CHAPTER III CHAPTER III
A. FINDINGS
35 CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The findings were written systematically in the line with the problem statement as previously stated in the introduction section while the discussion deals with the further description and interpretation of the findings.
36
Based on the data of Pre-Test, as clearly presented the mean of the total pre-test score is 42.77, the minimum is 30, maximum is 60 and standard deviation is 10.03.
Table 4.2 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students’ Smoothness in Pre-test
No Range of
score Classification
Cognitive
Frekuensi %
1 81-100 Excellent
- -
2 61-80 Good - -
3 41-60 Fairly Good
8 44%
4 21-40 Fair
10 56%
5 0-20 Poor
- -
Total 18 100%
Table 4.2 shows the frequency and percentage of the students’ smoothness pre-test from 18 students. As clearly presented, the highest percentage of the students’ are 10 students (56%) with fair category. Meanwhile, 8 (44%) the students’ get fairly good category. In addition there is no students’ get poor, good and excellent category. In conclusion, before the treatment, the students’ at the XIPA2 grade of SMAN 5 Soppeng has fair ability in speaking especially smoothness.
37
Table 4.3 Students’ Score in Smoothness Post-Test Mean
78.3333 Std. Deviation
9.07485 Variance
82.353 Range
30.00
Minimum 70.00
Maximum 100.00
Based on the data of post-test above, as clearly presented the mean of the total post-test score is 78.33, the minimum is 70, maximum is 100 and standard deviation is 9.074.
Table 4.4 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students’
Smoothness in Post-test
No Range of
score Classification
Cognitive
Frekuensi %
1 81-100 Excellent
4 20%
2 61-80 Good
14 80%
3 41-60 Fairly Good
- -
4 21-40 Fair
- -
5 0-20 Poor
- -
Total 18 100%
Table 4.4 shows the frequency and percentage of the students’
Speaking smoothness in the post-test from 18 students, as presented in the table,
38
almost all of the students are in good category with 14 students (80%). Besides, there are very small percentages that get excellent category with 4 student (20%).
There is no students are in poor, fair and fairly good category. Thus, the students’
at the XIIpa2 grade of SMAN 5 Soppeng has good ability in speaking especially smoothness and. It means that students’ speaking especially smoothness in that school significantly Effect after treatment.
2. The Effect of Time Token Method on the Students’ Pronunciation in Speaking
Table 4.5 Students’ Score in Pronunciation of Pre-Test Pre-Test
Mean 48.8889
Std. Deviation 9.16444
Variance 83.987
Range 30.00
Minimum 35.00
Maximum 65.00
Based on the data of Pre-Test, as clearly presented the mean of the total pre-test score is 48.88, the minimum is 35, maximum is 66 and standard deviation is 9.16.
39
Table 4.6 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students’
Pronunciation in Pre-test
No Range of
score Classification
Cognitive
Frekuensi %
1 81-100 Excellent
- -
2 61-80 Good
1 5.6%
3 41-60 Fairly Good
10 55.5%
4 21-40 Fair
7 38.9%
5 0-20 Poor
- -
Total 18 100%
Table 4.6 shows the frequency and percentage of the students’
pronunciation pre-test from 18 students. As clearly presented, the highest percentage of the students’ are 10 students with fairly good category.
Meanwhile, 7 students’ get fair category and one student gets good category. In addition there is no students’ get poor, good and excellent category.
In conclusion, before the treatment, the students’ at the XIIPA2 grade of SMAN 5 Soppeng is fairly good ability in speaking especially pronounciation.
Table 4.7 Students’ Score in Pronunciation Post-Test Mean
73.6111 Std. Deviation
8.18994 Variance
67.075
40 Range
30.00
Minimum 65.00
Maximum 90.00
Based on the data of post-test above, as clearly presented the mean of the total post-test score is 73.61, the minimum is 65, maximum is 90 and standard deviation is 8.189.
Table 4.8 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students’
Pronunciation in Post-test No Range of
score Classification
Cognitive
Frekuensi %
1 81-100 Excellent
3 16.7%
2 61-80 Good
15 83.3%
3 41-60 Fairly Good
- -
4 21-40 Fair
- -
5 0-20 Poor
- -
Total 18 100%
Table 4.8 shows the frequency and percentage of the students’
Speaking pronunciation in the post-test from 18 students, as presented in the table, almost all of the students are in good category with 15 students. Besides, there are very small percentages that get excellent category with 3 students. There is no students are in poor, fair and fairly good category. Thus, the students’ at the XIIPA2
41
grade of SMAN 5 Soppeng has good ability in speaking especially pronunciation.
The Improvement of Students’ Speaking Skill
Table 4.9 Improvement of Students’ Speaking Smoothness and Pronunciation Mean Score
Effect (%) Pre-Test Post-Test
Smoothness 42.77 78.33 83.14%
Pronunciation 48.88 73.61 50.59%
Based on table 4.9 shows that Smoothness mean score of pre-test is 42.77 and post-test is 78.33. The effect of pre-test and post-test is 83.14%. It concludes that the using of Time Token Method is effective in improving students’ smoothness in Speaking. able to give good contribution in teaching and learning speaking ability especially smoothness and pronunciation.Pronunciation.
The mean score of pre-test is 48.88 and post-test is 73.61. The effect of pre-test and post-test is 50.59%. It concludes that the using of Time Token Method is effective in improving students’ pronunciation in Speaking. Based on the data above, it can be concluded that the use of Time Token Method is able to give good contribution in teaching and learning speaking ability especially smoothness and pronunciation.
42 3. Hypothesis Testing
To know the effect of Time Token Method of students’ speaking ability in terms of smoothness and pronunciation, this research uses program SPSS 24 to analyze the T-test and T-table. The result of t-test for speaking ability focus on smoothness and pronunciation can be seen below:
Table 4.10 The T-test Value of Students’ Speaking Ability Especially Smoothness and Pronunciation
Variable T-test T-table Comparison Classification
Smoothness 23.602 1.739 t-test > t-table
Significantly Different
Pronunciation 14.632 1.739 t-test > t-table
Significantly Different
Table above shows that Smoothness. T-test value for speaking ability focus on smoothness is 23.602 > 1.739. Pronunciation. T-test value for speaking ability focus on Pronunciation is 14.632 > 1.739.Based on the result, it indicates that the result of t-test value in all of variable and indicator is higher than t-table value. It means that there are significant different between the result of pre-test and post- test in speaking ability especially smoothness and pronunciation. Thus, it concludes that there is effect of the students’ speaking ability deal with smoothness and pronounciation by using Time Token Method.
43 B. Discussions
This part, this research presents the discussion about the analysis on the research that has been presented in the previous sub chapter. In this case the researcher discuss about the data analysis, which is intended the result of the Pre- Test and the Post-Test and the discussion about the students’ smoothness and pronunciation toward speaking ability using Time Token method.
a. The Students’ Smoothness
The students’ smoothness in speaking class by using Time Token method at the eleventh grade of senior high school of SMAN 5 Soppeng shows that from all the data above. At the first meeting the students have low smoothness and pronunciation. It makes their speaking ability very low, it could be seen at the result of pre-test where the students have fair category. And in the end of meeting the students’ post-test increase with good category. Thus, it could be seen that, Time Token method was effective to be used in speaking class regarding to effect the students’ smoothness and fluency in speaking ability.
This case the researcher discusses the result of the data analysis in accordance with the scope of this research the discussion was intended to know the students effect in their smoothness using Time Token method. According to Brown in Asmayanti & Amalia 2014, smoothness is the ability of speaking English through a good clustering and reduces form. It is in line with Agus Nano Basuki (2005) findings, using time token Arends can affect learners’ confidence
44
and bravery have a notion and assess the work its friends, so that there no student predominating discussion or on the contrary is not at all have a notion or converse.
Relating to the data analysis in the Pre-Test and the Post-Test, the researcher presents the students smoothness and pronunciation in speaking class using Time Token method and the students had good response, it can be seen by increasing of their fluency especially smoothness in speaking. It is supported by Yudha Anpratama (2005) after do the research she found that using Time Token in speaking class made students more confidence and fluency in learning of speaking class.
b. The Students’ Pronunciation
The students’ pronunciation in speaking class by using Time Token method at the eleventh grade of senior high school of SMAN 5 Soppeng shows that from all the data above. At the first meeting the students have quite low pronunciation. It makes their speaking ability very low, it could be seen at the result of pre-test where the students have fairly good category. And in the end of meeting the students’ post-test increase with good category. Thus, it could be seen that, Time Token method was effective to be used in speaking class regarding to Effect the students’ pronunciation in speaking ability.
Webster in Basuki (2018: 54) says that pronunciation is an act or result of producing the sound of speech, including articulation, vowel information, accent, and inflection, often with reference to some standard of concerns or acceptability.
According to Sutatyo (2021) the research reveals that the uses of Time token
45
technique in English class has increased the students’ learning activities from 68
% in Pre-cycle to 78% in cycle 1 and 80 % in cycle 2. The Communicative competence in speaking English has increased from 74 to 78 in cycle 1 and 81 in cycle 2. It means that time token can improve communicative competence and improve the students’ skill in pronouncing the words in speaking skill.
46 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESSTION