RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses the design of the research, population and sample, instrument of the research, prosedure of collecting data and technique of data analysis.
A. Design of the Research
In this research, the writer collected, processed, and analyzed the data to get conclusion of the research. This research used pre- experimental design with one group pre-test and post-test. Pre-test was the test which given to the students’, before the treatment. The post-test was given to the student’s after the treatment to find out the student’s achivement.
Figure 3.1. Design of Pre-experimental Research Where : T1 : Pre-test
X : Treatment T2 : Post-test
(Gay in Harlina, 2012 :29) T1 – X – T2
B. Variables of the Research
This research consist of two variables: They were independent variable and dependent variable.
1. Independent variable is the use of hangman game.
2. Dependent variable is the students’ vocabulary achievement.
C. Population and Sample 1. Population
In this research, the population is the students of SMPN 19 Makassar. The total of population where 315 students’ which concist of nine class.
2. Sample
This research applied total sampling technique. The writer choosed is one class at the class VII- Unggulan as the sample. Total number of the sample is 35 students.
D. Intrument of the Research
The writer gave the students pre-test and post-test. The students was devided into four groups. Pre-test and post-test are the same in form as well as it’s content but the time and aim are different.
1. Both the experiment class and controlled class were given the pre-test before the lesson is begun to know the students knowledge of the material that was be taught.
2. Both the experiment class and control class were given the same materials but with the different techniques of presentation. The experiment class gave the games technique and the control class without games.
E. Procedure of Collecting Data
The procedure of collecting data are chronologically as follows:
1. Pre-test
The writer gave the students pre-test to know their achivement in English vocabulary. The students were given a number of questions.
Those questions were in matching and filling the blanks form.
2. Treatment
After giving the pre-test to the students, the writer gave the treatment. The writer gave some materials of vocabulary to the students with Games.
3. Post-test
After doing the treatment to the students, the writer gave the post-test. The questions given to the students were same as the questions in pre-test.
F. Technique of Data Analysis
In analyzing the obtained data, the writer used mean score formula: The statistical analysis was undertake in the following steps:
1. Scoring the students answer
Students Correct Answers
Score =
ᵡ
100 % Total Number of items
2. Classifying the students item correct into five levels which based on the standard of some evaluations as follows:
No Scores Criteria
1. 91-100 Very good
2. 76-90 Good
3. 61-75 Fair
4. 51-60 Poor
5. 0-50 Very poor
Farchan in Nurjanah (2010:30) 3. Calculating the mean score of the students pre-test and post-test using
the following formula:
∑x ∑ = N
Where ∑ = Mean Score ∑X = Total Score
N =Total Sample
(Gay in Harlina, 2012: 29)
4. Computing the frequency of the rate precentage of students score F
P = X 100 N
Notation :
P = percentage F = frequency
N = the total number of students (Gay, 1990:204)
5. Finding out the significant difference between the result of the pre –test and post - test by calculating the value of the t-test using the following formula:
t = D ∑D² (∑D)² N N ( N- 1)
Where : t = Test of sigificant
D = The mean of different score ∑D = The sum of total different score
∑D = The square of the sun score differences N = Total number of the students
(Gay in Sere, 2013:35)
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of two parts, they are the findings of the research and the discussion of the research finding. It entirely covers the description of the result of data analysis, in discussion section further explanation and interpretation of the findings.
A. Findings
In collecting data the writer employed a test, which used as a pre- test and a post-test. The pre-test was applied before giving treatment where as the post-test was administrated after giving treatment. In analysis data, the writer presented the items of the test, namely ; vocabulary test. The writer described into several tables to show the data after made research in the classroom.
In this part the writer presents about the result of data analysis namely the vocabulary test. The research process was conducted for treatment by using Hangman Game.
To obtain the information of students’ vocabulary, the writer described it through scoring, giving classification, mean score, standard deviation and test significance of pre-test and post-test.
1. The students’ pre-test
The scoring of the students’ vocabulary test in pre-test and post-test is shown in the table at next page:
Table 1. Students’ pre-test and post-test score of SMPN 19 Makassar No Students’ Initial Pre-test Post-test
1. R H P 96 100
2. A A R 96 100
3. M F A 93 100
4. M F N 93 93
5. M I R B 86 93
6. A G 93 100
7. N N F 90 100
8. A F S 96 100
9. R R 96 100
10. M S R 93 93
11. W P Y 96 100
12. P Y S 96 93
13. A Q A 96 100
14. N A 93 93
15. A U H 83 93
16. A F H 90 86
17. N R F 93 93
18. F A M 93 100
19. S H M 83 100
20. N P 80 93
21. P S T 96 100
22. M A S 96 100
23. A N F 96 93
24. F F W 96 100
25. T W 86 100
26. A M R 90 100
37. M F M 86 100
38. M R T 93 93
39. M E A 96 93
30. R M S 93 100
31. R W M 76 100
32. M P 93 93
33. F M U 80 86
34. A N A S 93 100
35. I N 93 93
Total 3198 3381
Source : SMPN 19 Makassar
Table 2 : Table of Source Number of
students
Pre-test Post-test X2- x1 Deviation
(x1) (x1)² (x2) (x2) ² D D²
1 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
2 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
3 93 8649 100 10000 7 49
4 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
5 86 7396 93 8649 7 49
6 93 9216 100 10000 7 49
7 90 8100 100 10000 10 100
8 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
9 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
10 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
11 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
12 96 9216 93 8649 3 9
13 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
14 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
15 83 6889 93 8649 10 100
16 90 8100 86 7396 4 16
17 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
18 93 8649 100 10000 7 49
19 83 6889 100 10000 17 289
20 80 6400 93 8649 13 169
21 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
22 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
23 96 9216 93 8649 3 9
24 96 9216 100 10000 4 16
25 86 7396 100 10000 14 196
26 90 8100 100 10000 10 100
27 86 7396 100 10000 14 196
28 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
29 96 9216 93 8649 3 9
30 93 8649 100 10000 7 49
31 76 5776 100 10000 24 576
32 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
33 80 6400 86 7396 6 36
34 93 8649 100 10000 7 49
35 93 8649 93 8649 0 0
Total 3198 29378 3381 32722 209 2243
Source : SMPN 19 Makassar
Table 3. The classification frequency and percentage of students’
vocabulary in pre-test.
No Classification Scores Frequency Percentage
1. Very good 91-100 24 68,57%
2. Good 76-90 11 31, 42%
3. Fair 61-75 0 0%
4. Poor 51-60 0 0%
5. Very poor 0-50 0 0%
Total 35 100%
Source : SMPN 19 Makassar
Table 3 above, shows that in pre-test there were 24 students (68,57%) got very good classification, 11 students (31,42%) got good classification. While none of the students got fair, poor, very poor category. From this result, it can be conclude that the students’ vocabulary in pre-test was very good.
2. The students’ post-test
The classification of the students’ vocabulary in post-test is shown in the following table:
Table 4. The Classification, frequency and precentage of students’
vocabulary in post-test.
No Classification Scores Frequency Percentage
1. Very good 91-100 33 86,84%
2. Good 76-90 2 5,26%
3. Fair 61-75 0 0%
4. Poor 51-60 0 0%
5. Very poor 0-50 0 0%
Total 35 100%
Source : SMPN 19 Makassar
Table 4 above, shows that in post-test there were 33 students (86,84%) got very good classification, 2 students (5,26%) got good classification, none of them got fair, and got poor classification. Thus it can be conclude that the students’ vocabulary in post-test was very good.
3. The mean score and standard deviation of students’ pre-test and post test.
After classifying the students’ vocabulary achievment, the mean score and standard deviation in pre-test and post-test are presented in the following table :
Table 5 : Mean score and standard deviation of students pre-test and post-test.
