CHAPTER IV
RESULT OF THE STUDY
A. Data Finding
In this section, it would be described the obtained data of improvement the students’ vocabulary after and before taught by using finger puppet media. The
presented data consisted of Mean, Median, Modus, Standard Deviation, Standard Error, and the figure.
1. Distribution of pre-test score of Experiment group
The pre-test of the experiment group were presented in the following table
7. Bagas Panca Surya A07 43
8. Cahyair Sandhi A08 53
9. Citra Farah A09 23
10. Dini Angriani A10 33
11. Daffa Bagus A A11 43
12. Fatmala A12 43
13. Fitri Rahayu A13 27
14. Isna Mayada A14 33
15. M. Adi Saputra A15 33
16. M. Tri Yandi A16 47
17. Mesia Maulida A17 37
18. M.Rizki A18 13
19. Maharani A19 17
20. Maulida A20 20
21. Monica A 21 27
23. Reyhan Rizki A23 40
Based on the data above, it can be seen that the students’ highest score was
66 and the student’s lowest score was 10. It mean that, most students still did not master about vocabulary especially noun. To determine the range score use interval of temporary, the writer calculated using formula as follows:
=
= 11, 4 or 12
So, the range of score was 57 and interval of temporary was 12. It was presented using frequency distribution in the following table.
Table 2.2 The Frequency Distribution of Pre-Test score of the Experiment Class
No Interval Frequency X Fx
1. 65-69 1 67 67
2. 60-64 0 62 0
3. 55-59 0 57 0
4. 50-54 3 52 156
5. 54-49 1 47 47
6. 40-44 7 42 294
7. 35-39 2 37 74
8. 30-34 7 32 224
9. 25-29 2 27 54
11. 15-19 1 17 17
12. 10-14 3 12 36
N=30 1.035
The distribution of students’ pretest score can also be seen in the following figure.
3.1The Frequency Distribution of the Pre Test Scores Of the Experiment Class
It can be seen from the figure above about the students’ pretest score. There
40 and 44. There was one student who got score between 45 and 49. There were three students who got score between 50 and 54. And there was one student who got score between 65 and 69.
The next step, the writer tabulated the scores into the table into the calculation of mean, median, and modus as follows:
No Interval F X fx X’ Fx’ fka Fkb
1. 65-69 1 67 67 6 6 1 30
2. 60-64 0 62 0 5 0 1 29
3. 55-59 0 57 0 4 0 1 29
4. 50-54 3 52 156 3 9 4 29
5. 54-49 1 47 47 2 2 5 26
6. 40-44 7 42 294 1 7 12 25
7. 35-39 2 37 m 74 0 0 14 18
8. 30-34 7 32 224 -1 -7 21 16
9. 25-29 2 27 54 -2 -4 23 9
10. 20-24 3 22 66 -3 -9 26 7
12. 10-14 3 12 36 -5 -15 30 3
N=30 1.035 -15
From the table above, the data could be inserted in the formula of mean, median and modus. In simple explanation, I are interval score of students, f is total student who got the score, fX is multiplication both X and f, fkb is the cumulative students calculated from under to the top, in other side fka is the cumulative students calculated from the top to under. The process of calculation used formula below:
a. Mean
M =
M =
M = 34, 5
b. Median
No Interval F fka Fkb
1. 65-69 1 1 30
2. 60-64 0 1 29
4. 50-54 3 4 29
5. 54-49 1 5 26
6. 40-44 7 12 25
7. 35-39 2 fa 14 18
8. 30-34 7 21 16
9. 25-29 2 23 9 fb
10. 20-24 3 26 7
11. 15-19 1 27 4
12. 10-14 3 30 3
N=30
Score of interval = 34-35
Fi = 2
Fka = 12
I = 5
U = 34 + 0.5 = 34.5
Mdn =
= 34,5 -
= 34,5 – 0,7 = 33,8
l= 30 – 0, 5
fi = 7
I = 5
Mdn =
=
=29, 5 +
= 29, 5 + 4, 3 = 33, 8
c. Modus
Interval F
65-69 1
60-64 0
55-59 0
50-54 3
40-44 7
35-39 2 fb
30-34 7
25-29 2
20-24 3
15-19 1
10-14 3
N=30
Fa = 1
L = 45- 0,5 = 44,5
I = 5
= 44,
= 44, 5 + 0,3 X 5
The last step, the writer tabulated the scores of pre test of control group into the table for the calculation of standard deviation and the standard error as follows:
Table 2.3 the Calculation of the Standard Deviation and Standard Error of the Pretest Score of Experiment group.
Score F X Fx x-m x2 Fx’2
65-69 1 67 67 32.5 1056.25 1056.25
60-64 0 62 0 27.5 756.25 0
55-59 0 57 0 22.5 506.25 0
50-54 3 52 156 17.5 306.25 918,75
45-49 1 47 47 12.5 156.25 156.25
40-44 7 42 294 7.5 56.25 393.75
35-39 2 37 74 2.5 6.25 12.5
30-34 7 32 224 -2.5 6.25 43.75
25-29 2 27 54 -7.5 56.25 112.5
20-24 3 22 66 -12.5 156.25 468.75
10-14 3 12 36 -22.5 506.25 1518.75
TOTAL ∑F= 30 ∑Fx2=
4987.5
The table above used for calculate standard deviation and standard error by calculate standard deviation first. The process of calculation used formula below:
d. Standard Deviation
SD=
=
= 12, 893
e. Standar eror
Sd =
=
=
=
The result of calculation showed the standard deviations of pre test score of experimental group was 12,893 and the standard error of pre test score of experimental group was 2.394.
2. Distribution of Post-Test Score forExperimentGroup
The post-test score of the experimental group were presented by the following table:
Table 2.4 the Description of Post-test Score the Data Achieved by the Students in Experiment Group
No Students Code Score
1. Alif Purnomo A01 73
2. Ahmad Riadi A02 70
3. Akbar Raya A03 67
4. Alfianur A04 56
5. Ahmad Sairaji A05 30
6. Agus Dwi Yanto A06 53
7. Bagas Panca Surya A07 80
8. Cahyair Sandhi A08 50
10. Dini Angriani A10 60
11. Daffa Bagus A A11 70
12. Fatmala A12 83
13. Fitri Rahayu A13 80
14. Isna Mayada A14 73
15. M. Adi Saputra A15 63
16. M. Tri Yandi A16 73
17. Mesia Maulida A17 80
18. M.Rizki A18 30
19. Maharani A19 73
20. Maulida A20 63
21. Monica A 21 70
22. Olga Maulida A22 63
23. Reyhan Rizki A23 60
24. Reza Prayuda A24 53
26. Syarifah A26 63
27. Siti Kharunisa A27 70
28. Yudid Ramadhan A28 80
29. Yuyun Rumanti A 29 57
30. Yolanda Silva A30 86
Based on the data above, it can be seen that the students’ highest score was 86 and the student’s lowest score was 30. To determine the range of score and
interval of temporary, the writer calculated using formula :
The highest score (H) = 86 The lowest score (L) = 30 The Range of score (R) = H-L+1
= 86-30 + 1
= 56 + 1 = 57
Interval of temporary =
= 57/6
= 9, 5 = 10
Table 2.5 the table of Frequency Distribution of Post-Test score for Experiment Group
No Interval (F) X FX
1. 84-89 1 86,5 86,5
2. 78-83 5 80,5 402,5
3. 72-77 5 74,5 372,5
4. 66-71 6 68,5 411
5. 60-65 6 62,5 375
6. 54-59 2 56,5 113
7. 48-53 3 50,5 151,5
8. 42-47 0 44,5 0
9. 36-41 0 30,5 0
10. 30-35 2 32,5 65
TOTAL N= 30 ∑= 1977
The distribution of students’ posttest score can also be seen in the following
0 2 4 6 8
84-89 78-83 72-77 66-71 60-65 54-59 48-53 42-72 36-41 30-35
the frequency distribution of post
test
Figure 3.2 the Frequency Distribution of Post-Test Score of the experiment Group
It can be seen from the figure above about students’ posttest score. There
was one student who got score between 84-89. There were five students who got score between 78-83. There were five students who got score between 72-77. There were six students who got score between 66-71. There were six students who got score between 60-65. There were two students who got score between 54-59. There were three students who got score between 48- 53. There were two students who got score between 30-35.
Table 2.6 the Table for Calculating Mean of Posttest Scores for the Experimental Group
No Interval F X FX
1. 84-89 1 86,5 86,5
2. 78-83 5 80,5 402,5
3. 72-77 5 74,5 372,5
4. 66-71 6 m 68,5 411
5. 60-65 6 62,5 375
6. 54-59 2 56,5 113
7. 48-53 3 50,5 151,5
8. 42-47 0 44,5 0
9. 36-41 0 38,5 0
10. 30-35 2 32,5 65
TOTAL N= 30 ∑=
a. Mean
M =
= = 65, 9
b. Median
Interval F X Fka Fkb
84-89 1 86,5 1 30
78-83 5 80,5 6 29
72-77 5 74,5 11fka 24
66-71 6 68,5 17 19
60-65 6 62,5 23 13fkb
54-59 2 56,5 25 7
48-53 3 50,5 28 5
42-47 0 44,5 28 2
36-41 0 38,5 28 2
30-35 2 32,5 30 2
Score Interval = 66-71
Fi = 6
Fka = 11
I = 6
U = 71 + 0.5 = 71.5
Mdn =
=
= 71, 5 – 4/6 X6
= 71, 5 – o, 7 X 6 = 71.5 – 4, 2 = 67, 3
c. Modus
interval F
84-89 1
78-83 5
72-77 5fa
66-71 6
54-59 2
48-53 3
42-47 0
36-41 0
30-35 2
TOTAL N= 30
Modus = Fa =5
N= 66-71
L = 66-0,5 = 66,5
I = 6
= = 65,5 + 0,5 x 6 = 68,5
The last step, the writer tabulated the scores of pre test of experimental group into the table for the calculation of standard deviation and the standard error as follows:
Table 2.7 the Calculation of the Standard Deviation and Standard Error of the Pretest Score of Experiment group.
Interval F X FX x-m X2 fx2
84-89 1 86,5 86,5 20,6 424,36 424,36
78-83 5 80,5 402,5 14,6 213,16 1065,8
72-77 5 74,5 372,5 8,6 73,96 369,8
66-71 6 68,5 411 2,6 6,76 17,576
60-65 6 62,5 375 -3,4 11,56 69,36
54-59 2 56,5 113 -9,4 88,36 176,72
48-53 3 50,5 151,5 -15,4 237,16 711,48
42-47 0 44,5 0 -21,4 457,96 0
36-41 0 38,5 0 -27,4 750,76 0
TOTAL N= 30 ∑= 1977
∑=
5066,216
d. Standard Deviation
SD= = = √168, 873867 = 12,995
e. Standard Error
Sem =
=
= = 2,413
The result of calculation showed the standard deviation of post test score of experimental group was 12.995 and the standard error of post test score of experimental group was 2.413.
3. Distribution of Pre-Test Score of Control Group
The pre test scores of the control group were presented in the following table.
Table 2.8 the Description of Pre-Test Scores of Data Achieved by the Students in Control Group
No Student CODE SCORE
1. Abu Nidal C01 30
2. Ade Nur C02 36
3. Adelia Fatahaya C03 40
4. Aditya Putra C04 43
5. Aisyah C05 26
6. Ali Wibowo C06 20
7. Amelia Lestari C07 30
8. Anggun Angriani C08 50
9. Anita Nooraini C09 26
10. Arnan Maulana C10 26
11. Bilqis C11 33
12. Bima Aditya C12 36
13. Dea Calossa C13 66
15. Feri Irawan C15 23
16. Fitri Anti C16 66
17. M. Khaidir C17 23
18. M. Muzaini C18 30
19. M.Gozali C19 30
20. Putri Lestari C20 20
21. Putri Maryanti C21 23
22. Raden Oni Qital C22 30
23. Rudi Hartono C23 43
24. Salsadiva C24 53
25. Sarah Maulida C25 33
26. Supriyanto C26 30
27. Tri Subi C27 23
28. Windi Dwi C28 36
29. Yola Depi Marista C29 36
Based on the data above, it can be seen that the students’ highest score was 66 and the student’s lowest score was 10. It mean that, most students still did not master about vocabulary especially noun. To determine the range score use interval of temporary, the writer calculated using formula as follows:
The highest score (H) = 66 presented using frequency distribution in the following table.
Table 2.9 the table of Frequency Distribution of Pre-Test score for Control Group
No Interval Frequency (F)
FX
2. 60-64 0 0
3. 55-59 0 0
4. 50-54 2 104
5. 45-49 0 0
6. 40-44 3 126
7. 35-39 3 111
8. 30-34 10 320
9. 25-29 3 81
10. 20-24 7 154
TOTAL ∑= 1.030
The distribution of students’ pretest score can also be seen in the following
3.3 The Frequency Distribution of Pre-Test Score of the Control Group
The table and the figure showed the pre-test score of students in control group. It could be seen that two were students who got score between 65 and 69. There were two students who got score between 50 and 54. There were three students who got score between 40 and 44. There were three students who got score between 35 and 39. There were ten students who got score between 30 and 34. There were three students who got score between 25 until 29. There were seven who got score between 20 and 24. In this case, many students got score under 70.
The next step, the writer tabulated the score into the table for the calculation mean, median and modus as follows:
a. Mean
Interval Frequency (F) X FX
60-64 0 62 0
55-59 0 57 0
50-54 2 52 104
45-49 0 47 0
40-44 3 42 126
35-39 3 37 111
30-34 10 m 32 320
25-29 3 27 81
20-24 7 22 154
TOTAL ∑F= 30 ∑P= 1.030
Mean:
M =
=
= 34,3 = 34
Interval F X Fka Fkb
65-69 2 67 2 30
60-64 0 62 2 28
55-59 0 57 2 28
50-54 2 52 4 28
45-49 0 47 4 26
40-44 3 42 7 26
35-39 3 37 10fa 23
30-34 10 32 20 20
25-29 3 27 23 10fb
20-24 7 22 30 7
TOTAL ∑F= 30
Score Interval = 30-34
Fi = 10
Fka = 10
I = 5
Mdn =
= 34, 5 – 2, 5 = 32
c. Modus
Interval F
65-69 2
60-64 0
55-59 0
50-54 2
45-49 0
40-44 3
35-39 3fa
30-34 10
25-29 3fb
20-24 7
Fa = 3
N= 30-34
L = 30- 0,5 = 29,5
I = 5
= 29, 5 + 2, 5 = 32
The last step, the writer tabulated the scores of pre test of control group into the table for the calculation of standard deviation and the standard error as follows:
Table 2.10 the Calculation of the Standard Deviation and Standard Error of the Pretest Score of Control group.
Score F X Fx x-m x2 Fx’2
65-69 2 67 134 32.7 1069.29 2.138,58
60-64 0 62 0 27.7 757.29 0
55-59 0 57 0 22.7 515.29 0
45-49 0 47 0 12.7 161.29 0
The table above used for calculate standard deviation and standard error by calculate standard deviation first. The process of calculation used formula below:
The result of calculation showed the standard deviations of pre test score of control group was 11,884 and the standard error of pre test score of control group was 2,206.
f. Distribution of Post-test score for Control group
That post test score of the control group were presented by the following table:
Table 2.11 the Description of Post-test Scores of the Data Achieved by the Students in Control Group
No Students Code Score
1. Abu Nidal C01 33
2. Ade Nur C02 43
3. Adelia Fatahaya C03 40
4. Aditya Putra C04 63
5. Aisyah C05 40
6. Ali Wibowo C06 30
7. Amelia Lestari C07 33
8. Anggun Angriani C08 50
10. Arnan Maulana C10 33
11. Bilqis C11 43
12. Bima Aditya C12 53
13. Dea Calossa C13 80
14. Debi Oktavia C14 40
15. Feri Irawan C15 33
16. Fitri Anti C16 63
17. M. Khaidir C17 36
18. M. Muzaini C18 47
19. M.Gozali C19 50
20. Putri Lestari C20 23
21. Putri Maryanti C21 50
22. Raden Oni Qital C22 53
23. Rudi Hartono C23 50
24. Salsadiva C24 46
26. Supriyanto C26 63
27. Tri Subi C27 40
28. Windi Dwi C28 36
29. Yola Depi Marista C29 40
30. Yulia Islami C30 23
Based on the data above, it can be seen that the students’ highest score was 86 and the student’s lowest score was 30. To determine the range of score and
interval of temporary, the writer calculated using formula :
The highest score (H) = 80 The lowest score (L) = 23 The Range of score (R) = H-L+1
= 80-23 + 1
= 57 + 1 = 51
Interval of temporary =
= 58/7
= 8.2
Table 2.12 the table of Frequency Distribution of Post-Test score for control Group
No Interval (F) X FX
1. 79-85 1 82 82
2. 72-78 0 75 0
3. 65-71 0 68 0
4. 58-64 2 61 122
5. 51-57 2 54 108
6. 44-50 6 47 282
7. 37-43 7 40 280
8. 30-36 9 33 297
9. 23-29 3 26 78
TOTAL N= 30 ∑=1249
The distribution of students’ posttest score can also be seen in the following
Figure 3.4 the Frequency Distribution of Post-Test Score of the control Group
It can be seen from the figure above about students’ posttest score. There
was one student who got score between 79-85. There were two students who got score between 58-64. There were two students who got score between 51-57. There were six students who got score between 44-50. There were seven students who got score between 37-43. There were nine students who got score between 30-36. There were three students who got score between 23-29.
The next step, the writer tabulated the score into the table for the calculation of mean, median, and modus as follows:
a. mean
No interval f X FX
1. 79-85 1 82 82
3. 65-71 0 68 68
4. 58-64 2 61 61
5. 51-57 2 54 54
6. 44-50 6 47 47
7. 37-43 7 40 40
8. 30-36 9 33 33
23-29 3 26 26
TOTAL N= 30 ∑=1249
M =
= = 41, 6 = 42
b. Median
Interval F X Fka Fkb
79-85 1 82 1 30
72-78 0 75 1 29
58-64 2 61 3 29
51-57 2 54 5 27
44-50 6 47 11fka 25
37-43 7 40 18 19
30-36 9 33 27 12fkb
23-29 3 26 30 3
TOTAL ∑F= 30
Score Interval = 37-43
Fi = 7
Fka = 11
I =7
U = 43 + 0.5 = 43.5
Mdn =
=
c. Modus
Interval F
79-85 1
72-78 0
65-71 0
58-64 2
51-57 2
44-50 6
37-43 7 fa
30-36 9
23-29 3 fb
TOTAL ∑F= 30
Modos= Fa =6
N= 30-36
I = 7
= = 29,5 + 0,7 X 7 = 2,95 + 4,9 = 34,4
The last step, the writer tabulated the scores of pre test of experimental group into the table for the calculation of standard deviation and the standard error as follows:
Table 2.13 the Calculation of the Standard Deviation and Standard Error of the Pretest Score of control group.
Interval F X FX x-m X2 fx2
79-85 1 82 82 40 1600 1600
72-78 0 75 75 33 1089 0
65-71 0 68 68 26 676 0
58-64 2 61 61 19 361 722
51-57 2 54 54 12 144 288
44-50 6 47 47 5 25 150
30-36 9 33 33 -9 81 729
23-29 3 26 26 -16 256 768
∑= 1249 ∑= 4285
d. Standard Deviation
SD= = = 11,951
e. Standard error
Sem = = = = 2,219
The result of calculation showed the standard deviation of post test score of control group was 11,951 and standard error of post test score of control group was 2,219.
B. The Result of Data Analysis
a. Calculate T-test using Manual Calculation
of hypothesis, “1” can be (>) or (<). The answer of hypothesis could not be
predicted whether on more than or less than.
