CHAPTER IV RESULT OF THE RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION
2. The Data of Research
12 II 20 20 10 20 10 80
13 IS 10 10 10 10 5 45
14 JA 10 10 6 10 10 46
15 LS 20 20 12 15 15 82
16 MA 15 10 5 10 10 50
17 MD 15 15 5 15 10 60
18 MM 10 10 5 10 5 40
19 MP 10 10 6 10 10 46
20 MR 12 10 8 10 12 52
21 NA 15 15 10 10 10 60
22 NP 10 10 7 10 10 47
23 OP 10 15 9 15 10 59
24 PA 10 10 10 10 10 50
25 PN 15 10 5 10 9 49
26 RA 12 20 10 15 15 72
27 RT 10 15 9 15 10 59
28 RD 15 10 8 10 15 58
29 ST 10 10 9 10 10 49
30 SW 10 10 10 10 9 49
Total 1677
The Highest Score 82
The Lowest Score 40
Average 55,9
Source: The pre-test score of students’ writing narrative text performance From the data above, it can be found that the highest score was 82 and the lowest score was 40. Based on the data, the resercher measured the class interval by using the formula as follows:
K=1 + 3,3 Log n K=1 + 3,3 Log 30
K=1 + 3,3 x 1,47 K=1 + 4,87 K=5,87 ≈ 6
R= H (highest score) – L (lowest score) + 1 R= 82 – 40 + 1
R= 43 I = I =
I = 7,167 ≈ 7
Note
R = The distance from score maximum and score minimum H = The highest score
L = The lowest score
K = The number of interval class I = The length of interval class n = Total of participant
The total of class interval of this result pretest research was 7. After knowing the class interval, the data taken from interval above was put on the table of frequency distribution, as follows:
Table 8
The Frequency Distribution of Students’ Score In Pre-Test of Writing Narrative Text
No Class Interval Frequency Percentage %
1 40-46 5 16,66%
2 47-53 8 26,67%
3 54-60 12 40%
4 61-67 1 3,33%
5 68-74 2 6,67%
6 75-82 2 6,67%
Total 30 100%
if the data was put into graphic, it can be seen as follow:
Figure 3
The Graphic of Frequency Distribution of The Students’ Score Pre-Test of Writing Narrative Text
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
40 – 46 47-53 54-60 61-67 68-74 75-82
Frequency Percentage
Based on the table frequency distribution and graphic above, it can be inferred that 30 students as the research sample can be divided :
1) For the class interval of 40-46, there were 5 students or 16,66%
2) For the class interval of 47-53, there were 8 students or 26,67%
3) For the class interval of 54-60, there were 12 students or 40%
4) For the class interval of 61-67, there was only 1 student or 27%
5) For the class interval of 68-74, there were 2 students or 6,67%
6) For the class interval of 75-82, there were 2 students or 6,67%
The table and graphic above show that most of students got lower grade than 70, they were 27 students. The criteria of students who are successful in mastering the material are the students who got score more than 70, it was only 3 students or 10%. The average grade of pre-test is 55,9. It shows that the score of the students‟
writing narrative text in pre-test was not satisfactory. It became one of the reason why researcher used Think Pair Share Technique as an alternative technique to teach English especially in writing narrative text. It was done to know the effect of think pair share technique toward students‟ writing ability.
b. Post-test Result
After knowing the pre-test score of the students‟ writing ability , it might be assumed that the students got poor score. Therefore, the researcher conducted the treatment to help the students in understanding of writing narrative text. The researcher gave treatment by using think pair share technique. The researcher asked to the students about the difficulties in building up a narrative text and gave more explanation about the writing narrative text by using think pair share technique. The researcher explained about the procedure of think pair share technique is, and also explained about the procedure of think pair share technique in learning process.
Therefore, the students were curious and interested to use this technique in learning writing narrative text.
In this process the researcher saw that the students were interested and they motivated to study writing more by using this technique, at the end. The researcher gave post-test to know their writing narrative text after they were given the instruction (treatment).
To measure the effect of think pair share technique, the researcher tested the students to build a narrative text. The score of the post-test can be describes as follows:
Table 9
The Post-Test Score of Writing Narrative Text Ability at The Eleventh Grade of SMA Negeri 3 Metro
No Name
Score
PostTest Content Organization Vocabulary Language
use
Mechanics
1 AC 20 15 12 20 15 82
2 AM 15 15 15 15 20 80
3 AS 15 20 14 15 10 74
4 AT 20 15 14 10 15 74
5 AL 19 10 15 15 10 69
6 CA 20 20 16 15 15 86
7 DS 20 15 18 20 15 88
8 DU 15 15 12 20 20 82
9 FA 15 20 20 15 15 85
10 FR 15 15 16 15 15 76
11 HS 20 15 13 20 15 83
12 II 21 15 20 15 20 91
13 IS 15 12 15 15 15 72
14 JA 15 15 15 15 15 75
15 LS 20 23 20 15 15 93
16 MA 20 15 15 12 20 82
17 MD 15 15 20 16 20 86
18 MM 15 15 15 13 20 78
19 MP 15 15 15 20 10 75
20 MR 20 20 10 10 15 75
21 NA 20 20 15 15 15 85
22 NP 15 15 15 15 17 77
23 OP 15 10 20 20 15 80
24 PA 15 15 15 15 15 75
25 PN 15 10 10 15 20 70
26 RA 19 20 15 20 15 89
27 RT 15 10 19 15 10 69
28 RD 15 15 14 15 15 74
29 ST 15 15 18 15 15 78
30 SW 16 15 15 15 15 76
Total 2379
The Highest
score 93
The Lowest
Score 69
Average 79,3
Source : The score of post-test of students’ writing narrative text performance
From the data above, it can be found that the highest score was 93 and the lowest score was 69. Based on data, the researcher measured the class interval by using the formula as follows:
K = 1 + 3,3 log n K = 1 + 3,3 log 30 K = 1 + 3,3 x 1,47 K = 1 + 4,87 K = 5,87 ≈ 6
R = H (highest score) – L (lowest score) + 1 R = 93 – 69 + 1
R = 25 I = I =
I = 4,167 ≈ 4
R = The distance from score maximum and score minimum H = The highest score
L = The lowest score
K = The number of interval class I = The length of interval class n = Total of participant
The total of class interval of this result pretest research was 8. After knowing the class interval, the data taken from interval above was put on the table of frequency distribution, as follows :
Table 10
The Frequency Distribution of Students’ Post-Test Score of Writing Narrative Text Ability
If the data was put into graphic, it can be seen as follow
Figure 3
The Graphic Of Frequency Distribution Of The Students’ Score In Post-Test Of Writing Narrative Text Performance
Based on the table frequency distribution above, it can be inferred that 30 students as the research sample can be divided :
1) For the class interval of 65–72, there were 4 students or 13,33 % 2) For the class interval of 73–76, there were 9 students or 30,00%
3) For the class interval of 77–80, there were 5 students or 16,67%
4) For the class interval of 81–84, there were 4 students or 13,33%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
69-72 73-76 77-80 81-84 85-88 89-93
Frequency percentage
Class Interval Frequency Percentage
69 – 72 4 13,33%
73 – 76 9 30,00%
77 – 80 5 16,67%
81 – 84 4 13,33%
85 – 88 5 16,67%
89 – 93 3 10,00%
Jumlah 30 100%
5) For the class interval of 85–88, there were 5 students or 16,67%
6) For the class interval of 89–93, there were 3 students or 10,00%
Based on the table and graphic above, the average score from students was 79,3. It shows that their average of pre-test grades was increased so; it means that the treatment through think pair share technique was succesful on students writing narrative text performance. From the table above, it can be seen that the students who passed the test was the students who got score more than 70, there were 27 students or 90%.