32
This chapter aims to know the method of the research, and this research contains the research design made by the researcher seeks to explain to the reader how researchers research in an organized manner which packaged in this chapter.
A. Place and Time of the Research 1. Place of The Research
The Research took place at SMAN 1 Ciasem which was located at Jl.
Margasari 2 Sukamandi Ciasem, Sukamandi Jaya, Kec.Ciasem, Kab.Subang, Prov. Jawa Barat.
2. Time of The Research
The Research was conducted in the odd semester of the 2020 academic year, on October – November 2020. The Research was conducted in four meetings. Two weeks according to the school schedule available 3. Research Schedule
Table 3.0 Research Schedule No Activity
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 a.preperation
b.Permission 2 Implementation
a.Trail of Instrument b.Pretest
c.Posttest
3 Data Processing a.Collecting Data b.Analysis Data
2020 Research Preperation
1 June July August Sept Oct Nov
B. Method and Design of The Research
The Researcher used Quasi Experiment. “Quasi-Experimental Design a way to Identify a comparison group that is as similar as possible to the treatment group in terms of baseline characteristics (Pre-Intervention)”
(White & Sabarwal, 2014). The variable X in this research uses board games in learning English, and the variable Y in this research is speaking skills.
The Researcher tries to find the influence of Board Games on students‟ Speaking skills used this method to give the specific result. The research design used in quasi-experimental is a pretest and posttest control group based on Rogers & Révész (2005).
Table 11.1 Pretest/posttest control group Design Experimental group O X O
Control group O O
Description:
X: The treatment to give O: Pretest and Posttest
C. Population and Sample of the Research 1. Population
Population is the group of people whom the study is about (Dörnyei, 2007). The population in this study is all students odd Semester Academic Year 2020/2021 at SMAN 1 Ciasem.
2. Sample
Sample is the group of a participant whom the Research examines in an empirical investigation (Dörnyei, 2007). The Researcher takes two classes of samples for the second-grade students of SMAN 1 Ciasem. It consists of Males and Females, and this sample research has done using a simple random sampling technique in which two classes are chosen randomly from three courses in SMAN 1 Ciasem. The selected random sample was taken from XI IPS 3 and XI IPS 4 as a sample. Then, two samples randomly chose one class as an experimental and the other class as a control class. After randomization, class XI IPS 4 was selected as the practical class consist of 35 students and Class XI IPS 3 as the control class consist of 36 students. Still, in this Research, the Researcher chose 21 students from 35 students of XI IPS 4 and chose 21 students from 36 Students of XI IPS 3. The reason is the lack of Students' response to learning English, especially in this Research. Therefore, to avoid wasted time, the Researcher only chose 21 students in each class between the experimental and control classes.
However, when the learning process begins, each class has a different method. The experiment in the first treatment Provides overall material explaining the online board game (Rhetoric), and the Second treatment starts playing the online board game in groups, where each round consists of 8 students. The activity repeated until all students have a part to play the online board game (Rhetoric). And for class control of the learning process using WhatsApp, in the first treatment, the teacher provides directions to students for
the learning video given by the teacher, which contains an explanation of asking and giving an opinion as a whole and interaction with the students using voice note on a WhatsApp. And in the second treatment, the teacher provides examples of conversations on asking and giving opinions available on YouTube video and provides directions to students to understand the contents of the conversation then provides training for students to practice the conversation results using voice notes in the WhatsApp application.
D. Technique of Data Collection 1. Pretest
In this research, the researcher starts the test with Pre-test, commonly Pretest conducted before the treatment, and aims to know the students‟
speaking skills in both classes. The instrument of the test is in the Appendices.
2. Post Test
Post-test is a kind of test commonly used in the research study, and post-test used in the form of performance test or after the treatment has given.
Post-test used to measure the students' speaking skills on the topics that have taught. Then the researcher assessed the students speaking performances using the speaking rubric. The instrument of the test is in the Appendices.
3. Observation
Observation is a technique of observing students and teachers when learning English and Board games as a learning medium. In this study, researchers used observation checklists to keep teacher and student activities in the teaching-learning process before, during, and after implementation.
Observation aims to see or observe the atmosphere in the classroom learning that has or has not implemented. The aspect of student activity followed was:
participation, interest, attention, and presentation. The clue of the Students Observation checklist is in the form of appendices.
4. Questionnaire
Questionnaire is a survey study aim at describing the characteristic by examining sample of group (Dörnyei, 2007). In this research, The Researcher gives several questions to the respondent to answer on a piece of paper. Those questionnaires expected to describe the characteristic of the respondent in learning English using Board Game and used to provide information on the ability of students to organize ideas systematically. The instrument of collecting data using this technique is a questionnaire, and the questionnaire paper is in the appendices.
E. Instrument of the Researcher
Instruments are tools used in scientific or non-scientific research to determine the results of a study. The preparation of instruments is conducted with systematic processes and procedures (Sefrianto et al., 2020). and to know the influence of Speaking by using online board games (rhetoric),
the writer gave an oral test to the students. And the Speaking skill test is an instrument to know the ability of students' speaking skill both before pre- test and after post-test the learning proses. Both tests are given the student's individual ability a pre-test is to see the student's initial ability, and the post-
test is to look at the student's speaking ability in the two groups which are better. The test assessment above is to know students' speaking skills.
The indicator of grading speaking skill use is as shown in the following table according to Brown (2003) as follows:
Table 3.1 Rubric Speaking Skill
Scoring Rubric Speaking Skill
No Aspect Description Score
Equivalent that of an educated native speaker Errors in grammar are frequent, but speaker can be understood by a native speaker used to dealing with foreigners attempting to speak his language.
5
Able to use the language accurately on all levels normally pertinent to professional needs. Errors in grammar are quite rare
4
1 Grammar Control of grammar is good. Able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy to participate effectively is most formal and informal conversation on practical, social, and professional topic.
3
Can usually handle elementary constructions quite accurately but does not have thorough or confident control of the grammar
2
Errors in grammar are frequent, but speaker can be understood by a native speaker used to dealing with foreigners attempting to speak his language
1
Speech on all levels in fully accepted native speakers in all its features including breadth of vocabulary and idioms, colloquialism, and pertinent cultural references.
5
Can understand and participate in any conversation within the range of his experience with high degree precision of vocabulary
4
2 Vocabulary Able to speak the language with sufficient vocabulary to participate effectively in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social and professional topics. Vocabulary is broad enough that he rarely has to grope for a word.
3
Has speaking vocabulary sufficient to express himself simply with some circumlocution
2
Speaking vocabulary inadequate o express anything but the most elementary needs idioms, colloquialism, and pertinent cultural references
1
equivalent to that of an educated native speaker 5
can understand any conversation within the range of his experience
4
3 Comprehension Comprehension is quite complete at a normal rate of speech
3
Can get the gist of most conversation of non- technique subject (i.e., that required no specialized knowledge.
2
Within the scope of his very limited language experience, can understand simple question and statements if delivered with slowed speech, repetition, or paraphrase.
1
has complete fluency in the language such that his speech is fully accepted by educated native speakers.
5
able to use the language fluently on all levels normally pertinent to professional needs. Can participate in any conversation within the range of
4
this experience with a high degree of fluency
4 Fluency can discuss particular interest of competence with reasonable ease. Rarely has to grope for words.
3
Can handle with confidence but not with facility most social situations, including introductions, and casual conversations about current events, as well as work, family and autobiographical information.
2
(No specific fluency description. Refer to other four language areas for implied level of fluency.)
1
Equivalent to and fully accepted by educated native speakers
5
errors in pronunciation are quite rare 4 5 Pronunciation errors never interfere with understanding and rarely
disturb the native speaker. Accent may be obviously foreign
3
accent is intelligible though often quite faulty 2 errors in pronunciation. Are frequent but can be understood by a native speaker used to dealing with foreigners attempting to speak his language
1
Then to categorize the students‟ speaking skill result, the researcher used a table score and In order to case computation, the researcher adaptation the small score of J.B Heaton cited from Azzahroh (2015) to the scale of 100 as follows:
Table 3.2
The Level of Speaking Skill and Motivation
Score Range of Score The level of Speaking Skill and motivation
5 85-100 Excellent
4 75-84 Great
3 65-75 Enough
2 55-64 Bad
1 Below 55 Extremely Bad
F. Technique of Data Analysis
Before analyzing normality and homogeneity on pre-test and post-test data, the researcher found the statistic descriptive of both tests and both classes.
The technique used by the author in calculating the pre-test and post-test data is with the following steps:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Descriptive Statistic → Descriptive 3. In the right column enter all variable into variable box 4. Ok
1. Normality Test
Normality test tests to measure whether our data was normal distribution or not. In determining the normality test, the writer used the Shapiro Wilk test. According to Ghasemi & Zahediasl (2012) the Normality test is a test that has the power to reject the null hypothesis and, therefore, the sample that most often passes the test in a study, namely at the time of normality test. And normality test only used for a sample size of less than 50.
In normality test, hypothesis testing is:
H0: Data in a normal distribution H1: Data in un normal distribution With test criteria is:
(a) If significance > 0.50, then H0 is accepted (b) If significance < 0.50, then H0 is rejected
The step to normality test on calculation data is with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Descriptive Statistic → Explore
3. Input variable one to dependent List and variable two to Factor List
→ Click Plots
4. Check Normality Plots with test → Continue 5. Ok
2. Homogeneity Test
Homogeneity test used to investigate whether the data obtained is Homogeneous or not, this test obtained from pre-test and post-test results. This test used Levene's test to determine whether a test is homogeneous or not, and the standard signification in the homogeneity test is 0.50. Hypothesis and testing are:
H0: Second variant Homogeneity class H1: Second variant not Homogeneity class With test criteria is:
(a) If significance > 0.05, then H0 is accepted (b) If significance < 0.05, then H0 is rejected
The step to homogeneity test on calculation data are with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Descriptive Statistic → Explore
3. Input variable one to dependent List and variable two to Factor List
→ Click Plots
4. Check Power Estimation → continue 5. Ok
3. T-test
According to Kim (2018) a T-test is a type of statistical test that compares the means, and t-tests are a type of parametric method they can use
when the samples satisfy normality, equal variance, and independence. So the researcher uses this technique to know the different students‟ speaking skills in both classes that to be the classification of the research. So that certainly is carried out on the two mean difference tests, such as:
1. If Both data are standard and homogeny distributed, so the T-test was done.
2. If Both normal data distribution but no homogeny, the test of two averages with T-test done.
3. If one of both normal data distributed, then there is a homogeneity test, the different test two average with statistic non-parametric test done.
In two averaging tests, the hypothesis tasted is as follows:
1) Statistical hypothesis for the data pre-test and post-test.
H0: μ1 = μ2 (nothing the difference of average in the initial ability and ability end of the student experiment class with control class).
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2 (there is a difference of average in the initial ability and ability end of the students experiment class with control class).
Criteria Suggestion is: (α) = 0.05
If significant 2 tailed < 0.05 H0 rejected If significant 2 tailed > 0.05 H0 accepted
2) Statistical hypothesis for the data simple linear regression
H0: μ1 = μ2 (there is no influence between Board Game model toward students‟ speaking skills)
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2 (there is an influence between Board Games towards students speaking skills).
The criteria of tasting are as follows:
If significant value > 0,05 so that H0 is accepted If significant value < 0,05 so that H0 is rejected
The step to Independent Sample T-test on calculation data is with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Compare Means→ Independent sample test
3. Data value move to test variable and student move to grouping variable
4. Click define group → give the both groups 5. Continue
6. Ok
4. Mann-Whitney Test
Mann-Whitney U is a non-parametric statistical test. It is a test used to analyze differences between the medians of two data sets. It can be used in place of a t-test for independent samples in cases where the values within the sample do not follow the normal or t-distribution and when the distribution of values is unknown. For the Mann-Whitney U test to be applied, values must be measurable on an ordinary scale and comparable in size. According to Milenović (2011) The Mann-Whitney U is also used
to test the null hypothesis, subject to both samples coming from the same basic set or having the same median value.
Statistical hypothesis for the Mann-Whitney Test:
H0: μ1 = μ2 (there is no influence between Board Game model toward students‟ speaking skills)
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2 (there is an influence between Board Games towards students speaking skills).
The criteria of tasting are as follows:
If significant value > 0,05 so that H0 is accepted If significant value < 0,05 so that H0 is rejected
The step to Independent Sample T-test on calculation data is with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Non-parametric Tests→ Legacy Dialogue→ Two Independent sample test
3. Data value move to test variable and student move to grouping variable
4. Click define group → give the both groups 5. Continue
6. Ok
5. Simple Linear Regression
Sir Francis Galton first proposed the concept of linear regression in 1894. Linear regression is a statistical test applied to a data set to define
and quantify the relationship between the considered variables and the simple linear regression can control the effect in understanding the relationship between two variables (Kumari & Suniti, 2017).
As for this research, the researcher used simple linear regression to know the influence of online board games on students‟ speaking skills between the experiment class and the control class. Furthermore, according to Leonata (2015) Simple linear regression is conducted in order to reveal the relationship between two variables and to estimate the value of the dependent variable (Y) according to the selected independent variable (X).
Furthermore, the researcher used SPSS version 21.0 to analyze the simple linear regression.
Statistical hypothesis for the data simple linear regression is following:
H0: μ1 = μ2 (there is no influence between Board Game model toward students‟ speaking skills)
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2 (there is an influence between Board Games towards students speaking skills).
The criteria of tasting are as follows:
If significant value > 0,05 so that H0 is accepted If significant value < 0,05 so that H0 is rejected
This research used SPSS version 21.0, and in analyzing the regression equation, The Researcher used simple linear regression data by Leonata (2015:178).
Y‟ = a + bX
where:
Y‟ = the predicted value of Y variable for X value
a = the Y intercept or the estimated value of Y when X = 0
b = the slope of the line or the average change in Y‟ for each change of one unit (either increase or decrease) in the independent variable X
X = value of the independent variable
The step-in Simple Linear Regression test on calculation data is with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Regression → Linear
3. Input variable participant to independent and input posttest 4. In the method column we choose enter
5. Click Statistics → check Estimates and Method Fit 6. Continue
7. Ok 6. Questionnaire
The author used a questionnaire to know the students‟ response towards Online Board Game (Rhetoric) in English learning, especially in speaking skills. The researcher used Google Forms to collect the information from students. Moreover, this questionnaire used a yes and no question system to collect the data. It means that this questionnaire only requires yes and no answers. The technique for analyzing the questionnaire done by calculating the percentage of yes answers used Scala Guttman and
calculated using excel, where every “yes” answer given a score of 1 and the answer “no” given a score of 0. After calculating the data using Microsoft Excel and descriptive statistics from the Questionnaire data, the researcher used SPSS version 2.1.
The step-in Analyze Questionnaire on calculation data is with software SPSS version 21.0:
1. Input Data
2. Analyze → Descriptive Statistic → Frequencies 3. In the right column enter all variable into variable box 4. Ok
Furthermore, after calculating using SPSS, the data obtained is then presented before the interpretation by using the formula:
(Hadi,2014) Description:
P = Presentation
F = frequency of every value the observed n = the total number
by using the classification interpretation of the presentation according to Hadi (2014) can to see in following table:
Table 3.3
The percentage results from the Students’ questionnaire towards Learning Speaking skills using Online Board Game (Rhetoric)
No Percentage (100%) Criteria
1 0 None
2 1-25 Less than the number of respondents
3 25-49 Almost half
4 50 Half
5 51-75 More than half
6 76-99 Almost entirely
7 100 Entirely
7. Observation
This research used an observation sheet for the teacher. The English teacher to the researcher carried out this observation. This observation aims to know the teacher's response to the researcher when learning the English process using Online Board Game (Rhetoric).
Guttman Scale analysis is a method used in the Social Sciences of dealing with binary information, that is, information with “yes” and “no”
answers, here that information can be assembled in a particular order (Forrester, 2019). Moreover, this observation made by researchers in the form of a checklist using the Guttman scale. The answer “yes” gets a score of 1, and the answer “Not” gets 0.
To find out the classification of research activities in the teaching
process using Online Board Games (Rhetoric) can be seen based on the percentage adopted by Ngalim Purwanto cited from Kurnianingsih (2014):
Table 3.4
Classification of the Percentage Score of Observation Results
Percentage Criteria
≤ 54% Very less
55-59% Less
60-75% Enough
76-85% Great
86-100% Excellent
