CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Findings
1. The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill through Scientific Approach
The researcher used the Scientific Approach in the Experimental Group to see the improvement of student content and organization in the written descriptive text.
a. The improvement of students’ content in writing
The students‟ content in writing can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.1 The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of Content in Experimental Group.
Indicator Mean Score Improvement
Pre-test Post test
Content 1.8 3.4 88.8 %
Based on Table 4.1 above, it shows that the average student pre-test score was 1.8. Most students did not know how to compose their basic theme idea and relate it to supporting details in order to complete the content of their writing in paragraph. Some of the students just wrote the topic without describe the details at all.
32
Students tend to follow what teacher usually commanded them to write. After that, the researcher gave treatment by using the Scientific Approach and the students‟ writing test result has shown the combination of topic and details in term of writing content were getting better. The students‟ mean score became 3.4 which meant that the improvement was 88.8% compared to the pre-test result. This data proved that using Scientific Approach in writing could improve students‟ writing skill viewed from the content.
b. The improvement of students’ organization in writing
The researcher also assessed students‟ organization in writing skill. It was begun by pre-test to post test. After treatment, there was an improvement in student writing skills in terms of organization. The difference between the pre-test student score and the post-test score was indicated. In addition, the researcher also counted an improvement percentage of students. Shows in the table below:
Table 4.2 The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of Organization in Experimental Group.
Indicator Mean Score Improvement
Pre-test Post test
Organization 2.2 3.5 58.09 %
Based on the table 4.2 above, shows that the mean score of the students in pre-test was 2.2. Most of the students confused to
33
organize their paragraph. Some of them found it difficult to determine identification of the subject to describe. After the treatment by using the Scientific Approach, the researcher found out that the score had improved which is 3.5. The percentage of improvement the students in pre-test to post test was 58.09 % which means that Scientific Approach helped to improve the students‟ organization in writing.
c. The Rate Percentage of the Students’ Score
The rate percentages of the students‟ scores were presented in the following table.
Table 4.3 The Rate Percentage of Pre-test and Post-test Score NO Classification Score Pre – Test Post - Test
F % F %
1 Very good 85-100 0 0% 16 80%
2 Good 65-84 1 5% 2 10%
3 Fair 55-64 6 30% 2 10%
4 Poor 35-54 13 65% 0 0%
5 Very poor 0-34 0 0% 0 0%
∑ 20 100% 20 100%
Table 4.2 shows that in the pre-test, which was done before treatment, 13 students (65%) who belonged to „poor‟ category, 6 students (30%) belonged to „fair‟ category and 1 student (5%) who belonged to „good‟ category. Based on the percentage data of pre- test, the ability of the students in Experimental Group before the
34
treatment found to be poor.
While in the post-test that done after the treatment, from 20 students, there was 16 students (80%) who belonged to „very good‟ category, 2 students (10%) belonged to „good‟ category and also 2 students (10%) belonged to „fair‟ category. Based on the result, it can be concluded that the rate percentage in the post-test was higher than the rate percentage of pre-test.
2. The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill through Natural Approach.
The researcher taught students by using the Natural Approach as the conventional approach in Control Group to see the improvement of students‟ content and organization in Writing descriptive text.
a. The improvement of students’ content in writing
The students content in writing can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.4 The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of Content in Control Group.
Indicator Mean Score Improvement
Pre-test Post test
Content 1.5 1.7 13.3 %
Based on the table 4.3 above, it shows that the mean score of the students in pre-test was 1.5. The students wrote clear topic but the details kept missing the relation with the topic in order to complete
35
their writing‟s content. After that, the researcher give treatment by using the conventional teaching way that is Natural Approach and the score of the students had improved even though the score was not significant or higher enough. It showed in post test which become 1.7.
This result of pre-test and post test had improvement which was 13.3
%, showed that using Natural Approach could improve students‟
writing ability viewed from content.
b. The improvement of students’ organization in writing
The researcher also assessed the writing skills of the student organization. It started with a pre-test and post-test. The researcher also reported an improvement percentage of students. The difference between the pre-test student score and the post-test score was indicated. The score shown in the table below:
Table 4.5 The Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill in Terms Of Organization in Control Group.
Indicator Mean Score Improvement
Pre-test Post test
Organization 1.7 1.9 11.7 %
Based on the table 4.4 above, it showed that the mean score of the students in pre-test were 1.7. Most of the students felt confuse to identify and gave description based on the topic. It was caused by their lack in organization of the text. Students‟
identification is not complete enough and the description were
36
arranged with few misuse of connectives. After the researcher gave treatment by using conventional which is Natural Approach, the score of the students had improved. It showed in the post test which to be 1.9. It was indicated that the students had improved their organization and they can write descriptive text better than before. The percentage of the improvement was 11.7 %. It was meant that Natural Approach could improve students‟ organization in writing.
c. The Rate Percentage of the Students’ Score
The rate percentages of the students‟ scores were presented in the following table.
Table 4.6 The Rate Percentage of Pre-test and Post-test Score NO Classification Score
Pre – Test Post – Test
F % F %
1 Very good 85-100 0 0% 0 0%
2 Good 65-84 0 0% 0 0%
3 Fair 55-64 0 0% 1 5%
4 Poor 35-54 15 75% 19 95%
5 Very poor 0-34 5 25% 0 0%
∑ 20 100% 20 100%
The table 4.2 shows that in the pre-test, which was done before treatment, which 15 students (75%) who belonged to „poor‟
category and 5 students (25%) belonged to „very poor‟ category.
While in the post-test that done after the treatment, from 20
37
students, there was 1 student (5%) belonged to „fair‟ category and the rest 19 students (95%) belonged to „poor‟ category. Based on the result, it can be concluded that the rate percentage in the post- test was higher than the rate percentage of pre-test.
3. The Significance Improvement of Students’ Writing Skill in Experimental and Control Group
A pre-test and post-test was administered to determine whether there was a significant improvement in student writing skills between students taught by the Scientific Approach and students taught by the Natural Approach. The mean score was shown in the table below.
a. Mean score based on pre-test and post test in experimental and control group.
Table 4.7 Mean score of pre-test and post test
Group Mean Score Improvement
Pre-test Post test
Experimental 20.2 34.5 70.7 %
Control 16 18.2 13.7 %
Based on the table 4.5 above, the students‟ mean score of pre-test in Experimental Group was 20.2. after getting the treatment by using Scientific Approach, the students mean score of post test was 34.5. It meant that the mean score of the students in Experimental Group have an improvement, namely 70.7 %.
In Control Group the students‟ mean score of pre-test was 16, after
38
giving the treatment by using Natural Approach, the students‟ mean score of post test was 18.2 which meant that the mean score of the students in Control Group have an improvement, namely 13.7 %.
b. The Standard Deviation of Experimental and Control Group in Post-test.
After calculating the student score, the standard deviation for both classes is shown in the table below:
Table 4.8 The Standard Deviation of Experimental and Control Group in Post Test
Group Mean Score Standard Deviation Pre-test Post test
Experimental 34.5 4.8 4.2
Control 18.2 4.16 4.2
Table 4.8 shows that the students‟ mean score of post test in Experimental Group by using Scientific Approach was 34.5 and the standard deviation in pre-test was 4.8 and 4.2 for the post test. In Control Group without using Scientific Approach, the students‟
mean score post test was 18.2 and the standard deviation in control group was 4.16 in pre-test and post test was 4.2.
c. Test of Significance (t – Test)
The significance score of post – test between experimental and control group can known by using t-test.
Table 4.7 Test of Significant
Variable T – test value T – table value Remark
X1 – X2 12.5 2.024 Significantly
39
different
The table above showed that t – table value was low than t – test. The result of the test showed there was significant difference between t – test and t-table (12.5 > 2.024), it means that t – test was higher than t – table at the level of significance 0.05 and the degree of freedom (N1 + N2– 2) = (20 + 20 - 2) = 38.
Figure 4.1 Hypothesis Testing
Figure 4.1 indicates that the value of the t-test (12.5) was greater than the value of t-table (2.024). It means that there was significance score of post – test between experimental group and control group.
Based on the result above it can be concluded that the Null Hypothesis (H0) was rejected whereas the Alternative Hypothesis (H1) was accepted. In other words, the use of Scientific Approach
T- test value T- table value 12.5
2.024
40
was effective to improve the students‟ writing ability in term of content and organization.