CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
3.3 Population and Sample
The population of the research was the second grade student of Junior High school 5 Pinrang academic year 2019/2020. The total of population was 206 students.
Table 3.1 The total students of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang
No. Class Sex Total
Male Female
1. VIII. 1 17 13 30
2. VIII. 2 17 13 30
3. VIII. 3 13 14 27
4. VIII. 4 16 15 31
5. VIII. 5 16 17 33
6. VIII. 6 17 15 32
7. VIII.7 11 12 23
Total 206
(Source: Administration of SMPN 5Pinrang)
3.3.2 Sample
There were six classes as population. The sample was taken by using purposive sampling technique. The writer used one class at second grade because the second grade ready for receiving the method. The purpose of this research is enhance students’ vocabulary through participation point system method, that the students in class VIII.1 which is consisted of 30 need the treatment because almost all of students lack of participation in the class and difficult to communicate in English.
3.4 The Instrument and Procedure of Collecting Data 3.4.1 The Instrument
In collect of the data, the researcher used a vocabulary test as the instrument.
The test was applied in pre-test and post-test. The pre-test was intended to know the student’s prior of vocabulary before giving the treatment, while the post test is aim to find out whether the students vocabulary develop after giving the treatment.
3.4.2 Procedure of Collecting Data
In collecting the data, the researcher did the following steps:
3.4.2.1 Pre-Test
Before the writer gave the treatment. The writer was gave students pre-test the first activity. Pre-test was administrated to the students by giving them some vocabulary test. The vocabulary consisted 20 items and the test ran 60 minutes. The writer wanted to know how many vocabularies students have during they study English in the school. After giving the pre-test the next time the researcher gave the students treatment.
3.4.2.2 Treatment
After did the pre-test, the students was give treatment by using Participation Point System Method. The procedures of treatments are as follows:
1. The first Meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer gave motivation about the importance of English to the students before giving material.
c. The writer explained about participation point system method using in the class, and divided into several groups maybe 4-5 groups. The researcher showed first
material about “Things in the classroom” and the researcher gave the list of vocabulary.
d. The writer showed the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeated it.
e. The writer gave chance five minutes to the students memorize and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
f. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
g. At the end of the lesson, the writer gave the students chance for asking about unclear the material and count their point.
2 The second meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer showed second material about “Part of Body” and the researcher gave the list of vocabulary.
c. The writer showed the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeated it.
d. The researcher gave chance five minutes to student memorized and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked
all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
e. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
f. At the end of the lesson, the writer the students chance for asking about unclear the material and count their point.
3 The third meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer showed third material about “Daily Activity” and the writer gave the list of vocabulary.
c. The writer show the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeated it.
d. The writer gave chance five minutes to student memorize and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
e. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
f. At the end of the lesson, the writer gave the students chance for asking about unclear the material and count their point.
4 The fourth meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer showed fourth material about “Kitchen” and the writer gave the list of vocabulary.
c. The writer showed the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeated it.
d. The writer gave chance five minutes to student memorize and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
e. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
f. At the end of the lesson, the writer gave the students chance for asking about unclear the material and count their point.
5 The Fifth meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer showed fifth material about “Animals” and the writer gave the list of vocabulary.
c. The writer showed the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeated it.
d. The writer gave chance five minutes to student memorize and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
e. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
f. At the end of the lesson, the writer gave the students chance for asking about unclear the material and count their point.
6 The sixth meeting
a. The writer gave greeting to the students to open the class.
b. The writer showed sixth materials about “Public place” and the writer gave the list of vocabulary
c. The writer showed the picture related the topic, read the vocabulary and the students repeat it.
d. The writer gave chance five minutes to student memorize and understand vocabulary with their partner in group. And then, the writer asked all of the groups to make a sure that the students have known about the vocabularies.
e. After that the writer showed flash card to apply PPS Method, the writer used three types of card; green card has 1 point and red card has 3 points and yellow cards have 6 points related to the material. The student should participate to collect the point to get reward. Before the students answer the question or participate in group the student should raise their hand.
f. The writer gave the students chance for asking about unclear the material, and then, researcher closed the meeting.
3.4.2.3 Post-Test
After the treatment the writer was carry out a post-test. It would be intended to know the treatment success or not. The post-test had a same procedure with the pre- test.
3.5 Technique of Data Analysis
The data was collect through pre-test and post-test, the following procedure used:
1. Scoring the students’ answer
2. Classifying the score five levels classification is as follow:
Table 3.2 The Classifying the score five levels classification
(Dirjen Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah)31
31Dirjen Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Peraturan Directorat Jendral Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Tentang: Penilaian Perkembangan Anak Didik (Jakarta: Depdiknas, 2005), p. 2.