Test Mean score Standard Deviation
Pre-test 91.37 27.89
Post-test 96.6 92.97
Table 5 above, shows that the mean score of students in pre-test
was 91.37 while the mean score in post-test increased to 96.6. The standard deviation of the pre-test is 27.89 while the standard deviation of the post-test is 92.97. From these data, we obviously see that the mean score of students’ post-test is greater than the mean score of students’
pre-test.
a. The mean score of students’ in pre-test ∑x
∑ = N
= 3198 35 = 91.37
b. The mean score of students’ in post-test ∑x
∑ = N = 3381
35 = 96,6
In the pre-test the students’ mean score was 91.37 and post-test was 96.6 it means that the result of the students’ mean score in pre-test and post- test shows a significant different.
4. Standard Deviation of students in pre-test SD = ∑ᵡ1² — (∑ᵡ1)² N N─1
SD = 29378─(3198)² 35 35-1
SD = 29378 ─ 102272 35 34
SD = 29378 ─ 2922.0577 34
SD = 26455.94 34
SD = 778.11 SD = 27.89
5. Standard Deviation of students’ in post-test SD = ∑ᵡ2²¯ (∑ᵡ2)²
N N─1
SD = 32722 — (3381)² 35 35─1
SD = 32722 ─ 11431161 35
34
SD = 32722 ─ 326604
34 SD = 293882
34 SD = 8643.588 SD = 92.97
6. T-test Analysis
X1 = 3198 X2 = 3381
∑D = 209
∑D² = 2243
7. T-test value of students’ vocabulary achievement test of significance df= N-1
df= 35-1 df= 34
t = D
∑D² ─ (∑D)² N N (N ─ 1)
t = 5,97
2243 ─ (209)² 35 35(35-1)
t= 5,97
2243 - 43681 35 35(34)
t= 5,97 2243 — 1248 1190
t= 5,97
99,85 1190
t= 5,97 0.83
t= 5,97 0,911 t= 6,56
Test of significance used to know whether or not the result of pre- test and post-test are significantly different. The result of t-test is 6.56
Then result of t-test was compared with the value of t-table. To know the value of t-table, the writer used the level of significance (p)= 0,05 and found degree freedom (df), where:
df = N-1 = 35-1 =34
If degree of freedom (df) 34 in the level of significance 0.05, so t- table value is 1.69092. It is clearly shown that the result of t-test is greater than t-table (6.56>1.69092). It means that there is a significant effect of hangman game on students’ vocabulary at SMPN 19 Makassar. This indicates that the using of Hangman Game on students’ vocabulary gave positive effect which mainly the establishing of students vocabulary. So, it can be concluded that Null hyposthesis was rejected and alternative hypothesis was accepted.
B. Discussion
The proposing of students’ vocabulary in this section is to describe clearly the effect of hangman game on students’ vocabulary. For computing students’ vocabulary on pre-test and post-test or before and after using hangman game in teaching learning process.
The findings of this study show that the use of Hangman Game in teaching vocabulary helps the students’ to establish the vocabulary knowledge because hangman game can motivate the students to be more active in vocabulary lesson. Beside that one of the advantage of hangman
game can motivate students because it offer challenge to try hangman game. Hangman game can give opportunity for students to practice and repeat the sentence pattern and vocabulary. The others advantage of hangman game was made the teaching and learning process can be more attractive. Thus the English teachers are hopped to apply hangman game for retrieving students’ vocabulary knowledge in a teaching and learning process. During the test, the students’ fell confident in doing the test. And the result of the post-test revealed significantly development than pre-test.
In the pre-test, students had to answer 34 questions which consist of 10 multiple choice and 24 matching words. Then the writer conducted treatment to improve students’ vocabulary by using hangman game.
