CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
N. Indicator of Success
4) Reflecting
In the end of the Cycle I, the researcher and the collaborator did the evaluation and reflection together. According to the result of speaking score in Cycle I, the use of Matching Game could improve the students speaking ability but the numbers of students who Complete the MMC was only 15 students or 62,5%. Even though it incomplete the indicator of success, there was improvement in their speaking ability score.
58% 63%
75%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
1st Meeting 2nd Meeting 3rd meeting Precentage of Score
54
Next, the students‘ activity also improved start form the first meeting until the third meeting in Cycle 1. It revealed that 71% of the students paid attention, 70% of the students were active in group, and 82% of students worked together, 54% of students made notes and 83% of students did the task. From the table, it concluded that the use of Matching Games activity improved the students‘ activity in the classroom.
In conclusion, there were some problems that should be repaired, so the researcher and the collaborator agreed to conduct Cycle to. The common mistake in the teaching and learning process became a reference to be better so that the use of matching game could improve the students‘ speaking ablity.
b. Cycle 2 a. Planning
Based on the reflecting in the Cycle I, the researcher and the collaborator made the planning as follow:
1) The researcher prepared the lesson plan including teaching procedure, media, and relevant material to be applied in acting phase.
2) The researcher prepared learning resource for students.
3) The researcher used the use of matching game to be applied in acting phase improve students‘ speaking ability.
evaluation sheet to evaluate the student‘s activity after teaching and learning process.
5) The researcher managed the time allocation well so that the purpose of the study achieved.
b. Acting
1) The First and The Second Meeting
The first meeting was conducted on Saturday, November 22th 2017. The time allocation was 2x40 minutes. The teaching and learning process was for treatment as follow:
a) The teacher greeted the students, prayed together and checked attendance list.
b) The teacher started the learning process by invite all the students to guess the material was.
c) The teacher explained the material while gave chance to student to ask
d) The teacher explained the rule of Matching Game.
e) The students were asked to do the simulation of matching game.
f) The teacher closed the first meeting.
The second meeting was conducted on Saturday, November 25th 2017. The time allocation was 2x40 minutes.
The teaching and learning process was for treatment as follow:
56
a) The teacher greeted the students, prayed together and checked attendance list.
b) The teacher started the learning process by invite all the students to guess the material was.
c) The teacher explained the material while gave chance to student to ask
d) The teacher explained the rule of matching game.
e) The students were asked to do the task.
f) The teacher and the students discussed about several mistakes from their speaking ability
g) The teacher closed the second meeting by asking the students to practice speaking in home.
2) The Third Meeting
The third meeting was conducted on Wednesday, November 29th 2017. The time allocation was 2x40 minutes.
The teaching and learning process was for Post Test II. The result of the students‘ speaking score could be seen in the following table:
Table 13
The result of the students’ speaking score (post test II)
No Name
ASPECT* Total
S c o re
Score Category F P V G I
S
1 ANH 4 2 3 4 3 16 80 Complete
2 ADY 4 3 3 4 3 17 85 Complete
3 AAP 2 2 3 3 3 13 65 Incomplete
4 AYS 3 2 3 3 4 15 75 Complete
EA 3 3 3 3 3 15 75 Complete
6 FK 4 3 3 3 4 17 85 Complete
7 FAL 4 3 3 3 3 16 80 Complete
8 GC 3 3 3 3 3 15 75 Complete
9 JA 4 3 3 4 3 17 85 Complete
10 MZAG 2 2 3 3 3 13 65 Incomplete
11 NR 3 2 3 3 3 14 70 Complete
12 PY 3 2 3 3 3 14 70 Complete
13 RNL 4 3 3 4 4 18 90 Complete
14 RM 3 2 4 4 3 16 80 Complete
15 RTWD 4 3 3 4 3 17 85 Complete
16 RLAS 3 3 3 3 3 15 75 Complete
17 RDAY 3 2 3 3 3 14 70 Complete
18 RP 3 2 3 3 3 14 70 Complete
19 F 3 3 4 4 3 17 85 Complete
20 SMA 3 2 3 3 3 14 70 Complete
21 SM 3 2 3 4 3 15 75 Complete
22 SA 3 3 3 4 3 16 80 Complete
23 DAS 3 2 3 4 4 16 80 Complete
24 HS 2 2 3 3 3 13 65 Incomplete
Total 1835
Average 76,460
Highest Score 90
Lowest Score 65
Table 14
The Frequency of the Students’ Score in Post-Test II No Students’
Score Percentage Frequency Explanation
1 ≥70 87,5% 21 Complete
2 <70 12,5% 3 Incomplete
Total 100% 24
The result of the pre-test showed that there were 21 (87,5%) students complete to achieve the minimum standard of mastery (MMC). There were only 3 (12,5%) students did not complete the MMC The highest score in pre-test was 90 and the lowest score was 65.
58
Figure 6
Result of the Students Speaking Score in the Post Test II Cycle II
Based on the result of Post Test II, there were 21 students (87,5%) success to complete the minimum mastery criteria (70) and 3 students (12,5%) incomplete it. The numbers of students who Complete was 21 or 87,5%. It reached the indicator of success where 80% the students could get the score ≥ 70. It meant that the use of Matching Game was success to improved the students‘ speaking ability.
c. Observing
The observation was conducted when the learning process happened (Cycle II) by using the observation sheet for students activities in class and the observation sheet for teacher activity.
The observation was done by the collaborator (English teacher) of eighth graders of SMP Muhammadiyah Sekampung.
12,5%
87,5%
0 5 10 15 20 25
Incomplete Complete
Score
Numbers of Students
Learning Process
Based on the observation sheet, the students more enthusiasm to pay attention learning process. Then, most of them were active in the group and working together. Now, most of students made a note and all of students did the task.
The data of the students‘ activity can be seen in the following table:
Table 15
The Result of The students Activity in the teaching and learning process in Cycle II
No Students’
Activit y
Cycle II Average Increasing