No. Classification Score
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Very good Good
Fair Poor Very Poor
86 – 100 71 – 85 56 – 70 41 – 55
≤ 40
3. Finding out the mean score would use the following formula :
Where:
X : Mean Σ𝑋 : Total Score
N : The total number of Students32
4. Calculating the rate percentage of the students score:
where:
P : the percentage of the student respond F : the frequency of the student respond N : the total number of sample
5. Finding out the difference of the mean score between pre-test and post-test by calculate the T-test value using the following formula:
32Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Edisi Revisi (Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009), p. 298.
Χ= Σ𝑋 n
X=
t=
√∑
Where:
T = test of significance
D = the mean score of difference (X1-X2) ΣD = the sum of the total score
ΣD2 = the square of the sum score of difference N = the total sample.33
33Gay L.R. Educational Research, Competencies for Analysis and Application second edition (Columbus: Charles E Merril Company, 1981), p. 331.
34
CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of two sections, the section deals with the finding of the research and the discussion of the research. The findings of the research cover the description of the result of data collected through test that can be discussed in the section below.
4.1 Findings
The findings of this research deal with the classification of students’ pre-test and post-test. To find out the answer of the research question in the previous chapter, the researcher gave a test that was given twice. A pre-test was given before treatment to know the students’ vocabulary mastery through Participation point system method before giving them the treatment, while post-test was given after treatment and the result of the post-test of this research can answer the question of this research that aims to find out through Participation point system Method that be able to improve the students’ vocabulary mastery at SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang.
4.1.1 The vocabulary mastery through Participation point system at SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang
This part covers the result of data analysis about the vocabulary mastery through Participation point system at student.
4.1.1.1 The students’ score in pre-test
The pre-test had done before implementation Participation point system. It was conducted on Tuesday October 15th, 2019. The students were given the pre-test.
The researcher found out the result of the students’ pre-test based on the scoring
vocabulary before giving treatment through Participation point system which was analyzed and resulted in the information as shown in the following table:
Table 4.1 The Result of Pre-Test and Square
No Students
Pre-Test Correct
Answer Score (X1) (X1)2
1 Cahaya Nabila 14 70 4.900
2 Aisya Dinda 11 55 3.025
3 Nabila Nurfadila 13 65 4.225
4 Sri mutiara 17 85 7.225
5 Nabila 12 60 3.600
6 Nursuci 19 95 9.025
7 Santi 6 30 900
8 Firdayani 8 40 1.600
9 Fitriyani Herman 14 70 4.900
10 Hariyanti 16 80 6.400
11 Andi Salsabila 8 40 1.600
12 Fauziah 11 55 3.025
13 Nabila Juliana 12 60 3.600
14 Rifqy Muchtar 9 45 2.025
15 Ilham 10 50 2.500
16 Muh.Risal 8 40 1.600
17 Muh.Alif 11 55 3.025
18 Sudirman 6 30 900
19 Muh.Fajri 14 70 4.900
20 Muh.Firman 11 55 3.025
21 Andriano 11 55 3.025
22 Muh.Rajab 9 45 2.025
23 Muh.Yusril 16 80 6.400
24 Syahril 11 55 3.025
(Data’ source: the Students’ Score in Pre-Test)
Based on the score above, it can classified in to five level classification as follow:
Table 4.2 The Students’ Classification Score, Frequency and Percentage of Pre-test
NO Classification Score Frequency Percentage (%)
1 Verry good 86-100 1 3.33%
2 Good 71-85 3 10%
3 Fair 56-70 9 30%
4 Poor 41-55 12 40%
5 Very Poor ≤40 5 16.66%
Total 30 100%
(Data source: the rate percentage of the frequency of pre-test)
Based on the table above, the students’ vocabulary mastery score before giving treatment through Participation point system, one student in Very good classification, three students in good classification, nine students in fair, twelve students in Poor classification and the last five students in very poor classification. Total score in pre-test was 1.750 It could be seen that almost of the VIII.1 students’ ability in vocabulary was low. Because most of students gained Poor score. The following are the process of calculation to find out the mean score and the standard deviation based on the calculation of students’ score in pre-test of the table 4.2
25 Ilham.H 11 55 3.025
26 Hasril 14 70 4.900
27 Riman 11 55 3.025
28 Aldy 14 70 4.900
29 Muh.Fadlan 13 65 4.225
30 A.Dimas 10 50 2.500
Total ΣX=1.750 ΣX2=109.050
Based on the result of the pre-test, the data showed that the mean score of the pre-test is 58.33. From that analyzing, it could be seen that almost of the 30 students’
vocabulary mastery was still low because most of students got poor and very poor score.
4.1.1.2 The students’ score in Post-test
Meanwhile, the students score in post-test would be presented in the following table:
Table 4.3 The Result of Post-Test and Square
No Students
Post-Test Correct
Answer Score (X2) (X2)2
1 Cahaya Nabila 20 100 10.000
2 Aisya Dinda 20 100 10.000
3 Nabila Nurfadila 18 90 8.100
4 Sri mutiara 19 95 9.025
5 Nabila 19 95 9.025
6 Nursuci 20 100 10.000
7 Santi 16 80 6.400
8 Firdayani 18 90 8.100
9 Fitriyani Herman 19 95 9.025
10 Hariyanti 20 100 10.000
11 Andi Salsabila 19 95 9.025
12 Fauziah 20 100 10.000
13 Nabila Juliana 18 90 8.100
14 Rifqy Muchtar 19 95 9.025
15 Ilham 19 95 9.025
16 Muh.Risal 17 85 7.225
17 Muh.Alif 20 100 10.000
18 Sudirman 17 85 7.225
(data’ source: the students score in the post-test )
Based on the score above, it can classified in to five level classification as follow:
Table 4.4 The Students’ Classification Score, Frequency and Percentage of Post test
NO Classification Score Frequency Percentage (%)
1 Verry good 86-100 26 86.66%
2 Good 71-85 4 13.33%
3 Fair 56-70 0 0%
4 Poor 41-55 0 0%
5 Very Poor ≤40 0 0%
Total 30 100%
The table above showed that there was an enhancement of students’ score after giving treatment there was six meeting through participation point system, twenty six students in very good classification, and four students in good classification, no one in Fair, Poor and Very Poor classification It means that the students vocabulary ability had improved through Participation point system method.
19 Muh.Fajri 19 95 9.025
20 Muh.Firman 19 95 9.025
21 Andriano 18 90 8.100
22 Muh.Rajab 19 95 9.025
23 Muh.Yusril 18 90 8.100
24 Syahril 17 85 7.225
25 Ilham.H 18 90 8.100
26 Hasril 20 100 10.000
27 Riman 18 90 8.100
28 Aldy 19 95 9.025
29 Muh.Fadlan 20 100 10.000
30 A.Dimas 18 90 8.100
Total X=2.805 ΣX2 = 263.125
The total score in post-test is 2.805. It proved that there were increased of students’
score in post-test.
Based on the result of the post-test, the data showed that the mean score of the post-test is 93.5. From that analyzing, it could be seen that almost of the thirty students got very good score. It showed that implementing Participation point system method is effective to stimulate students’ vocabulary mastery.
4.1.1.3 The result of Pretest and Post-test Presented in the Following:
Table 4.5 The Mean Score and Standard Deviation of Pre-test and Post-test
Test Mean score Standard Deviation (SD)
Pre-test Post-test
58.33 93.5
15.49 5.43
(Data’ source: the main score and standard deviation of pre-test and post-test)
The data in table 4.5 shows that the mean score of pre-test was 58.33 (X1) while the mean score of the post-test increased 93.5 (X2). The standard deviation of pre-test was 15.49 while the standard deviation of post-test was 5.43
As the result at this item, the mean score of the post-test was greater than the mean score in pre-test. It means that students’ vocabulary mastery had improvement after doing the learning process that Participation point system method.
This part presented the result of data analysis about implementing participation point system to stimulate students’ vocabulary mastery at the second grade of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang.
4.1.2 The Implementation of participation point system method to enhance Students’
vocabulary at the second grade of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang
This part presented the result of data analysis about implementing participation point system to stimulate students’ vocabulary mastery at the second grade of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang.
4.1.2.1 T-test value
The following was the table to find out the difference of the mean score between pre-test and post-test.
Table 4.6 The Worksheet of Calculation of the Score on Pre-test and Post-test on the Students Vocabulary Mastery.
