CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION
A. Finding
This finding presents the result of data of students writing skill of the second grade students of SMPN 1 Kalaena, Luwu Timur. The findings of this research deal with scoring and classification of the students‟ pre-test and post- test. Data calculated based on the result and the result of pre-test and post- test. The researcher do some observation and test during research activity in this chapter.
1. The score classification of students‟ pre-test and post test
The students‟ pre-test and post-test in making paragraph descriptive text through POW+TREE strategy be seen in the following table.
Table 4.1.Rate Frequency (F)and Percentage (P) of the Students Score in Pre-test and Post-test in Content.
No Classification Score
Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 30-27 - - 12 41.38%
2 Good 26-22 5 17.24 % 14 48.28%
3 Fair 21-17 15 51.72% 3 10.34%
4 Poor 13-16 9 31.03% - -
Total 29 100% 29 100%
Table 4.1 above show that, in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good, 5 students (17.24 %) classified as good, 15 students (51.72%) classified as fair and 9 students (31.03%) classified as poor.
In the post test, 12 (41.38%) students classified as very good, 14 (48.28%) students classified as good, 3 students (10.34%) classified as fair and none of student classified as poor.
The writer found that in the pre-test, the students had difficult to make a relevant paragraph each other, but after application the POW+TREE strategy in writing lesson, in post-test the students easier to make a relevant paragraph. This results show that there is an improvement of the students‟ writing skill in content.
Table 4.2. Rate Percentage (P) and Frequency (F) of the Students Score in Pre-test and Post-test in Organization No Classification Score Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 20-18 - - 9 31,03%
2 Good 17-14 3 10.34% 18 62.07%
3 Fair 13-10 10 34.48% 2 6.90%
4 Poor 9-7 16 55.17% - -
Total 29 100% 29 100%
Table 4.2 above show that, in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good, 3 students (10.34%) classified as good, 10 students (34.48%) were Classified as fair and 16 students (55.17%) classified as poor.
In the post-test there were, 9 students (31,03%) classified as very good, 18 students (62.07%) classified as good, 2 students (6.90%) classified as fair and none of the students were classified as poor.
The writer found that in the pre-test, most of students had difficult in organizing their idea into readable paragraph, but in post-test the students can organizing their idea into readable paragraph.
Table 4.3. Rate Percentage (P) and Frequency (F) of the Students Score in Pre-test and Post-test in Vocabulary No Classification Score
Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 20-18 - - 17 58.62%
2 Good 17-14 8 27.59% 12 41.38%
3 Fair 13-10 13 44.83% - -
4 Poor 9-7 8 27.58% - -
Total 29 100% 29 100%
Table 4.2 above show that, in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good, 8 students (27.59%) classified as good, 13 students (44.83%)were Classified as fair and 8 students (27.58%) classified as poor.
In the post-test there were, 17 students (58.62%) classified as very good, 12 students (41.38%) classified as good, and none of the students classified as fair and poor.
The writer found that in pre-test, the students still had difficult in choosing vocabulary, so that the students were difficult to make a good paragraph, but in the post-test the students easier to choosing a vocabulary, so that the students were easier to make a good paragraph. This result show that there is an improvement of the students, writing skill in vocabulary.
Table 4.4. RatePercentage (P) and Frequency of the students Score in Pre-test and Post-test in Language Use/Grammar.
No Classification Score Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 20-18 - - 7 24.13%
2 Good 17-14 - - 16 55.17%
3 Fair 13-10 9 31.03% 6 20.70%
4 Poor 9-7 20 68.97% - -
Total 30 29 100% 29 100%
Table 4.3 above show that, in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good and good, 9 students (31.03%) classified as fair and 20students (68.97%) classified as poor.
In the post-test there were, 7 (24.13%) students classified as very good, 16 students (55.17%) classified as good, 6 (20.70%) students classified as fair and none of the students classified as poor.
The writer found in the pre-test, most of students no mastery of sentences construction rule, so that the students difficult to make a good paragraph. But in post-test, some of students can mastery of sentence construction rule, so that the students can make a good paragraph. This result show that there is an improvement of the students, writing skill in grammar.
Table 4.5.Rate Percentage (P) and Frequency (F) of the students Score in Pre-test and Post-test in Mechanics.
No Classification Score
Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 25-22 - - 4 13.80%
2 Good 21-19 - - 15 51.72%
3 Fair 18-11 5 17.24% 10 34.48%
4 Poor 10-7 24 82.76% - -
Total 30 29 100% 29 100%
Table 4.5 above show that, in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good and good, 5 students (17.24%) classified as fair and 24 students (82.76%) %) classified as poor .
In the post-test 4 (13.80%) students classified as very good, 15students (51.72%classified as good, 10 students (34.48%classified as fair and none of the students classified as poor.
The writer found, in pre-test most of students‟ written was dominated by errors of spelling, but in the post-test the writer found some of students can mastery of conviction. This result show that there is an improvement of the students‟ writing skill in mechanics.
Table 4.6. Rate Percentage (P) and Frequency (F) of the students Score in the five components Observed.
No Classification Score Pre-test Post-test
F P F P
1 Very good 91-100 - - 6 20.69%
2 Good 90-76 - - 16 55.17%
3 Fair 75-61 6 20.69% 7 24.14%
4 Less 51-60 3 10.34% - -
5 Poor 0-50 20 68.97% - -
Total 29 29 100% 29 100%
Based on the result of the data analysis for the test on table 6 above indicates that in the pre-test none of the students classified as very good and good, 6 students (20.69%) classified as fair, 3 students (10.34%) classified as less category, and 20 (68.97%) students classified as poor.
In the post test 6 students (20.69%) classified as very good, 16 students (55.17%) classified as good, 7 students (24.14%) classified as fair, and none of the students classified as less and poor.
The writer found in the pretest, most of the students got low score. But in post test, most of students can got good score. This result show that there is an effect on the students‟ writing skill in grammar.
2. Students‟ Pre-Test and Post-Test Score Students’
Name Code Pre-Test Classification Post-Test Classification
S1 44 Poor 82 Good
S2 62 Fair 81 Good
S3 51 Less 90 Good
S4 66 Fair 93 Excellent
S5 62 Fair 93 Excellent
S6 37 Poor 78 Good
S7 48 Poor 84 Good
S8 51 Less 87 Good
S9 46 Poor 83 Good
S10 44 Poor 82 Good
S11 44 Poor 82 Good
S12 44 Poor 81 Good
S13 38 Poor 75 Fair
S14 41 Poor 88 Good
S15 43 Poor 75 Fair
S16 56 Less 90 Good
S17 44 Poor 91 Excellent
S18 37 Poor 84 Good
S19 34 Poor 74 Fair
S20 34 Poor 86 Good
S21 34 Poor 65 Fair
S22 34 Poor 66 Fair
S23 34 Poor 74 Fair
S24 39 Poor 86 Good
S25 34 Poor 73 Fair
S26 34 Poor 76 Good
S27 66 Fair 89 Good
S28 66 Fair 97 Excellent
S29 62 Fair 97 Excellent
After calculating the result of the students‟ pretest and post test, the mean score and standard deviation were presented in the following table.
N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std.
Deviation
Pre-Test 29 34 66 1329 45.83 11.113
Post-Test 29 65 97 2402 82.83 8.320
Valid N (list wise) 29
Based on the data of pre-test and post-test the above, the researcher found that there is significant improvement after giving the treatment. In pre-test, the total score is 1329, the mean score is45.83and standard deviation is11.113.
While in post-test, the total score 2402 with the mean is 82.83 and standard deviation is 8.320.The total and mean score of post-test is higher than pre-test.
3. Test of significance (t-test).
After conducting the students‟ pre-test and post-test score in experiment class, the researcher used t-test for hypothesis test. T-test is a test to measure whether or not there is a significant difference between the results of the students‟ mean scores in the pretest and the posttest. By using inferential analysis of t-test or test of significance run by SPSS Version 16, the significant differences can be easier to analyze.
In this research, the Null hypothesis (Ho) stated that the effect of POW+TREE strategy can‟t enhance the students‟ writing skill in English at the eight grade of SMPN 1 Kalaena, Luwu Timur in the academic year 2020/2021. While the Alternative hypothesis (H1) state that the Effect of POW +TREE strategy can enhance the students‟ writing skill in English at the eight grade of SMPN 1 Kalaena, Luwu Timur in the academic year 2020/2021s.If
the value of significance 2 or sig. (2-tailed) lower than 0.05, H1 accepted and Ho rejected.
Table 4.5 The Result t-test
Paired Samples Test Paired Differences
T df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper Pair 1 pretest -
posttest -37.000 7.290 1.354 -39.773 -
34.227 -27.332 28 .000
The result of t-test stated that Sig. (2-tailed) was 0,000. The result provided that the Sig. (2-tailed) table was lower than level of significance. So, the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted and the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected. It means that the effect of POW+TREE strategy can enhance students‟
writing skill in English at the eight grade of SMPN 1 Kalaena, Luwu Timur in the academic year 2020/2021.