After giving treatment, the writer conducted post-test to knoow the students’ vocabulary achievement. After using hangman game the questions were still the same with pre-test. From the result of students’
post-test show that their vocabulary achievement improved.
It also supported by the inferntial analysis by using hangman game t-test that was used to know the research hypothesis that there was a difference between the result students’ vocabulary test before and after giving treatment. The result showed that t-test value (6.56) is greater than t-table (1.69092).
The writer also found that the students were motivated to learn vocabulary by using hangman game method. In pre-test there were 24 students (68,57%) got very good classification, 11 students (31,42%) got
good classification. While none of the students got fair, poor, very poor category. After giving treatment, the students’ vocabulary is categorized very good because there are 33 students (86,84%) got very good classification, 2 students (5,26%) got good classification. None of them got fair, and got poor classification.
The average value of the pre-test and post-test are both high, where pre-test = 91 and post-test = 96. It means that the use of the hangman game can not give a significant effect on students’ vocabulary at SMPN 19 Makassar.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consist of two sections. The first section is conclusion, which is based on the research findings, and the second section is suggestion based on the conclusion.
A. CONCLUSION
Based on the result of data analysis and the result of the previous chapter, the writter concludes that there is a significant effect of hangman game on students’ vocabulary (a case of class Vll-Unggulan) at SMPN 19 Makassar. It can be proved that the score of t-test = 6,56 is higher than the score of t-table = 1.69092
After consulting the t-table at the significant level 0,05 with the standard and the degree of freedom (df) = N-1= 35-1= 34
So H0 was rejected and H1 was accepted, which means that there is a significant of using hangman game in establishing students’
vocabulary.
B. SUGGESTION
The finding of this study shows that hangman game can establish student’s English vocabulary achievement. So that, the writer reccommends:
1. In teaching vocabulary, the teacher should use some different methods and ways to attract the students’ attention to learn English vocabulary.
2. The English teacher may use Hangman Game in teaching vocabulary, because it can be establish students vocabulary achievement.
3. Teacher should be creative, selective, and innovative in selecting and composing material based on the students’ need.
4. In learning a foreign language, students should master very much of vocabulary.
5. The writer suggest further research in order to increase the difficulty of the vocabulary.
There are many ways in learning English beyond the school or formal situation, so students should develop their English skills by find and applying media and technologies around us.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ahmad. 1992. Factors Influencing Students’ Achievement in Vocabulary and Majority of the Students are Less Interested in Learning Vocabulary. Thesis FPBS. IKIP Ujung Pandang. Unpublished Allen, Edward David. 2003. Classroom Technique : Foreign Language and
English as a second Language. New York: Oxford University Press, Incs.
Allen, Virginia. 2005. Technique in Teaching Vocabulary. New York : Oxford University press.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian : Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta : PT. RINEKA CIPTA.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2007. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching.
New York : Pearson Education, Inc.
2001. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. New York : Prentice Hall.
2007. Teaching by Principles : an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (Third Edition). San Francisco : Pearson Education, Inc.
Butler, 2000. Statistics in Linguistics. New York : Basil Blackwell.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2004. Petunjuk Teknis Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta : Depdiknas.
Ersoz, A. 2000. Six Games for the EFL/ESL Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VI, No. 6. Juny. Retrieved on.
Gay, L.R. 1981. Education Reserch. USA : Bell and Howel Company.
2006. Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and Application (Second Edition). Columbus. Ohio : Charles E.
Merrill Publishing Company.
Good. 2001. The Basic of Language Learning and Dictionary of Education.
New York : McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Hansen. 1994. Learners to acquire new experience with in a Foreign Language. Great Britain : H
Harlina. 2012. Teaching Vocabulary through Degree of Comparison of SMPN 31 Makassar. Universitas 45 Makassar. Thesis.
Unpublished.
Harmer. 1991. Basically Distinguishes the Types of Vocabulary. Longman : Cambridge University Press.
