Mechanics

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

B. Suggestions

V. Mechanics

Content Classification Criteria

5 Excellent to very good Demonstrates mastery of conventions-etc.

4 Good to average Occasional errors of spelling, punctuation- etc

3 Fair to poor Frequent errors of spelling punctuation, capitalization-etc

2 very poor No mastery of conventions – dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing - etc

Format Penilaian

No Classification Score

1 Excellent 86-100

2 Very good 68-85

3 Fair to poor 48-67

4 Very poor 32-47

Bahan : Video pembelajaran yang terkait dengan materi Sumber Belajar : Buku Paket Bahasa Inggris

Mengetahui,

Guru Mata Pelajaran Mahasiswa,

Sahdana, S.Pd Zesi Rusma

Calculating the t-test value 𝐷 = ^∑D

𝑁

= ^582.67

23

= 25.33 Code of Students

Pre-Test (X1)

Post-Test (X2)

Gain

(X2-X1) D²

S-1 53.33 77.33 24.00 576.00

S-2 46.67 84.00 37.33 1393.78

S-3 38.67 72.00 33.33 1111.11

S-4 57.33 89.33 32.00 1024.00

S-5 37.33 66.67 29.33 860.44

S-6 41.33 70.67 29.33 860.44

S-7 54.67 74.67 20.00 400.00

S-8 57.33 74.67 17.33 300.44

S-9 57.33 74.67 17.33 300.44

S-10 34.67 77.33 42.67 1820.44

S-11 45.33 81.33 36.00 1296.00

S-12 34.67 74.67 40.00 1600.00

S-13 49.33 85.33 36.00 1296.00

S-14 33.33 50.67 17.33 300.44

S-15 54.67 74.67 20.00 400.00

S-16 60.00 82.67 22.67 513.78

S-17 52.00 68.00 16.00 256.00

S-18 49.33 73.33 24.00 576.00

S-19 34.67 65.33 30.67 940.44

S-20 58.67 62.67 4.00 16.00

S-21 70.67 78.67 8.00 64.00

S-22 57.33 64.00 6.67 44.44

S-23 41.33 80.00 38.67 1495.11

N=23 ∑ X1=

1120.00

∑X2=

1702.67 ∑D= 582.67 ∑D²=17445.33

∑D² = 17445

∑D = 582.67 N = 23

= ^25.33

√^{17745– (582.67)2}23 23(23−1)

= ^25.33

√^{17745– 339504}23 506

= ^25.33

√17745– 14761 506)

= ^25.33

√5897

= ^25.33

2.42

= 10.46

1. Pretest a. Poor

F= 9. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ⁹

23× 100% = 39.1%

b. Fairly Poor

F = 3. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ³

23×100% = 13%

c. Fair

F = 10. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹⁰

23 × 100% = 43.4%

d. Good

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23× 100% = 4.3%

2. Post Test a. Fairly poor

F= 3. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ³

23× 100% = 13.04%

𝑁

P = ⁸

23×100% = 34.78%

c. Good

F = 7. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁷

23 × 100% = 30.43%

d. Very Good

F = 5. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁵

23× 100% = 21.73%

1. Pretest

a. Very Poor

F= 10. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ¹⁰

23× 100% = 43.47%

b. Poor

F = 6. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁶

23×100% = 26.08%

c. Fairly Poor

F = 6. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁶

23 × 100% = 26.08%

d. Fair

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23× 100% = 4.34%

2. Post Test a. Fairly Poor

F = 4. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁴

23×100% = 17.39%

𝑁

P = ⁸

23 × 100% = 34.78%

c. Good

F = 6. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁶

23× 100% = 26.08%

d. Very Good

F = 5. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁵

23× 100% = 21.73%

1. Pretest

a. Very Poor

F= 11. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ¹¹

23× 100% = 47.82%

b. Poor

F = 11. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹¹

23×100% = 47.82%

c. Fair

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23 × 100% = 4.34%

2. Post Test

a. Poor

F= 2. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ²

23× 100% = 8.69%

b. Fairly Poor

F = 8. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁸

23×100% = 34.78%

𝑁

P = ⁴

23 × 100% = 17.39%

d. Good

F = 8. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁸

23× 100% = 34.78%

e. Very Good

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23× 100% = 4.34%

1. Pretest

a. Very Poor

F= 4. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ⁴

23× 100% = 17.39%

b. Poor

F = 12. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹²

23×100% = 52.17%

c. Fairly Poor

F = 6. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁶

23 × 100% = 26.08%

d. Fair

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23 × 100% = 4.34%

2. Post Test

a. Poor

F= 1. N= 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁 × 100%

P = ¹

23× 100% = 4.34%

𝑁

P = ³

23×100% = 13.04%

c. Fair

F = 10. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹⁰

23 × 100% = 43.47%

d. Good

F = 8. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ⁸

23× 100% = 34.78%

e. Very Good

F = 1. N = 23 P = ^𝐹

𝑁×100%

P = ¹

23× 100% = 4.34%

Students Content Organization Language use

Final

Score Content Organization Language use

Final Score

S-1 21 9 10 53.33 25 15 18 77.33

S-2 17 7 11 46.67 26 17 20 84.00

S-3 14 7 8 38.67 22 14 18 72.00

S-4 21 10 12 57.33 28 18 21 89.33

S-5 14 7 7 37.33 21 15 14 66.67

S-6 15 7 9 41.33 21 13 19 70.67

S-7 22 10 9 54.67 22 14 20 74.67

S-8 22 13 8 57.33 24 17 15 74.67

S-9 22 13 8 57.33 23 18 15 74.67

S-10 14 7 5 34.67 22 17 19 77.33

S-11 16 10 8 45.33 26 18 17 81.33

S-12 14 7 5 34.67 24 17 15 74.67

S-13 17 10 10 49.33 26 17 21 85.33

S-14 13 7 5 33.33 17 10 11 50.67

S-15 25 7 9 54.67 25 17 14 74.67

S-16 22 13 10 60.00 24 18 20 82.67

S-17 21 13 5 52.00 22 14 15 68.00

S-18 17 9 11 49.33 22 14 19 73.33

S-19 14 7 5 34.67 25 14 10 65.33

S-20 22 13 9 58.67 17 13 17 62.67

S-21 22 14 17 70.67 22 15 22 78.67

S-22 21 13 9 57.33 19 13 16 64.00

S-23 16 7 8 41.33 26 19 15 80.00

Total 1406.67 1100 792 1120 1763.33 1785 1564 1702.67

1. Content classification a. Mean score of Pre Test

𝑋 =

^Σx_N

𝑋 =

^1406.67

23

= 61.15

𝑋 =

^Σx

N

𝑋 =

^1763.3

23

= 76.66 c. Improvement percentage

P =

^{𝑥2−𝑥1}

𝑥₁

x 100%

=

76.66−61.15

61.15

x 100%

= 25.36%

2. Organization classification a. Mean score of Pre Test

𝑋 =

^Σx_N

𝑋 =

¹¹⁰⁰

23

= 47.82

b. Mean score of Post Test

𝑋 =

^Σx

N

𝑋 =

¹⁷⁸⁵

23

= 77.60

P =

𝑥₁

x 100%

=

77.60−47.82

47.82

x 100%

= 62.29%

3. Language use classification a. Mean score of Pre Test

𝑋 =

^Σx_N

𝑋 =

⁷⁹²

23

= 34.43

b. Mean score of Post Test

𝑋 =

^Σx

N

𝑋 =

¹⁵⁶⁴

23

= 68

c. Improvement percentage P =

^{𝑥2−𝑥1}

𝑥₁

x 100%

=

^68−34.43

34.43

x 100%

= 97.48%

𝑋 =

^Σx

N

𝑋 =

¹¹²⁰

23

= 48.69

b. Mean score of Post Test

𝑋 =

^Σx

N

𝑋 =

^1702.67

23

= 74.02 c. Improvement percentage

P =

^{𝑥2−𝑥1}

𝑥₁

x 100%

=

74.02−48.69

48.69

x 100%

= 52%

Level of Significance for one-tailed test

Df .10 0.05 .01 .001

1 6.314 12.706 63.657 636.619

2 2.920 4.303 9.925 31.595

3 2.353 3.182 5.841 12.924

4 2.132 2.776 4.604 8.610

5 2.015 2.571 4.032 6.869

6 1.943 2.447 3.707 5.959

7 1.895 2.365 3.499 5.408

8 1.860 2.306 3.355 5.041

9 1.833 2.262 3.250 4.704

10 1.812 2.228 3.169 4.587

11 1.796 2.201 3.106 4.437

12 1.782 2.179 3.055 4.318

13 1.771 2.160 3.012 4.221

14 1.761 2.145 2.977 4.140

15 1.753 2.131 2.947 4.073

16 1.746 2.120 2.921 4.015

17 1.740 2.110 2.989 3.965

18 1.734 2.101 2.878 3.922

19 1.729 2.093 2.861 3.883

20 1.725 2.086 2.845 3.880

21 1.721 2.080 2.831 3.819

22 1.717 2.074 2.819 3.792

23 1.714 2.069 2.807 3.767

24 1.711 2.064 2.797 3.745

25 1.708 2.060 2.787 3.725

26 1.706 2.058 2.779 3.707

27 1.703 2.052 2.771 3.690

28 1.701 2.048 2.763 3.674

29 1.699 2.045 2.756 3.659

30 1.697 2.042 2.750 3.646

40 1.684 2.021 2.701 3.551

50 1.671 2.000 2.660 3.460

60 1.658 1.980 2.617 3.373

No Code of Students

Pre Test

Classification

Post Test

Classification Row

Score

Final Score

Row Score

Final Score

1 S-1 21 70,00 Fair 25 83,33 Good

2 S-2 17 56,67 Fairly Poor 26 86,67 Very Good

3 S-3 14 46,67 Poor 22 73,33 Fair

4 S-4 21 70,00 Fair 28 93,33 Very Good

5 S-5 14 46,67 Poor 21 70,00 Fair

6 S-6 15 50,00 Poor 21 70,00 Fair

7 S-7 22 73,33 Fair 22 73,33 Fair

8 S-8 22 73,33 Fair 24 80,00 Good

9 S-9 22 73,33 Fair 23 76,67 Good

10 S-10 14 46,67 Poor 22 73,33 Fair

11 S-11 16 53,33 Poor 26 86,67 Very Good

12 S-12 14 46,67 Poor 24 80,00 Good

13 S-13 17 56,67 Fairly Poor 26 86,67 Very Good

14 S-14 13 43,33 Poor 17 56,67 Fairly Poor

15 S-15 25 83,33 Good 25 83,33 Good

16 S-16 22 73,33 Fair 24 80,00 Good

17 S-17 21 70,00 Fair 22 73,33 Fair

18 S-18 17 56,67 Fairly Poor 22 73,33 Fair

19 S-19 14 46,67 Poor 25 83,33 Good

20 S-20 22 73,33 Fair 17 56,67 Fairly Poor

21 S-21 22 73,33 Fair 22 73,33 Fair

22 S-22 21 70,00 Fair 19 63,33 Fairly Poor

23 S-23 16 53,33 Poor 26 86,67 Very Good

No Code of

Students Row Classification Classification

Score

Final Score

Row Score

Final Score

1 S-1 9 45 Poor 15 75 Fair

2 S-2 7 35 Very Poor 17 85 Good

3 S-3 7 35 Very Poor 14 70 Fair

4 S-4 10 50 Poor 18 90 Very Good

5 S-5 7 35 Very Poor 15 75 Fair

6 S-6 7 35 Very Poor 13 65 Fairly Poor

7 S-7 10 50 Poor 14 70 Fair

8 S-8 13 65 Fairly Poor 17 85 Good

9 S-9 13 65 Fairly Poor 18 90 Very Good

10 S-10 7 35 Very Poor 17 85 Good

11 S-11 10 50 Poor 18 90 Very Good

12 S-12 7 35 Very Poor 17 85 Good

13 S-13 10 50 Poor 17 85 Good

14 S-14 7 35 Very Poor 10 50 Fairly Poor

15 S-15 7 35 Very Poor 17 85 Good

16 S-16 13 65 Fairly Poor 18 90 Very Good

17 S-17 13 65 Fairly Poor 14 70 Fair

18 S-18 9 45 Poor 14 70 Fair

19 S-19 7 35 Very Poor 14 70 Fair

20 S-20 13 65 Fairly Poor 13 65 Fairly Poor

21 S-21 14 70 Fair 15 75 Fair

22 S-22 13 65 Fairly Poor 13 65 Fairly Poor

23 S-23 7 35 Very Poor 19 95 Very Good

No Code of Students

Pre Test

Classification

Post Test

Classification Row

Score

Final Score

Row Score

Final Score

1 S-1 10 40 Poor 18 72 Fair

2 S-2 11 44 Poor 20 80 Good

3 S-3 8 32 Very Poor 18 72 Fair

4 S-4 12 48 Poor 21 84 Good

5 S-5 7 28 Very Poor 14 56 Fairly Poor

6 S-6 9 36 Poor 19 76 Good

7 S-7 9 36 Poor 20 80 Good

8 S-8 8 32 Very Poor 15 60 Fairly Poor

9 S-9 8 32 Very Poor 15 60 Fairly Poor

10 S-10 5 20 Very Poor 19 76 Good

11 S-11 8 32 Very Poor 17 68 Fair

12 S-12 5 20 Very Poor 15 60 Fairly Poor

13 S-13 10 40 Poor 21 84 Good

14 S-14 5 20 Very Poor 11 44 Poor

15 S-15 9 36 Poor 14 56 Fairly Poor

16 S-16 10 40 Poor 20 80 Good

17 S-17 5 20 Very Poor 15 60 Fairly Poor

18 S-18 11 44 Poor 19 76 Good

19 S-19 5 20 Very Poor 10 40 Poor

20 S-20 9 36 Poor 17 68 Fair

21 S-21 17 68 Fair 22 88 Very Good

22 S-22 9 36 Poor 16 64 Fairly Poor

23 S-23 8 32 Very Poor 15 60 Fairly Poor

NO NIS NAMA L/P TANGGAL ABSENSI 22 23 29 4 5 11 12 A I S JMLH

1 16001 AFIFAH AZ ZAHRA P

2 16002 DEWI HANDRIANI SAFITRI P

3 16003 HAFIDA NATSIR P

4 16004 JUMRIANI P

5 16005 KARTIKA PUTRI P

6 16006 NUR AULIAH M P

7 16007 NURFADILLAH P

8 16008 NUR RESKY AULIA PUTRI P

9 16009 NURFADILLAH P

10 16010 NURFADILLAH A P

11 16011 NURFAIDAH P

12 16012 NURMADINA P

13 16013 NURUL HASANAH P

14 16014 PUTRI DEWIA WAHID P

15 16015 RESKY YULIA ANANDA P

16 16016 RUSMAYANI P

17 16017 SAIDAH P

18 16018 SITTI CHAJAR P

19 16019 SITTI NURHAFSAH P

20 16020 SOFIA BATISTA P

21 16021 SRI WAHYUNI ZAFITRI P

22 16022 UMMAHATUL MU'MININ P

23 16023 WINDA PURWANTI P

24 16024 ELSA VESIX LEONAK P

25 16025 JELLY P

26 16026 FITRI SANDI P

27 16027 SALSA LUTFIAH REZKI P

28 16028 YESIA SUPIT P

29 16029 HUMAEDAH P

30 16030 P

31 16031 P

32 16032 P

Zesi Rusma is the first daughter of marriage Rustan and Mas Illang. She was born on October 3^rd , 1994 in Parepare. She has a brother. She graduated her school in 2007 at SDN 14 Parepare.

In the same year she continued her study at SMPN 2 Parepare and graduated in 2010. Then, she registered in SMA Negeri 3 Sengkang and graduated in 2013. In same year, She was accepted in English Education Departement, Muhammadiyah University of Makassar.

A, Cynthia and Boardman. 2008. Writing to communicate. New York: Pearson Education.

Anisa, Ike. 2010. Improving Students’ Vocabulary Mastery Using Experiential Learning. Klaten: University of Widya Dharma Klaten. Unpublish Thesis.

Aprilia, Septi. 2015. Penerapan Pembelajaran Experiential Learning untuk Meningkatkan Kualitas Pembelajaran IPA Kelas V Sekolah Dasar.Premier Educandum, 5(1), pp.20-33.

Beard, Colin and John P W. 2006. Experiential Learning: A Best Practice Handbook for Educator and Trainer.United State: Kogan Page.

Brown,H. Douglas. 2000. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Castellanos, Cristian A M. 2016. Teaching Pronunciation Through Experiential Learning and Pronunciation Technique. Bogota D.C: UNIMINUTO. Thesis.

Deane, Paul. 2008. Cognitive Model of Writing: Writing Proficiency as a Complex Integrated Skill.

Doddy, Achmad. Ahmad Sugen& Effendi. 2008. Developing English Competence.

Jakarta: PusatPerbukuanDepartemenPendidikanNasional.

Emzir. 2015. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan: Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. Jakarta:

Rajawali Press.

Fachrurrazy. 2014. Teaching English as a Foreign Language for Teachers in Indonesia. Malang: University of Malang Press.

Fiddler, M. and Marienau, C., 2008. Developing habits of reflection for meaningful learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2008(118), pp.75-85.

Gay, L., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. 2006. Educational Research: Competencies for analysis and applications. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gay, L.R. 1981. Educational Research. Colombus: Prentice-Hall.

Graham, Steve and Dolores Perin. 2007. A Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Adolscent Students.Journal of Education Psychology, 99(3), pp.445-476.

Heaton. 1988. Writing English Language Test. United State of America: Longman.

Huy, N. T. 2015. Problems Affecting Learning Writing Skill of Grade 11 at Thong Linh High School. Asian Journal of Education Research, 3 (2), pp,5

Khairiyawati.2016. The Use of Dyadic Essay Confrontation Technique in Increasing the Students’ Writing Skill. University of Muhammadiyah Makassar.

Unpublish Thesis.

Knapp, Peter. 2005. Genre, Text, and Grammar. Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Kolb, A. and Kolb, D., 2008. Experiential learning theory, a dynamic, holistic approach to management learning, education and development. Department of organizational behavior. Case Western Reserve University. Western Reserve University Working Paper.

Kolb,D.A., 2014. Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.

Lauder, A. 2008. The Status and Function of English in Indonesia: A review of key factor. Makara, Social Humanior, 12(1), pp.9-20.

Lie, Anita., 2007. Education Policy and EFL Curriculum in Indonesia: Between The Commitment to Competence and Quest for Higher Test Scores. TEFLIN Journal, 1(18)

Maharani, Silvia. Muhammad Kristiawan & Amal Hayati. 2014. Effect of Experiential Learning toward Students’ Writing Skill at Grade X High School 1 Vii Koto Sungai Sariak, Padang Pariaman, West Sumatra. The Journal of Applied Science Research, 1(4), pp.267-273.

Mappiasse and Ahmad. 2014. Evaluation of English as a Foreign Language and Its Curriculum in Indonesia: A Review. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 10(7).

Meitikasari, Ani. 2016. Experiential Learning (EI): An Effective Teaching Method to Construct Students’ Writing Skill Viewed from Self-Efficacy, 1, pp.1015- 1022.

Mobbs, R., 2007. David Kolb. How to be an eTutor, 30.