To test the hypothesis of the study, the writer used t-test statistical calculation. Firstly, the writer calculated the standard deviation and the error of X1
and X2 at the previous data presentation. In could be seen on this following table:
Table 2.14 the Standard Deviation and Standard Error of X1 and X2
Variable The Standard
Deviation
The Standard Error
X1 12,995 2.413
X2 11,951 2,219
X1 = Experimental Group
X2 = Control Group
The table showed the result of the standard deviation calculation of X1 was
12,995 and the result of the standard error mean calculation was 2.413. The result of the standard deviation calculation of X2 was 11,951 and the result of the
standard error mean calculation was 2, 219.
Standard error of mean of score difference between Variable I and Variable II :
SEM1– SEM2 =√ SEM12 + SEM22
=
= √ 5, 822569 + 4,923961
= √10, 74653 = 3,27819005 = 3, 278
The calculation above showed the standard error of the differences mean between X1 and X2 was 5.068. Then, it was inserted to the toformula to get the
value of t observed as follows:
to=
to =
=
= 7,291
Which the criteria:
If t-test (t-observed) ≥ t-table, Ha is accepted and Ho is rejected
Then, the writer interpreted the result of t-test; previously, the writer accounted the degree of freedom (df) with the formula:
Df = (N1+N2) -2
= 30+ 30 – 2 = 58
5% to 1%
2,00 <7,291> 2,65
The writer chose the significant levels at 5%, it means the significant level of refusal of null hypothesis at 5%. The writer decided the significance level at 5% due to the hypothesis typed stated on non-directional (two-tailed test). It meant that the hypothesis can’t direct the prediction of alternative hypothesis.
Alternative hypothesis symbolized by “1”. This symbol could direct the answer of
hypothesis, “1” can be (>) or (<). The answer of hypothesis could not be predicted
whether on more than or less than.
Where:
X1 = Experimental Group
X2 = Control Group
T observe = the calculated Value
T table = the distribution of t value
Df/db = Degree of freedom
Based on the result of hypothesis test calculation, it was found that the value of observed was greater than the value of table at 1% and 5% significance level or
2,00< 7,291>2.65. It means Ha was accepted and Ho was rejected.
It could be interpreted based on the result of calculation that Ha stating that
finger puppets give influences toward student’s scores in increasing English
vocabulary was accepted and Ho stating that finger puppets does not give
influences toward student’s scores in increasing English vocabulary was rejected.
It means that teaching vocabulary using finger puppets gave significant effect on the students’ vocabulary score of the seventh grade students at SMP
muhammadiyah Palangka Raya.
C. Discussion
analysis, it can be seen from the score of students how the use of media giving positive effects for student’s vocabulary. It meant media has important role in
teaching learning process.
The results of researcher’s study is supported by theory (Chapter II: theory that be developed by mahony on page 22) about the reasons why teaching vocabulary using finger puppet could increase students’ interested in teaching
learning process. The first reason is about the advantage of finger puppet in learning process, such as: the students are motivated to be active in the class; the students easy to understand memorize and remember vocabulary because the student can see the object directly. Teaching learning process more interested when the teacher used finger puppets. From the data above, it can be known that teaching vocabulary by using finger puppets as the media of learning process gave significant effects in improving students’ English vocabulary. The students more
interested to receive vocabulary using finger puppet. So, the research of improving students’ English vocabulary by using finger puppet as media is
balanced with the theory in chapter II : theory that be developed by mahony on page 22. The theory was support the use of finger puppets as media in learning process and suitable with the condition of the seventh grade students.
increased after conducting treatment. In other words, teaching vocabulary by using finger puppets gave significant effect toward the students’ vocabulary.
Meanwhile, after the data was calculated using the ttest formula using manual
calculation showed that the tobserved was 7.291. By comparing the tobserved with the
ttable, it was found that the tobserved was higher than ttable at 5% level significance or
tobserved = 7.291>ttable=2.00.
In teaching vocabulary by using finger puppets, researcher find this media made the student more focus and motivated to memorize word and the able to write it. The students more interested to role play and practice their spoken. The student can make it easy. But, in teaching vocabulary by using finger puppets, the researcher found problem, like difficult in determine character suitable with each finger puppets.
When the researcher taught vocabulary and the writer used L2 (English) in conversation the students are confuse and didn’t interested, because they didn’t
