CHAPTER IV FINDING AND DISCUSSION
B. Discussion
In this section, the researcher discussed the chronology of collecting the data and the result of the data analysis in accordance with the two variables which by lies on the scope of this research.
After calculating the score analysis of the students‟ writing who used monolingual dictionary and those who used bilingual dictionary, it was found that there is a significant different between them, which is categorized moderate with the t-test value is 3.6. It is greater than the t-table score 2.021. The following are the descriptions about the students‟ achievement in writing skill especially in
writing paragraph by using monolingual and bilingual dictionary based on the research result.
1. Writing Score of Students Who used Monolingual Dictionary.
After doing the research, it was found the description about the writing score of students who used monolingual dictionary through their writing test score, the result of test showed that from 21 students, none got very poor score, none student got poor score, three students got fair score, thirteen students got good score, and five students got very good score. The mean score was found by dividing the sum of all score of the students‟ writing test was 72.5 refers to the previous classification of the score, the researcher pointed out that the students who used monolingual dictionary of English department of Makassar Muhammadiyah University have good competence in writing paragraph.
2. Writing Score of Students Who used Bilingual Dictionary.
The writing test which was given to the bilingual group was same with the test of monolingual group which consisted of 2 parts; each part consisted of 10 items. After analyzing the writing score of students who used bilingual dictionary through their writing test score, it was found that from 21 students, none got very poor score, none student got poor score, 1 student got fair score, nine students got good score, and eleven students got very good score. The mean score was found by dividing the sum of all score of the students‟ writing test was 80.6 (81) refers to the previous classification of the score, the researcher pointed out that the students who used bilingual dictionary of English department of Makassar Muhammadiyah University have very good competence in writing paragraph.
3. The comparison of Both of Groups
After getting the student‟s significance scores (value of t), researcher compared with the value of t-table. Based on the criteria of hypothesis testing that say when it found that the value of t-test is equal or greater than the value of t- table, it means that null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted because there is significant difference between of students‟ writing who use monolingual dictionary and those who use bilingual dictionary.
Meanwhile, when it found that the value of t-test is lower than the value of t-table means that null hypothesis (H0) is accepted and alternative hypothesis (H1) is rejected because there is no significant difference between of students‟ writing who use monolingual dictionary and those who use bilingual dictionary.
After calculating the score analysis of the writing test of students who used monolingual dictionary and those who used bilingual dictionary, it was found that there was a significant different between them. This was proved by comparing the t-test value and t-table value which t-test value was 3.6 and t-table value was 2.021. It means that t-test value was greater than t-table value. So that, the null hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted because there was a significant difference of writing skill between students‟ who used monolingual dictionary and those who used bilingual dictionary.
It was in accordance with the previous researches which were found by Retno Dewi Nugraheni that there was a significant difference on writing descriptive text between students who used monolingual dictionary and those who
used bilingual dictionary. On the other side, Hayati (2006:125) in his journal titled The Effect of Monolingual Dictionaries on Vocabulary Recall and Retention of EFL Learners found that there is significant difference between two dictionary- use group in vocabulary recall and retention.
Based on the finding of this research, the researcher stated that using dictionary in learning English gives effect in students‟ writing skill. Referring to the previous research findings as mentioned on the previous chapter. The researcher considers that this study related to those researches. It was proved by the findings of the researches that there was significant different on writing skill between students who used monolingual dictionary and those who used bilingual dictionary.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter deals with conclusion and suggestion. The first part is conclusions that are based on the research finding and discussion. The second part is suggestion that based on the conclusion.
A. Conclusion
Based on the discussion and explanation in the previous chapter and looking at the result of this research, the researcher put forward some conclusions as follows:
1. The mean score of writing test of students who used monolingual dictionary was 72.5 refers to the previous classification of the score, the researcher pointed out that the students who used monolingual dictionary of English department of Makassar Muhammadiyah University have good competence in writing narrative paragraph.
2. The mean score of writing test of students who used bilingual dictionary was 80.6, it can be completed as 81 refers to the previous classification of the score, the researcher points out that the students who used bilingual dictionary of English department of Makassar Muhammadiyah University have very good competence in writing narrative paragraph.
3. From the result of writing test and interview, this implied that there was difference in the achievement between the students who were using monolingual dictionary and those who use bilingual dictionary in writing
53
class. The slight difference can be seen from the means of both groups. From the calculation, the mean of the bilingual group was higher than the monolingual group. It was proved that there was significant difference between the result of the writing of students students who used monolingual dictionary and those who used bilingual dictionary by the value of t-test was greater than the value of t-table(Ttest value (3.6)> Ttable value (2.021)). It means that using bilingual dictionary was better than using monolingual dictionary for students who learn English as a foreign language (EFL learner).
B. Suggestion
In relation to the conclusion above, the researcher formulates some suggestion in the following points:
1. The researcher suggests that bilingual dictionary is important, but they are also limited tools. The result of this research showed that the group of learners who use bilingual dictionary got higher average score than the students who use monolingual dictionary, it because the students have not been familiar in using monolingual dictionary as we know that English is not our second language but as a foreign language. But, some of students realized that actually monolingual dictionary was much better then bilingual dictionary because it is not only give the meaning of the word but also give the information about how to pronounce it. That‟s why researcher suggest to the teacher/lecturer to use appropriate dictionary in teaching English, so, students will be familiar in using the appropriate dictionary for them.
2. The English teachers/lecturers of the school should be well informed of the finding of the research so that they can make important steps to improve their writing skill. Besides, the teacher/lecturers should be encouraged to conduct similar experiments to find ways in which monolingual dictionary can lessen the dependence many students have on bilingual dictionary.
3. The students should have adequate facilities in studying English and using a lot reference to improve their ability not only in writing but also reading, speaking and listening. They can use some books, different dictionary, an internet to get more information.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alberta, 2009.Grade 3 Descriptive Writing Score Guide. New York: Government of Alberta
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik Edisi Revisi V. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Best, John. W. 1981. Research in Education. Englewood Cliff, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc.
Boardman, Cynthia A and Jia Frydenberg.2002. Writing to communicate: Paragraphs and Essays, second Edition. New York: Longman.
Childs, Leslie and Curtis, Kay. 1999. Academic Studies English. Support materials and exercise for Writing Paragraphs and the Writing Process.
Canada: Winter
FKIP Unismuh Makassar. 2012. Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi. Makassar: Panrita Press.
Gay, L. R. 2006. Educatioal Research, Competencies for Analysis and Application.
Florida: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Harmer, Jeremy, 2004. How to teach Writing. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited
.
Harris, David, P. 1969. Testing English as Second Language. Englewood: Prentice Hall Inc.
Hasrul, 2012. The Use of Derby Writing Technique to Enhance the Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. Makassar: Thesis of Unismuh.
Hayati, A.Majid. 2005. A Comparative Study of Using Bilingual and Monolingual Dictionary in Reading Comprehension of intermediate EFL Students.
Heard James and Tucker, 2005. Advance Writing. Seoul Korea: Brain House.
Heaton, J. B. 1975. Writing English Language Test. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Hogue, 1991.Writing Academic English, third Edition. New York: Longman.
Hornby, A.S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.
56
Hughes, 2007.Teaching Language and literacy. (online). Restricted from:
http://faculty.uoit.ca/hughes/Writing/WritingProcess.html. (May 22nd,2014) Lado, Robert.1964. Writing Measurement. New York:Macmillan Publishing
company Inc
Margono, Drs. 2003. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta Meyer, Alan.2005.Gateways to Academic Writing: Effective Sentence, Paragraphs
and Essays. United States : Longman
Nugraheni, Retno Dewi. 2009. The Comparative study on writing skill between students who used monolingual dictionary and who used bilingual dictionary. Makassar: A Thesis.
Nunan, D. 1992. Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: CUP Oiler, John, w. Jr. 1979. Language Test at School. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Oshima, Alice and Hogue, Ann. 1997. Introduction to Academic Writing.
Newyork: Longman.
Pusat Kurikulum.2006. Model Penelitian SMA. (online) Restricted from:
http://puskur.net/inc/mdl/083ModelPenilitianSMA.pdf (June 10th, 2014) Ramelan. 1992. Introduction to Linguistics Analysis. Semarang: IKIP Press.
Sudijono,Anas. 2010. Pengantar statistik Pendidikan. Jakarta:Rajawali Press
1992 in Enrekang. She is the second child of two brothers and one sister from the marriage of Darman,S.Pd and Hapsah,S.Pd. In 1997, she began her study at Aisyah Islam Kindergarten. In 1998, she registered as student at elementary school SDN 37 Tungka in Enrekang and graduated in 2004. The next in the same year she registered as a student at SMPN 1 Enrekang and graduated in 2007. Then, she registered at senior high school, SMAN 1 Enrekang and graduated in 2010. In the same year, she enrolled as student of English Education Department in Muhammadiyah University of Makassar.
During her study, she participated actively in some organizations such as Himpunan Pelajar Mahasiswa Massenrempulu (HPMM), Unimuh Moderate United Nation (Unismuh-MUN), Al-markaz for Khudi Enlightening Studies (MAKES) and English Camp Organizer of Makassar (ECOM).
Find her on email: twotyenice@yahoo.co.id or on twitter @TwotyeniceGreen.