 516 513 496 65 2170

Min 13 12 13 10 2 54

(11)

APPENDIX 5

Analysis of SPSS for Post-Test of Experiment and Control Class

Case Processing Summary VAR000

VAR00002 Statistic Std.

Error

VAR0000 1

1.00

Mean 80.55 .846

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower

Interquartile Range 8

Skewness -.271 .421

Kurtosis -.733 .821

2.00

Mean 72.50 1.212

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

(12)

Variance 44.052

Std. Deviation 6.637

Minimum 54

Maximum 85

Range 31

Interquartile Range 7

Skewness -.916 .427

a. The weighting constant is 1.339. b. The weighting constant is 4.685.

c. The weighting constants are 1.700, 3.400, and 8.500 d. The weighting constant is 1.340*pi.

Tests of Normality VAR000

02

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

VAR000 01

1 .167 30 .032 .910 30 .015

2 .154 30 .066 .928 30 .044

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Test of Homogeneity of Variance Levene

Based on Median and

(13)

Based on trimmed

(14)
(15)

Appendix 6

Indicators of Writing Based on Jacob’s Theory

Conte

n

t

Criteria of Each Item Score

 Excellent to very good: Knowledgeable; substantive; thorough development of thesis; relevant to assigned topic.

 Good to average: Some knowledge of subject; adequate range; limited development of thesis; mostly relevant to topic, but lacks detail.

 Fair to poor: limited knowledge of subject; little substance; inadequate development of topic.

 Very poor: does not show knowledge of subject; non substantive; not pertinent; or not enough to evaluate.

30-27

26-22

21-17

16-13

Organi

zation

Criteria of Each Item Score

 Excellent to very good: Fluent expression; ideas clearly stated/supported; succinct; well organized;

logical sequ ; cohesive.

 Good to average: somewhat choppy; loosely organized but main ideas stand out; limited support; logical but incomplete sequencing.

 Fair to poor: non-fluent; ideas confused or disconnected; lacks logical sequencing and development.

 Very poor: does not communicate; no organization; or not enough to evaluate.

20-18

17-14

13-10

(16)

Voc

ab

u

lary

Criteria of Each Item Score

 Excellent to very good: sophisticated range; effective word/idiom choice and usage; word form mastery; appropriate register.

 Good to average: adequate range; occasional errors of word / idiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured.

 Fair to poor: limited range; frequent errors of word/form choice, usage; meaning confused or obscured.

 Very poor: essentially translation; title knowledge of English vocabulary, idioms, word form, or not enough to evaluate

20-18

Criteria of Each Item Score

 Excellent to very good: effective complex constructions; few errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions.

 Good to average: effective but simple construction; minor problems in complex constructions; several errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions but meaning seldom obscured.

 Fair to poor: major problems in simple / complex constructions; frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions and/or fragments, run-ons, deletions; meaning confused or obscured.

 Very poor: virtually no mastery of sentence constructions rules; dominated by errors; does not communicate; or not enough to evaluate.

25-22

21-18

17-11

(17)

M

ec

h

an

ics

Criteria of Each Item Score

 Excellent to very good: demonstrates mastery of conventions few errors of spelling, punctuations, capitalizations, paragraphing.

 Good to average: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization, paragraphing, but meaning not obscured.

 Fair to Poor: Frequent errors of spelling, punctuations, capitalizations, paragraphing; poor handwriting, meaning confused or obscured.

 Very poor: no mastery of conventions dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing; handwriting illegible; or not enough to evaluate.

5

4

3

(18)
(19)

APPENDIX 8

(20)

S = 12

1 30 30

5793649 193695

. 30

 

=

) 29 .( 30

5793649 5810850 

S =12

870 17201

S12 = 19.77

S1 = 19.77

(21)

APPENDIX 9

(22)
(23)

APPENDIX 10 Analysis of Post Test Scores In Experiment and Control Class

(24)

(25)
(26)
(27)

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

t3l tuyM4s@ Dorh Lgbtu3 h r stu *r.h 3tu4

Penelitian mahasiswa: batak, cina, dayak, jawa dan sumba di Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana.. Salatiga: Pusat Bimbingan Universitas Kristen

Panitia akan melakukan verifikasi dalam rangka pembuktian kualifikasi terhadap calon-calon pemenang yang telah ditetapkan dan akan diusulkan kepada Pengguna Jasa untuk

Bantuan BBGRM adalah Bantuan Keuangan dari Pemerintah Kabupaten Bantul kepada Pemerintah Desa yang diberikan melalui APBD ke dalam APBDesa untuk membiayai

The students interact, share, contribute the knowledge each other well as the result; the three components of interaction patterns; negotiate meaning, recast, and feedback,

Schaufeli dan Bakker (2003) menyatakan bahwa karakteristik kerja, yaitu sumber daya kerja dan tuntutan kerja, berkaitan dengan keterikatan kerja yang membawa pada

Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhnya atau sebagiandengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa izin dari penulis.

Sedangkan menurut Mulyadi dalam bukunya yang berjudul Sistem Akuntansi penjelasan buku besar (general ledger) adalah sebagai berikut: “Buku besar (general ledger)