Table 4.1: Table the improvement of students speaking skill in pre-test and post-test
Indicators
Mean Score Improvement
(%) Pre-Test Post-Test
Accuracy (Grammar)
56.88 68.75 20.86 %
Fluency (Smoothness)
73.75 80.00 8.47 %
Mean Score 65.31 74.38 13.87 %
The table above showed the students enhancement in speaking skill score as result of calculated of students pre-test and post-test at students speaking skill used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy. Where the students score in pre- test in speaking Accuracy are 56.88 and post-test 68.75 it means that there was improvement between pre-test and post-test 20.86%. The students score in pre-test in speaking Fluency pre-test 73.75 and post-test are 80.00 therefore, the improvement 8.47 %.
The research findings from the table above, indicated that there was the progressed the students‟ score from pre-test to post-test after doing treatment used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy. To saw clearly the progressed of the students‟
reading comprehension could be presented as the following chart.
The data above can also be shown in the figure below:
Figure 4.1. The Improvement of Students’ Speaking Skill
2. The Mean Score and Improvement of Students’ Speaking Accuracy In Terms of Grammar
The researcher used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy in treatment to saw the improvement of students‟ speaking accuracy in terms of grammar 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 saw in the table below:
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Accuracy Fluency
56.88
73.75 68.75
80
Pre-test Post-test
Table 4.2: The Mean Score and Improvement of Students’ Speaking Accuracy In Terms of Grammar
Indicator
Mean Score
Pre-test Post-test
1 Grammar 56.88 68.75
Improvement 20.86 %
The table 4.2 above showed that, the mean score in pre-test was lower than mean score of post-test. The mean score in pre-test was 56.88, it caused that most of students still used uncorrect grammar such as they used present tense when they wanted to express their idea in the past. It happened because they did not know to used past tense, they thought that they used past tense and also they did not know formula of tenses. After the researcher gave treatment by used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy the score of the students‟ had improved. It showed in post-test which to be 68.75. The students‟ speaking was suitable, they could develop their idea based on the topic.
The result of pre-test and post-test had improvement which was 20.86 %.
The data showed that used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy in speaking could improve students‟ speaking accuracy in term of grammar.
The data above can also be shown in the figure below:
Figure 4.2: The Improvement of Students’ Speaking Accuracy In Terms of Grammar
The graphic above showed, there was improvement of the students‟ in speaking accuracy in term of grammar from pre-test with the mean score was 56.88 to post- test with the mean score was 68.75. So, the improvement of pre-test to post-test was 20.86%.
56.88
68.75
20.86
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pre-test Post-test Improvement
Pre-test
Post-test
The mean score and Improvement the students' speaking accuracy in term of grammar
Table 4.3: The Rate Frequency and Percentage of The Students’ Speaking Accuracy In Term of Grammar In Pre-test and Post-test.
Score Classification
Pre-test Post-test
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage 96 – 100 Excellent
0 0 0 0
86 – 95 Very Good
0 0 0 0
76 – 85 Good
0 0 7 43.75 %
66 – 75 Fairly Good
0 0 2 12.5 %
56 – 65 Fair
7 43.75 % 4 25 %
36 – 55 Poor
9 56.25 % 3 18.75 %
0 – 35 Very Poor
0 0 0 0
Total Score 16 100 % 16 100 %
The table 4.3 above showed that the Classification of the students‟ speaking accuracy in term of grammar in pre-test and post-test from 16 students‟. There were no one students‟ got excellent, very good, fairly good and very poor in pre-test, 7 students got score (fair) with percentage 43.75 %, 9 students got score (poor) with percentage 56.25 %.
And after the researcher gave treatment to the students‟ through Practice Rehearsal pairs Strategy the score of students‟ had improved. There were no one students‟ got excellent, very good, and very poor in post-test, 7 students‟ got score
(good) with percentage 43.75 %, 2 students‟ got score (fairly good) with percentage 12.5 %, 4 students‟ got score (fair) with percentage 25 %. The data showed that used Practice Rehearsal Pairs strategy improved the students‟ speaking accuracy in term of Grammar.
3. The Mean Score and Improvement of Students’ Speaking Fluency In Terms of Smoothness
Researcher also assessed students‟ smoothness in speaking skill. It was began pre-test to post-test after researcher gave pre-test and post-test, there was improvement of students speaking fluency in terms of smoothness. It was indicated by the significance difference between students‟ pre-test and post-test score. Beside that, researcher also had counted improvement percentage of students‟. It showed at the following table:
Table 4.4: The Mean Score and Improvement of Students’ Speaking Fluency In Terms of Smoothness
Indicator
Mean Score
Pre-test Post-test
1 Smoothness 73.75 80.00
Improvement 8.47 %
Table 4.4 showed that the mean score of the pre-test was 73.75 while the mean score of the post-test increased 80.00. The result of pre-test and post-test had improvement which was 8.47%. The data showed that used Practice
Rehearsal Pairs Strategy in speaking could improved students‟ speaking fluency in term of smoothness.
The data above can also be shown in the figure below:
Figure 4.4: The Improvement of Students’ Speaking Fluency In Terms of Smoothness
The graphic above showed, there was improvement of the students‟ in speaking fluency in term of smoothness from pre-test with the mean score was 73.75 to post- test with the mean score was 80.00. So, the improvement of pre-test to post-test was 8.47%.
73.75
80
8.47
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Pre-test Post-test Improvement
Pre-test
Post-test
The mean score and Improvement the
students' speaking Fluency in term of smoothness
Table 4.5: The Rate Frequency and Percentage of The Students’ Speaking Fluency In Term of Smoothness In Pre-test and Post-test.
Score Classification
Pre-test Post-test
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage 96 – 100 Excellent
0 0 0 0
86 – 95 Very Good
0 0 0 0
76 – 85 Good
11 68.75 % 16 100%
66 – 75 Fairly Good
0 0 0 0
56 – 65 Fair
5 31.25 % 0 0
36 – 55 Poor
0 0 0 0
0 – 35 Very Poor
0 0 0 0
Total Score 16 100% 16 100%
The table 4.5 above showed that the Classification of the students‟ speaking fluency in term of smoothness in pre-test and post-test from 16 students‟. There were no one students‟ got excellent, very good, fairly good, poor and very poor in pre-test, 11 students got score (good) with percentage 68.75%, 5 students got score (fair) with percentage 31.25%.
And after the researcher gave treatment to the students‟ through Practice Rehearsal pairs Strategy the score of students‟ had improved. There were no one students‟ got excellent, very good, fairly good, fair, poor, and very poor in post-test,
16 students‟ got score (good) with percentage 100%. The data showed that used Practice Rehearsal Pairs strategy improved the students‟ speaking fluency in term of smoothness.
Table 4.6 The Mean Score and Improvement of the Students’
Pre-test and Post-test in Speaking Skill
No Indicator
Mean Score
Pre-test Post-test
Grammar
65.31 74.37
Smoothness Percent
Improvement 13.87%
Table 4.6 showed that the mean score of the pre-test was 65.31 while the mean score of the post-test increased 74.37. The improvement of the students‟
mean score in pre-test and post-test was 13.87%.
The data above can also be shown in the figure below:
Figure 4.6: The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Skill
Figure 4.6 showed that the improvement of the students‟ speaking skill was significantly, as the result at this item was the mean score of the post-test was greater than the mean score in pre-test. It means that the used practice rehearsal pairs strategy could improved students‟ speaking skill.
65.31
74.37
13.87
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pre-test Post-test Improvement
Pre-test
Post-test
The Improvement of the students' speaking skill
Table 4.7 The Rate Frequency and Percentage of Students’
Speaking Skill Score
Classification
Pre-test Post-test
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage 96 – 100 Excellent
0 0 0 0
86 – 95 Very Good
0 0 0 0
76 – 85 Good
0 0 7 43.75%
66 – 75 Fairly Good
5 68.75% 8 50%
56 – 65 Fair
0 0 1 6.25%
36 – 55 Poor
11 31.25% 0 0
0 – 35 Very Poor
0 0 0 0
Total Score 16 100 % 16 100 %
Table 4.7 above showed the rate frequency and percentage of score in pre-test and post-test from 16 students. This table shows 5 (68.75%) students were classified as fairly good, 11 (31.25%) students were classified as poor and none of the students got fair, excellent, very good, good, and very poor in pre-test. While post-test result show 7 (43.75%) students were classified as good, 8 (50%) students were classified as fairly good, 1 (6.25%) students were classified as fair and none of students got excellent, very good, poor and very poor.
Based on the result above, it could be concluded that the rate percentage in post- test was higher than the rate percentage in pre-test. None of the students got excellent and very good in both pre-test and post-test but the score increased significantly in post-test.
4. Test of Significance Testing and Hypothesis
To know the level of significance of pre-test and post-test, the researcher used t-test analysis on the level significance was (p) 0.05 with the degree of freedom (df) + N-1, where N= number of subject (16 students). Table 4.8 showed the result of t-test calculation of students‟ speaking skill.
Table 4.8 The Comparison of T-test and T-table Students’ Speaking Skill Score
Variable t-test t-table
Using Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy 6.52 2.331
Table 4.8 indicated that the values of the t-test were higher than the value of the t-table. It was indicated that there was a significant difference between the result of the students‟ pre-test and post-test by using Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy.
a. Hypothesis Testing
The researcher used t-test analysis for the level of significance (a) = 0.05 and the degree of freedom (df) = 16-1= 15. While the value of t-test is 6.52 and the value of t-table is 2.331, the table 4.6 showed that the result of t-test
(6.52) was higher than the value of t-table (2.331). It‟s mean the Null (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted. Therefore, there was significanted difference between the students‟ speaking skill in learning used Practice Rehearsal Pairs Strategy.