CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION
A. Research Finding
1. Description of the Data
Tests are the primary data of this research. The writer describes the data from students‘ pre-test and post-test. It will be described as the data of both experimental class and controlled class. The test results of both classes are presented below.
Table 4.1
Score of Pre-test of Experimental Class and Controlled Class
No Experimental
Class Pre Test
Controlled
Class Pre Test
1 Student 1 71 Student 1 68
2 Student 2 72 Student 2 61
3 Student 3 62 Student 3 60
4 Student 4 61 Student 4 70
5 Student 5 66 Student 5 67
6 Student 6 80 Student 6 60
7 Student 7 65 Student 7 69
8 Student 8 68 Student 8 72
9 Student 9 85 Student 9 69
10 Student 10 72 Student 10 71
No Experimental
Class Pre Test
Controlled
Class Pre Test
11 Student 11 64 Student 11 68
12 Student 12 75 Student 12 75
13 Student 13 63 Student 13 87
14 Student 14 60 Student 14 63
15 Student 15 63 Student 15 69
16 Student 16 58 Student 16 71
17 Student 17 57 Student 17 75
18 Student 18 58 Student 18 62
19 Student 19 71 Student 19 69
20 Student 20 77 Student 20 61
21 Student 21 70 Student 21 66
22 Student 22 61 Student 22 72
23 Student 23 59 Student 23 68
24 Student 24 58 Student 24 67
25 Student 25 70 Student 25 63
SUM 1666 1703
MEAN 66.64 68.12
MAX 85 87
MIN 57 60
The table of 4.1 shown that the highest score on pre-test of experimental class was 85 and the lowest score was 57 with the mean score was 66.64. On the other side, the highest score on pre-test of controlled class was 87 and the lowest score was 60 with the mean score was 68.12.
38
Table 4.2
Score of Post-test of Experimental Class and Controlled Class
No Experimental Class
Post Test Controlled Class
Post Test
1 Student 1 76 Student 1 78
2 Student 2 79 Student 2 70
3 Student 3 77 Student 3 61
4 Student 4 74 Student 4 71
5 Student 5 75 Student 5 74
6 Student 6 90 Student 6 65
7 Student 7 77 Student 7 65
8 Student 8 80 Student 8 75
9 Student 9 88 Student 9 76
10 Student 10 79 Student 10 66
11 Student 11 75 Student 11 79
12 Student 12 72 Student 12 80
13 Student 13 73 Student 13 89
14 Student 14 71 Student 14 63
15 Student 15 75 Student 15 75
16 Student 16 70 Student 16 76
17 Student 17 69 Student 17 77
18 Student 18 68 Student 18 68
19 Student 19 79 Student 19 74
20 Student 20 75 Student 20 65
21 Student 21 87 Student 21 74
No Experimental Class
Post Test Controlled Class
Post Test
22 Student 22 71 Student 22 79
23 Student 23 72 Student 23 74
24 Student 24 77 Student 24 73
25 Student 25 74 Student 25 69
SUM 1903 1816
MEAN 76.12 72.64
MAX 90 89
MIN 68 61
The table of 4.2 shown that the highest score on post-test of experimental class was 90 and the lowest score was 68 with the mean score was 76.12. On the other side, the highest score on pre-test of controlled class was 89 and the lowest score was 61 with the mean score was 72.64
Table 4.3
Score of Gained Score of Experimental Class and Controlled Class
No Experimental Class
Gained Score
Controlled Class
Gained Score
1 Student 1 5 Student 1 10
2 Student 2 7 Student 2 9
3 Student 3 15 Student 3 1
4 Student 4 13 Student 4 1
5 Student 5 9 Student 5 7
6 Student 6 10 Student 6 5
7 Student 7 12 Student 7 -4
40
No Experimental Class
Gained Score
Controlled Class
Gained Score
8 Student 8 12 Student 8 3
9 Student 9 3 Student 9 7
10 Student 10 7 Student 10 -5
11 Student 11 11 Student 11 11
12 Student 12 -3 Student 12 5
13 Student 13 10 Student 13 2
14 Student 14 11 Student 14 0
15 Student 15 12 Student 15 6
16 Student 16 12 Student 16 5
17 Student 17 12 Student 17 2
18 Student 18 10 Student 18 6
19 Student 19 8 Student 19 5
20 Student 20 -2 Student 20 4
21 Student 21 17 Student 21 8
22 Student 22 10 Student 22 7
23 Student 23 13 Student 23 6
24 Student 24 19 Student 24 6
25 Student 25 4 Student 25 6
SUM 237 113
MEAN 9.48 4.52
MAX 19 11
MIN -3 -5
The table of 4.3 shown that the highest score on gained score of experimental class was 19 and the lowest score was -3 with the mean score was 9.48. On the other side, the highest score on gained score of controlled class was 11 and the lowest score was -5 with the mean score was 4.52.
2. Data Analysis a. T Test
The collected data will be analyzed to examine the hypothesis by using t- test. A hypothesis test was done to see whether or not there was a significant difference in the result of post-test after the treatment was conducted. The result will indicate the effectiveness of the use Story Skeleton Model to foster learners‘
writing of recount text. Hypothesis test in this research was done by using t-test formula with significance level 0,05 in some steps as follows:
Group Statistics
CLASS N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
POSTTEST
EXPERIMENTCLASS 25 76.12 5.637 1.127
CONTROLCLASS 25 72.48 6.545 1.309
Table 4.4
The Result of T Test Calculation
Based on the data from the table 4.7 above, it showed that the result of post-test in both experimental and controlled class. Each class had a similar total of students which is 25. The table showed that the mean score of the controlled class is 72,48 meanwhile the mean score of the experimental class is 76,12. It is proved that the mean score of the experimental class was higher than the mean score of controlled class.
42
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. T Df Sig. (2- tailed)
Mean Differen
ce
Std.
Error Differen
ce
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference Lower Upper
POST TEST
Equal variances assumed
.771 .384 2.04 2
48 .047 3.480 1.704 .054 6.906
Equal variances not assumed
2.04 2
47.2 12
.047 3.480 1.704 .052 6.908
Table 4.5
The Result of Independent Samples Test of Post Test
From the data of Independent Sample Test in the table 4.8 showed the statistical hypothesis of this study. Since that the data of the population was distributed normally, the tcount of the Equal variances assumed was 2,042 with the Sig. (2tailed) 0.047. It means that the score is lower than the determined significance value 0.050. As the result, it can be seen that 0.042 < 0.05 means that null hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. As a result, it can be stated there is an effect of using Story Skeleton Model on Learners‘ Writing of recount text.
Then, the data was analyzed by using t-test. The manual calculation of t- test was described by following process:
Table 4.6 Calculation of T Test
Student X Y X-MX Y-MY (X-MX)² (Y-MY)²
1 4 10 -5.48 5.48 30.03 30.03
2 7 9 -2.48 4.48 6.15 20.07
3 15 1 5.52 -3.52 30.47 12.39
4 13 1 3.52 -3.52 12.39 12.39
5 9 7 -0.48 2.48 0.23 6.15
Student X Y X-MX Y-MY (X-MX)² (Y-MY)²
6 10 5 0.52 0.48 0.27 0.23
7 12 -4 2.52 -8.52 6.35 72.59
8 12 3 2.52 -1.52 6.35 2.31
9 3 7 -6.48 2.48 41.99 6.15
10 7 -5 -2.48 -9.52 6.15 90.63
11 11 11 1.52 6.48 2.31 41.99
12 -3 5 -12.48 0.48 155.75 0.23
13 10 2 0.52 -2.52 0.27 6.35
14 11 0 1.52 -4.52 2.31 20.43
15 12 6 2.52 1.48 6.35 2.19
16 12 5 2.52 0.48 6.35 0.23
17 12 2 2.52 -2.52 6.35 6.35
18 10 6 0.52 1.48 0.27 2.19
19 8 5 -1.48 0.48 2.19 0.23
20 -2 4 -11.48 -0.52 131.79 0.27
21 17 8 7.52 3.48 56.55 12.11
22 10 7 0.52 2.48 0.27 6.15
23 13 6 3.52 1.48 12.39 2.19
24 20 6 10.52 1.48 110.67 2.19
25 4 6 -5.48 1.48 30.03 2.19
SUM 237 113 664.24 358.24
MEAN 9.48 4.52 26.57 14.33
MIN -3 11
MAX 20 -5
1) Determine mean of Variable X with formula:
M1 = ∑ = = 9,48
2) Determine mean of Variable Y with Formula:
M2 = ∑
=
= 4,52
3) Determine Standard Deviation of Variable X with Formula:
SD1= √∑
= √ =√ = 5,15
4) Determine Standard Deviation of Variable Y with formula:
SD2= √∑
= √
=√ = 3,78
44
5) Determine Standard Error Mean Variable X with formula:
SEM1 =
√ =
√ =
√ = = 1.07
6) Determine Standard Error Mean Variable Y with formula:
SEM2 =
√ =
√ = √ = = 0.78
7) Determine standard error of difference of mean of variable X and Y:
= √
= √
= √ 0,60
=√
= 1,54
8) Determining to:
to =
= = = 3.22
9) Determining ttable in significant level 5%, with degree of freedom:
df = (N1 + N2) – 2
= (25+25) - 2
= 48
The value of df is 58 at degrees of significance 5% (0.05). It means the Ttable is 2.000. Furthermore, the hypothesis was tested based on the statistical hypotheses as follows;
Ha = to > tt
= 3.22 > 2.01
From the calculation above, writer assumed that Hα was accepted means ―Story Skeleton Model is effective to foster learners‘ writin of recount text..
The result from calculating the data is to= 3,22 and tt= 2.000. It means, to higher than tt in significant 5%. So, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted.
b. Formulation of The Effect Size
The researcher adopted Cohen‘s formula to measure whether the effect size of the media was strong. The Cohen‘s formula as follows:51
d =
Pooled Standard Deviation:
In which:
Mean of group A (experimental class) = 76.12 Mean of group B (control class) = 72.64 Standard deviation of group 1 (experimental class) = 5,15 Standard deviation of group 2 (control class) = 3,78 Pooled Standard Deviation:
=
d =
d =
d =
d = 0,78
The result could be interpreted based on these criteria below:
0-0.20 is weak effect, 0.21-0.50 is a modest effect, 0.51-1.00 is a moderate effect, and > 1.00 is a strong effect.
51 Daniel Mujis, Doing Quantitative Research in Education, (London: Sage Publications, 2004), pp. 136 – 139
46
Based on the criteria of the effect size level, it could be concluded that the result of the effect size calculation of this research was modest effect. It can be seen from the d score was 0,78. It means that the use of Story Skeleton Model has modest effect to foster learners‘ writing of recount text..
This research was intended to know the answer the formulated question:
―Is story skeleton model effective to foster learners‘ writing of recount text ability at eight grade of Mts. Al Falah?‖
The hypotheses could be used to find the answer of the formulated question above. The hypotheses could be analyzed as follows:
H1 = to > tt
Ho = to < tt The criteria were used as follows:
1. If to > tt, the alternative hypotheses (H1) is accepted and null hypotheses (Ho) is rejected. It can be concluded that there is an effect of story skeleton model on learners‘ writing of recount text
2. If to < tt, the alternative hypotheses (H1) is rejected and null hypotheses (Ho) is accepted. It can be concluded that there is no an effect of story skeleton model on learners‘ writing of recount text
Moreover, based on the t-test manual calculation the value of to is 3,22 while degree of freedom (df) is 48. The t-table of 48 with significance level 5% is 2,01.
Therefore, the value of t-observation is higher than t-table in other word to > tt. It means that alternative hypotheses (H1) was accepted and null hypotheses (Ho) was rejected. Thus, it could be concluded that there is an effect of using story skeleton model to foster learners‘ writing of recount text.