Kim, Lee Su. 2014. Creative Games for the Language Class. Forum’ vol.
33 No. 1. January-March. www.google.com. Retrieved on.
Margono, S. 2009. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT.
RINEKA CIPTA.
McMillan and Schumaker. 1984. Research in Education. Boston : Little Brown and Company.
Mulbar. 2002. Academic of Teaching and Learning Vocabulary . New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Muliana. 1996. The Influence of English Course toward the Students Achievement in Learning Vocabulary by the Third Year Students of SMU Negri 4 Makassar. UNM. Thesis. Unpublished.
Murcia. 1991. Techniques in Presenting of Vocabulary. New Jersey : Prentice Hall, Inc.
Murphy, Raymond. 1985. English Grammaris Use : A self Study Reference and Practic Book for Intermediate Students.
Combridge : Combridge university press.
Nurjannah. 2010. Teaching Vocabulary through Integrated Skill Approach.
Thesis FPBS. IKIP Ujung Pandang.
Procter, Paul. 1995. Cambridge International Dictionary of English.
Cambridge : The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Purwoningsih, D. 2007. Using Visual Dictionary in Teaching Vocabulary to Elementary School Students. Thesis. FBS UNS. Unpublished.
Quirck, Randolph. 1987. Teaching Vocabulary. USA: Houghton Publisher.
Richey, R. W. 2000. Planning for Teaching : an Introduction to Education.
California : Department of Education Saint Mary’s College.
Richard. 1988. Experiences with in Foreign Language. New York : Oxford University Press.
Scollon. 2004. Linguistic Insights – Studies in Language and Communication. London, UK : Routledge.
Sere, Uni 2013. Improving Students’ Vocabulary through Hangman Game at SMPN 23 Makassar. Universitas 45 Makassar.
S. M. Silvers. 1982. Experiences with Real Learning Takes Place, and Students’ used the Language. Newyork : The Gromwell
Press. Trowbridge.
Thornbury. 2002. Summed up that without Vocabulary Nothing can be Conveyed and Vocabulary Refers to All words in the Whole Language Used in a Particular Variety. New York : Oxford University press.
Ur. 1996. Techniques of Persenting the Meaning of new Vocabulary.
Great Britain : Heineman.
W. R. Lee. 1979. Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. Great Britain : Redwood Books.
Willkins. 1980. The Vocabulary Needed by Students is the Vocabulary that can Use for Language Performance. California : Department of Education Saint Mary’s College.
Wierus. 1994. Building up the Vocabulary through Eliciting Technique.
Thesis. FPBS. IKIP. Ujung Pandang. Unpublished.
Zdybiewska. 1994. Games and Experiences with in Foreign Language.
Newyork: The Gromwell Press. Trowbridge.
APPENDIXES
APPENDIXES APPENDIX 1.
RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN (RPP)
Satuan Pendidikan : Sekolah Menengah Pertama Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/ Semester : VII/ Genap Alokasi Waktu : 2 x 40 menit Tahun Pelajaran : 2014/2015
A. Standard Kompetensi :
1. Memahami pengetahuan (faktual, konseptual, dan prosedural) dalam ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni, budaya, dan humaniora, dengan wawasan keagamaan, kebangsaan, kenegaraan, dan peradaban terkait fenomena dan kejadian yang tampak mata.
2. Mencoba, mengolah, dan menyaji berbagai hal dalam ranah konkret (menggunakan, mengurai, merangkai, memodifikasi, dan membuat) sesuai dengan yang dipelajari di sekolah dan dari berbagai sumber lain yang dalam sudut pandang/teori.
B. Kompetensi Dasar :
1.1 Menyusun teks lisan dan tulis untuk menyatakan dan menanyakan sifat orang, binatang, dan benda dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks dan unsur kebahasaan yang benar dan sesuai konteks.
2.1 Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan tanggung jawab dalam melaksanakan transaksional dengan guru dan teman.
C. