1. ADP 50 50 0 Constant
2. ADF 75 80 5 Improved
3. AHS 40 50 10 Improved
4. ARP 40 60 20 Improved
5. AS 70 80 10 Improved
6. AP 50 60 10 Improved
7. AR 50 60 10 Improved
8. BR 70 80 10 Improved
9. BS 50 60 10 Improved
10. CAD 75 75 0 Constant
11. DNF 50 50 0 Constant
12. DA 60 75 15 Improved
13. DJ 70 75 5 Constant
14. ENS 40 60 20 Improved
15. EMJ 40 50 20 Improved
16. FNH 50 75 20 Improved
17. FR 30 40 10 Improved
18. FDP 50 75 20 Improved
19. 19FI 40 50 10 Improved
20. KSAS 75 80 5 Improved
21 LMW 80 80 0 Constant
22 LP 40 50 10 Improved
23 LCP 50 60 10 Constant
24 MSN 70 80 10 Improved
25 NH 40 50 10 Improved
26 NA 60 75 10 Improved
27 OIM 50 75 20 Constant
28 RLP 30 60 30 Improved
29 RB 40 50 10 Improved
30 SG 30 40 10 Improved
Total 1565 1905 Average 52,16 63,5 High Grade 75 80
Low Grade 30 40
Table 4.11
The Comparison of Students’ Pre-Test and Post-Test I in Cycle I
Interval Pre-Test Post-Test I Explanation
≥75 4 13 Complete
< 75 26 17 Incomplete
Total 30 30 Figure 4.6
The Comparison of Percentage of the Students’ Grade Completeness based on Pre-test and post-test I
The table and the graphic above, in pre-test it could be seen that total from 30 students, it could be concluded that 4 students or 13% of the total students were able to achieve the minimum passing grade that is ≥ 75. Then the students who did not achieve the minimum passing grade were 26 students or 87% of the total students. In post-test I, it could be concluded that 13 students or 43% of the total students, was complete the minimum passing grade. Then those who were not able to achieve the minimum passing grade were 17 students or 57% of the total students. The average grade of improvement between pre-test and post-test I but did not fulfill the indicator of success. It could be concluded that the result was unsuccessful. Because of the indicator of success could not be achieved yet that was 70% of the total students must pass the criteria.
4
26
13
17
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
≥75 ≤75
Pre-test Post-test I
Based on the result of student’s post-test I grade and the observation of student’s learning activities in cycle I it caused of give a subject material was not run well, so some students could not clear to understanding the material. Some students were not satisfied because most of the students did not pay attention toward the teacher explanation and they get difficulties to answer the question and some students achieved failure in test of cycle I. Therefore, the researcher had to continue in cycle II which consists of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting.
c. Cycle II
The action in the cycle I was not successful enough, the cycle must be continued to cycle II. Cycle II was used to repair the weakness in the cycle I. The steps of the cycle II as follows:
1) Planning
Based on the observation and reflection in cycle 1, it showed failure. So, we try to received to it and arrange the planning for cycle 2. Based on the result of cycle 1, in this stage the researcher and collaborator made the planning of the action as follow: preparing the lesson plan, preparing the material, preparing the learning media, preparing the observation sheet of the students activity 2.
2) Action
The action in the cycle 2 consists of 3 meetings, two meeting for the action, and one meeting for the post test, they are:
(a) The first meeting
The second meeting was conduct on Thursday, November 14th,for 2x40 minutes.
This session, the researcher was being the teacher. This meeting was started by praying and greeting, asking the students condition and checking the attendance list, and apperception. The teacher was explaining the material.The teacher gave a text assigment and the students answer the question. Then the other students have to listen and gave the opinion. Then, the teacher and students correct the result of the assignment together. In this meeting, most of the students could answer well.
It can be seen from the result of test who gave by the teacher. Closing the meeting.
(b) The second meeting
The second meeting was conducted on Friday, November 15th, this meeting used to post test 2 in the end cycle 2, for 2x40 minutes after the students given the action, the researcher gave posttest to the students. In this meeting, most of the students could answer well. It can be seen from the result of post test 2. There were 4 out of 26 students could do well.
d. Post-Test II Activity
Post-Test II was conducted on Thursday, November 21th, 2019. The researcher began the lesson by praying, greeting, checking attendance list and asking the students’ condition. The researcher gave post-test II to the students. In this meeting almost all of the students could answer well. It could be seen from the
result of the post-test II. There were only 6 of 30 students who were not achieved the minimum passing grade in SMP Negeri 2 Way Jeparathat is 75.
Table 4.12
The Students’ Post Test II Grade
No Students Name Post Test II Note
1 ADP 70 Incomplete
2 ADF 90 Complete
3 AHS 75 Complete
4 ARP 70 Incomplete
5 AS 90 Complete
6 AP 80 Complete
7 AR 80 Complete
8 BR 90 Complete
9 BS 75 Complete
10 CAD 80 Complete
11 DNF 75 Complete
12 DA 75 Complete
13 DJ 80 Complete
14 ENS 80 Complete
15 EMJ 75 Complete
16 FNH 80 Complete
17 FR 60 Incomplete
18 FDP 80 Complete
19 FI 60 Incomplete
20 KSAS 90 Complete
21 LMW 90 Complete
22 LP 80 Complete
23 LCP 75 Complete
24 MSN 85 Complete
25 NH 60 Incomplete
26 NA 80 Complete
27 OIM 80 Complete
28 RLP 75 Complete
29 RB 75 Complete
30 SG 70 Incomplete
Total 2325
Average 77,50 Complete Table 4.13
The Frequency of students’ Grade in Post-test II
No Grade Frequencies Percentage Explanation
1 ≥75 24 80 % Complete
2 < 75 6 20 % Incomplete
Total 30 100 %
Figure 4.7
The Percentage of the Students’ Grade Completeness on Post-test II
Based on the result above, it could be inferred that 24 students (80%) were successful and 6 other students (20%) were not successful. Based on the post-test 2 results, the researcher calculated the average grade that is 77. It was higher than