No X1 X2 (X1)2 (X2)2 D (X2- X1) (X2- X1)2
1 70 100 4.900 10.000 30 900
2 55 100 3.025 10.000 45 2.025
3 65 90 4.225 8.100 25 625
4 85 95 7.225 9.025 10 100
5 60 95 3.600 9.025 35 1.225
6 95 100 9.025 10.000 5 25
7 30 80 900 6.400 50 2.500
8 40 90 1.600 8.100 50 2.500
9 70 95 4.900 9.025 25 625
10 80 100 6.400 10.000 20 400
11 40 100 1.600 10.000 60 3.600
12 55 95 3.025 9.025 40 1.600
13 60 90 3.600 8.100 30 900
14 45 95 2.025 9.025 50 2.500
15 50 95 2.500 9.025 45 2.025
16 40 85 1.600 7.225 45 2.025
17 55 100 3.025 10.000 45 2.025
18 30 85 900 7.225 55 3.025
19 70 95 4.900 9.025 25 625
20 55 95 3.025 9.025 40 1.600
21 55 90 3.025 8.100 35 1.225
22 45 95 2.025 9.025 50 2.500
23 80 90 6.400 8.100 10 100
24 55 85 3.025 7.225 30 900
25 55 90 3.025 8.100 35 1.225
26 70 100 4.900 10.000 30 900
27 55 90 3.025 8.100 35 1.225
28 70 95 4.900 9.025 25 625
29 65 100 4.225 10.000 35 1.225
30 50 90 2.500 8.100 40 1.600
Total ∑X1=1.750 ∑X2=2.805 ∑X12 =
109.050 ∑X22 =
263.125 ∑D=1.055 ∑D2
=42.375 (Data source: Primary data processing)
This research used pre-experimental design with pre-test and post-test design.
The data below showed the value of t-test was greater than t-table value. In indicate that there was a significant difference between the result students’ pre-test and post- test.
Table 4.7 The Test of Significance and T-table Value
Variable T-test T-table value
Pre-test – post-test 14.29 1.699
4.1.2.2 Hypothesis Testing
To find out degree of freedom (df) the researcher used the following formula:
Df = N-1 = 30-1 =29
For the level, significant (p) 5% and df = 29, and the value of the table is 1.699, while the value of t-test is 14.29. It means that the t-test value is greater than t-table. Thus, it can be concluded that the students’ vocabulary mastery through participation point system method at second grade of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang is significant better after getting the treatment. So, the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. According to Jeffery the method has a positive effect, and is not designed to “control” or “dominate” students, but rather “to encourage them to overcome their psychological barriers to communicating in English and their basic fear of making mistakes.34 So, Participation point system is not only about how to give the students point but how to give the students motivation in teaching English.
4.2 Discussion
4.2.1 The Enhancement of students vocabulary through participation point system Method
To know the enhancement of students’ vocabulary through participation point system, the writer calculated the mean score students’ vocabulary was indicated from two test namely pre-test and post-test. The mean score in pre-test before gave the student treatment was 58.33 and the mean score of the post-test was 93.5 after gave the student treatment.
By looking at the test finding, from the data provided in classification table based on the vocabulary, clearly to see that there were one (3.33%) students who got very good, three (10%) students got good score, nine (30%) students got fair score, twelve (40%) students got poor score and five (16.66%) students got very poor score.
34Paul, Raine. The Use of a Participation Point System to Encourage More Proactive Learner Participation in Japanese University English Classes (J. F. Oberlin University: NII-Electronic Library Service, 2016), p. 94.
Where as in the post-test, twenty six (86.66%) students got very good score, four (13.33%) students got good score, and no one students got fair, poor and very poor score. From the result, the researcher concluded that the students’ vocabulary mastery from very poor up to good and very good classification.
In addition, to know what was the hypothesis received between null hypothesis (H0) and the alternative hypothesis (Ha), the writer use t-test to calculating result showed that on the t-test value was greater than t-table value 1.699 table (14.29
≥ 1.699) with a degree of freedom (df) =29 It means the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was concluded that by participation point system was able to enhance the students’
vocabulary mastery is significant better after getting the treatment. While the null hypothesis (H0) was rejected.
Based on the finding above the researcher concluded that there was an enhancement of using participation point system in teaching vocabulary at the Second Grade of SMP Negeri 5 Pinrang.
4.2.2 The ways of implementation Participation point system to enhance students’
vocabulary
To find out how the implementation Participation point system is able to enhance students’ vocabulary the researcher got some pieces from the students’
activities in learning process. There were eight meetings for doing this research. Two meetings for doing test and six meetings for doing the treatment to prove that was the implementation of participation point system can enhance the students’ vocabulary.
In the treatment the students were given 20 vocabularies in every meeting so the students have to mastery the vocabulary.