CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Findings
The research conclusions were determined on the data analysis results. The gathering of data involved data analysis. The exam consisted of pre- and post- testing part. A pre-test was utilized to determine the students' past reading comprehension before the REAP strategy was implemented, and a post-test was performed to see if their reading comprehension had improved.
1. Classification of student scores in the experiment class in pre-test and post-test
Tables 4.1 and 4.2 demonstrated the categorization of tenth-grade MA Madani Pao-Pao students' reading comprehension in the first grade in scores of pre- test and post-test in the experiment class.
Table 4. 1 The experiment class score percentage on the pre-test
No Range of Scores
Classifications Frequencies Percentages
1 96-100 Excellent - 0%
2 86-95 Very Good - 0%
3 76-85 Good - 0%
4 66-75 Fairly Good 2 6%
5 56-65 Fair 5 17%
6 46-55 Poor 18 60%
7 0-45 Very Poor 5 17&
Total 30 100%
Table 4.1 demonstrates that the students' scores before the treatment were very poor. Experiment class students did not score very good, excellent or good, 2 (6%) students scored fairly good, 18 (60%) students scored poor, and 5 (17%) students scored fair, and 5 (17%) students scored very poor.
Table 4. 2 The experiment class score percentages on post-test
No Range of Scores
Classifications Frequencies Percentages
1 96-100 Excellent - 0%
2 86-95 Very Good - 0%
3 76-85 Good 3 10%
4 66-75 Fairly Good 4 13%
5 56-65 Fair 18 60%
6 46-55 Poor 5 17%
7 0-45 Very Poor - 0%
Total 30 100%
36
After the post-test, Table 4.2 shows that some students received good score, 3 (10%) students received good scores, 4 (13%) students received fairly good score, 18 (60%) students received fair score, and 5 (17%) students received poor score.
This demonstrates that the REAP strategy successfully improved students' reading comprehension.
2. Classification of student scores in the control class based on pre-test and post-test results
The following tables (tables 4.3 and 4.4) demonstrated the categorization of tenth-grade students at MA Madani Pao-Pao reading comprehension in control class based on pre-test and post-test result.
Table 4. 3 The control class score result percentage on the pre-test No Range of
Scores
Classifications Frequencies Percentages
1 96-100 Excellent - 0%
2 86-95 Very Good - 0%
3 76-85 Good - 0%
4 66-75 Fairly Good 2 6%
5 56-65 Fair 5 17%
6 46-55 Poor 19 64%
7 0-45 Very Poor 4 13%
Total 30 100%
According to Table 4.3, no students (0%) scored excellent, very good, or excellent on the pre-test, and 2 students (6%) scored fairly good., 5 (17%) scored fair score, 19 (64%) students scored poor result, as well as 4 (13%) students scored
very poor result. It implies that the students' scores previous to treatments were extremely poor.
Table 4. 4 The control class score percentage on the post-test
No Range of Scores
Classifications Frequencies Percentages
1 96-100 Excellent - 0%
2 86-95 Very Good - 0%
3 76-85 Good - 0%
4 66-75 Fairly Good 3 10%
5 56-65 Fair 17 57%
6 46-55 Poor 10 33%
7 0-45 Very Poor - 0%
Total 30 100%
According to Table 4.4, 3 (10%) scored fairly good result, 17 (57%) scored fair result, and 10 (33%) scored poor result. This shows that the post-test scores of students in the control class were relatively low.
Table 4. 5 The frequency of sudents scoring in experiment class and control class
No Classifications Experiment Class Control Class Pre-Test Post-Test Pre-Test Post-Test 1 Excellent
2 Very Good
3 Good 3
4 Fairly Good 2 4 2 3
5 Fair 5 18 5 17
6 Poor 18 5 19 10
7 Very Poor 5 4
Total 30 30 30 30
38
Table 4.5 demostrates the frequency of students who received good, fairy good, fair, poor, as well as very poor score in both experiment and control class.
The post-test scores of experiment class are none of students scored very poor in post-test, 18 students scored fair score, 4 students scored fairly good score, and 3 students scored good score. Post-test scores of control class are none of students scored very poor score, 10 students scored poor score, 17 students scored fair score, and 3 students scored fairly score.
3. The values of mean and standard deviation for the experiment and control classes
After computing the outcomes of the students' scores, the table below shows the value of mean and standard deviation for the two classes:
Figure 4.1 The values of mean and standard deviation for the experiment and control classes
In both tests, the experiment class's pre-test mean score was 53.83 and its standard deviation was 7.73, whereas the control class's pre-test mean score was 54.33 and its standard deviation was 7.51. In the post-test, the experiment class's mean score was 64.50, with a standard deviation of 8.34. The control class's post- test mean score was 60.17, with a standard deviation of 7.36. The experiment class surpassed the control class in both experiments, results revealed.
The researcher uses a t-test to compare the scores from the experiment and control classes. According to Sugiyono (2010), the researcher may use the t-test formula with polled variance. Table 4.6 provides the t-test findings.
Table 4. 6 The values of t-test and t-table based on post-test
Variable T-test value t-table value
Post-Test 2.62 2.00
The researcher used a significance level of 5% (0.05), which implies that the falseness rate of the conclusion is 5% and the truth rate of the conclusion is 95%.
The alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted and the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected if the value of the t-test is bigger than the t-table. The t-test value is bigger than the t-table value, as shown in Table 4.6 with values of 2.00 and 2.62. It implies that students’ score in experiment class that was taught using the REAP strategy was higher than the control class that was taught with conventional strategy.
Figure 4.2 Mann-Whitney Test
If the p-value is greater than the level of significance, the null hypothesis is rejected, and it can be concluded that there is a significant difference between the
40
two classes. The significance level obtained is 0.025, the p-value is higher than the significance level value (0.05), it can be concluded that null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted.