CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
A. Findings
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the findings of the research and discussion. The findings of the research covered with the result of the data collected through the test. In discussion part, the researcher described the interpretation of the finding.
27
Table 4.2Findings Classification the Students’ Score of Post-Test
No. Classification Score Main idea Conclusion
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1. Excellent 96 - 10 - 0 % - 0%
2. Very Good 86 - 95 - 0 % - 0 %
3. Good 76 - 85 4 20% 3 15 %
4. Fairly Good 66 - 75 5 25 % 5 25%
5. Fair 56 - 65 11 55 % 6 30 %
6. Poor 36 - 55 - 0 % 6 30%
7. Very poor 0 - 35 - 0% - 0%
Total 20 20 100%100%
In the table above, the researcher found that after giving treatment the achievement of students in their reading comprehension through Closed Caption as a reading method; out of 20 students. Main Idea there is 3 (15%) students get good score, 5 (25%) students get fairly good score, and 11(55%) students get fair score. And the Conclusion there is 3 (15%) students get good score, 5 (25%) students get fairly good score, 6 (30%) students get fair score, and 6 (30%) students get poor.
1. The Effectiveness of Students’ Literal Comprehension
The researcher used Closed caption Method in treatment to see the improvement students’ in literal comprehension and there was improvement in pre-test to post-test. It showed from mean score of the students in pre-test and post-test and also improvement percentage. It could see in the table below:
Table 4.3 The Mean Score of Students’ Literal Comprehension
Indicator Mean score Improvement (%)
Main idea
Pre-test Post-test , ,
, 100
= 42,92%
49, 5 70,75
Table 4.3 indicates that there are differences of students’ score of pre-test and post-test in reading literal comprehension. The data analysis shows the students’ mean score improves from pre-test to post-test. The students’
mean score of pretest is 49,5 and it is classified as poor . However, after applying treatment the students’ literal comprehension improved. It is proved by students’ mean score in post-test is 70,75 and it is classified as fairly good. So, the improvement of students’ achievement in literal Comprehension is 42,92%. It means that, using Closed Caption Method is effective to improve students’ literal comprehension in reading.
2. The Effectiveness of Students’ Inferential Comprehension
The researcher used Closed caption Method in treatment to see the improvement students’ in inferential comprehension and there was improvement in pre-test to post-test. It showed from mean score of the students in pre-test and post-test and also improvement percentage. It could see in the table below:
29
Table 4.4 The Mean Score of Students’ Inferential Comprehension
Indicator Mean score Improvement (%)
Conclusion
Pre-test Post-test
, ,
, 100= 48,58%
44,25 65,75
Table 4.3 indicates that there are differences between students’ score of inferential comprehension before and after using treatment in reading. The data analysis shows that the students’ mean score improves from pre-test to post-test. The students’ mean score of pre-test is 44,25 and it classified as poor. However, after applying treatment the students’ inferential comprehension improved. It is proved by students’ mean score in posttest is 65,75 and it classified as fair. So, the improvement of students’
achievement in inferential comprehension is 48,58%. It means that, using Closed Caption Method is effective to improve students’ inferential comprehension in reading.
3. The Effectiveness ofStudents’ LiteralAnd Inferential Comprehension The researcher used Closed caption Method in treatment to see the improvement students’ in liteal and inferential comprehension and there was improvement in pre-test to post-test. It showed from mean score of the students in pre-test and post-test and also improvement percentage. It could see in the table below:
Table 4.5 The Mean Score of Students’Literal and Inferential Comprehension
Indicators
Mean score
Improvement Pre-test Post-test
Main idea (Literal) 49,5 70,75 42,92%
Conclusion
(Inferential) 44,25 65,75 48,58%
Table 4.5 indicates that the students score in post-test improves after teaching reading comprehension by using Closed Caption Method for literal and inferential level. Before giving treatment the students’ score in pre-test for literal comprehension is 49,5 and inferential comprehension is 44,25. These results are classified as poor category . However, after giving treatment the students’ score in posttest improves to be 70,75 for literal and 65,75 for inferential level. These scores are classified as a fairly good and fair category. It means that, after using Closed Caption method gives improvement to the students’ comprehension in reading.
4. T-test Value
In order to know whether or not the difference between the mean score of test and post-test is statistically significant the t-test statistical analysis for non independent sample is employed. The result of the t-test is shown in the following table.
31
Table 4.6 The T-Test Analysis of The Students’ Improvement
Variables
t-test t-table Explanation
Literal (main idea) Inferential
(conclusion)
9,45
11,84
2.093
2.093
t testt- table
t testt- table
Effective
Effective
The researcher compared t-test value and t- table to know whether the use of Closed Caption Method in teaching reading comprehension was significant, to find out the degree of freedom (df) the researcher used formula N-1=20-1=19, for the level significant (p)=0,05 and df=29, t-table got score 2.093. After calculating the t-test value of literal (main idea), it got score 9,45, so the value of t-test and t- table is (9,452.093), and calculating the t-test value of inferential (conclusion), it got score 11,84 . So the value of t-test and t-table is (11,842.093), it means that there was different result of the value of t-test and t-table
5. Hypothesis Testing
The result of the statistical analysis at the level significance 0.05 with degrees of freedom (df) = n–1, where df = 20–1 and df = 19 indicated that there is significant difference between the mean score of the post-test and pre-test. The mean score of the pre-test is 44,25 and post-test is 65,75, and the value of t-test in inferential is 11,84 whole the t-table is 2.093 where 11,842.093. It is concluded the null hypothesis (H1)is accepted. Seeing the fact that, the students’ reading comprehension could improve after treatment by using Closed caption Method.
In addition the t-test value in literalis greater that the t-table value (65,75>2,093).
It means that there is significant difference between the students’ reading comprehension before and after using Closed Caption in teaching reading. This also means that null hypothesis (H0) is rejected, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted.