CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.2 Data Analysis
4.2.1 Quantitative Data
Table 4.2 Field Notes
Field Notes
Date 21st May, 2022
Subjects Students
Participants 28 students Length of Observation Two weeks
Summary
The researcher started the research on 12-21 May 2022 at SMP N 14 Bintan. The researcher took a sample of class 8C from the three existing classes. In this study, the researcher used speaking skills in giving tests. Using two cycles and two meetings in each cycle consists of pre-test and post-test. In the first cycle, the students experienced an increase in scores from pre-test to post-test. But, in cycle one, the researcher found the class was not conducive. Some students were afraid to practice conversation in front of the class; some students were not serious about learning, and the value obtained had not reached the target desired by the researcher, so cycle two was carried out in the second week the researcher was at the school. In cycle two, students experienced a significant increase; they were active in learning, diligently asked questions, their enthusiasm for learning increased and their scores. This research was certainly successful by the researcher using the SGD technique.
4.2 Data Analysis
35
8 EP 58 Unsuccessful
9 FRK 70 Successful
10 GE 54 Unsuccessful
11 HG 60 Unsuccessful
12 HK 58 Unsuccessful
13 K 50 Unsuccessful
14 LA 54 Unsuccessful
15 MNH 55 Unsuccessful
16 MRP 56 Unsuccessful
17 NS 70 Successful
18 NNR 60 Unsuccessful
19 NRA 63 Unsuccessful
20 NRH 60 Unsuccessful
21 RAM 62 Unsuccessful
22 RR 65 Unsuccessful
23 RKP 70 Successful
24 RNM 50 Unsuccessful
25 SES 75 Successful
26 SA 70 Successful
27 TS 60 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 50 Unsuccessful
Total 1.662
Average 59,35
Based on the table above, the total student score is 1,662, and the number of students who took the test was 28 students. Then the average student score was:
π =β X N
π =1.662 28 π = 59,35
Based on the above calculations, the students speaking skill in the English lesson was still deficient. The average value was 59,35. To categorize the member of master's students, the researcher applies the following formula:
π =R
TΓ 100%
π = 5
28Γ 100%
π = 17,85%
Based on the above calculations, only 17,85% (5 students) of all eighth-grade students who took the test passed the competency. In contrast, the remaining 82,14% (23 students) failed the meeting the minimum competency criteria.
Students could conclude that their skill in speaking English was still deficient.
After implementing SGD in the classroom, the students were given a post- test I to find out the cycle I result. The following are the results of the students' post- test speaking in cycle I in the second meeting.
Table 4.4 Studentsβ Post-test I Result On The Topic Expression Of Like and Dislikes
No Initial Name Score of Post-test I Successful criteria (>69)
1 AS 62 Unsuccessful
2 A 62 Unsuccessful
3 A 68 Unsuccessful
4 AKN 72 Unsuccessful
5 DP 65 Successful
6 DA 65 Unsuccessful
7 DA 63 Unsuccessful
8 EP 70 Successful
9 FRK 75 Successful
10 GE 68 Unsuccessful
11 HG 76 Successful
12 HK 72 Successful
13 K 63 Unsuccessful
14 LA 68 Unsuccessful
15 MNH 70 Successful
16 MRP 70 Successful
37
17 NS 72 Successful
18 NNR 77 Successful
19 NRA 79 Successful
20 NRH 70 Successful
21 RAM 77 Successful
22 RR 65 Unsuccessful
23 RKP 72 Successful
24 RNM 55 Unsuccessful
25 SES 75 Successful
26 SA 75 Successful
27 TS 62 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 55 Unsuccessful
Total 1.923
Average 68,67
Based on the table above, the total student score is 1,923, and the number of students who took the test was 28 students. Then the average student score was:
π =β X N π =1.923
28 π = 68,67
Based on the above analysis, the students' speaking skills in English lessons got increasing. The average value was 68,67. To categorize the member of master's students, the researcher applies the following formula:
π =R
TΓ 100%
π =15
28Γ 100%
π = 53,57%
Based on the above calculations, 53,57% (15 students) of all eighth-grade students who took the test passed the competency. Meanwhile, the remaining 46,42% (13 students) failed to meet the minimum competency criteria. The
calculation could be concluded that the post-test of the cycle I was categorized as unsuccessful.
According to the students' speaking skill result in cycle 1, there was an increase in students' mean scores from the students' speaking skills in the preliminary study (pre-test) to the students' speaking skills in the first cycle (post- test I). The pre-test means score from the mean class 59,35 increased to 68,67, or 5 students who passed the score above the minimum mastery criterion increased to 15 students. It means that there was a 35,72 % of mean score improvement. The improvement percentage is derived from the formula:
π =π¦1β π¦
π¦ Γ 100%
π = 68,67 β 59,35
59,35 Γ 100%
π = 9,32
59,35 Γ 100%
π = 15,70 %
Students' speaking skill in English lesson on the topic "Expression of Congratulation" was classified as unsuccessful, so cycle II is needed to increase students' higher scores. Furthermore, the results of the post-test speaking for cycle II are as follows:
Table 4.5 Students' Post-test II Result On The Topic Expression Like and Dislikes No Initial Name A score of Post-test II Successful criteria (>69)
1 AS 62 Unsuccessful
2 A 65 Unsuccessful
3 A 70 Successful
4 AKN 75 Successful
5 DP 70 Successful
6 DA 75 Successful
39
7 DA 70 Successful
8 EP 70 Successful
9 FRK 75 Successful
10 GE 70 Successful
11 HG 80 Successful
12 HK 75 Successful
13 K 70 Successful
14 LA 75 Successful
15 MNH 75 Successful
16 MRP 75 Successful
17 NS 80 Successful
18 NNR 85 Successful
19 NRA 85 Successful
20 NRH 72 Successful
21 RAM 86 Successful
22 RR 80 Successful
23 RKP 75 Successful
24 RNM 60 Unsuccessful
25 SES 80 Successful
26 SA 80 Successful
27 TS 65 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 60 Unsuccessful
Total 2.060
Average 73,57
According to the table above, the students' speaking skill in the English lesson was increased on the topic "Expression of Like and Dislike" through SGD. The standard of maximum criteria was accomplished with a total score of students was 2.060 divided by the number of students who did the test was 28 students, so the students' average was:
π =β X N π =2.060
28 π = 73,57
Based on the above analysis, the students' speaking skills in English lessons had increased. The average value was 73,57. To categorize the member of master's students, the researcher applies the following formula:
π =R
TΓ 100%
π =23
28Γ 100%
π = 82,14%
Based on the above calculations, 82,14% (23 students) of all eighth-grade students who took the test passed the competency. Meanwhile, the remaining 17,86% (5 students) failed to meet the minimum competency criteria. It could be concluded that the post-test of cycle II was categorized as a success because the students' skills in speaking increased.
The calculation formula for the improvement percentage is as follows:
π =π¦2β π¦
π¦ Γ 100%
π = 73,57 β 59,35
59,35 Γ 100%
π = 14,22
59,35 Γ 100%
π = 23,95 %
According to the students' speaking skill result in cycle 2, there was an increase in students' mean scores from the students' speaking skills in the preliminary study (pre-test) to the students' speaking skills in the second cycle (post-test II). The pre-test means score from the mean class 59,35 increased to 73,57 or 23 students who passed the score above the minimum mastery criterion increased to 13 students. It means that there was a 23,95 % of mean score improvement. The
41
following are the results of the students' speaking pre-test to post-test I and II and a summary of the percentage increase in student scores:
Table 4.6 Students' Result Summary No Initial
Name
Pre-test Post-test I Post-test II
Score Successful
criteria (>69) Score Successful
criteria (>69) Score Successful criteria (>69) 1 AS 60 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 2 A 59 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 3 A 55 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 4 AKN 58 Unsuccessful 72 Unsuccessful 75 Successful
5 DP 61 Unsuccessful 65 Successful 70 Successful
6 DA 52 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 75 Successful 7 DA 40 Unsuccessful 63 Unsuccessful 70 Successful
8 EP 58 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 70 Successful
9 FRK 70 Successful 75 Successful 75 Successful 10 GE 54 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 11 HG 60 Unsuccessful 76 Successful 80 Successful 12 HK 58 Unsuccessful 72 Unsuccessful 75 Successful 13 K 50 Unsuccessful 63 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 14 LA 54 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 75 Successful 15 MNH 55 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 75 Successful 16 MRP 56 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 75 Successful 17 NS 70 Successful 72 Successful 80 Successful 18 NNR 60 Unsuccessful 77 Successful 85 Successful 19 NRA 63 Unsuccessful 79 Successful 85 Successful 20 NRH 60 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 72 Successful 21 RAM 62 Unsuccessful 77 Successful 86 Successful 22 RR 65 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 80 Successful 23 RKP 70 Unsuccessful 72 Successful 75 Successful 24 RNM 50 Unsuccessful 55 Unsuccessful 60 Unsuccessful 25 SES 75 Successful 75 Successful 80 Successful 26 SA 70 Successful 75 Successful 80 Successful 27 TS 60 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 28 XZ 50 Unsuccessful 55 Unsuccessful 60 Unsuccessful
Total 1.662 1.923 2.060
Average 59,35 68,67 73,57
The following is a summary of the percentage improvement in student scores from pre-test to post-test speaking cycle II :
Table 4.7 Students' Score Improvement Percentage Summary
Test Studentsβ Score > 69 Percentage
Pre-test 5 17,85%
Post-test I 13 53,57%
Post-test II 23 82,14%
From the above result, only 17,85% (5 students) scored>69. In the post-test in cycle I, 53,57% (13 students) got a score >69. It means that there was an increasing 35,72%. In post-test II, 82,14% (23 students) got a score >69. The increase was about 28,57%, and the total increase in students' scores from pre-test until post-test II was 64,29%. To conclude, the SGD worked excellently and efficiently in helping students speak English in the eighth grade of SMPN 14 Bintan. SGD successfully applied and was able to increase students' skills in speaking.
4.2.2 Qualitative Data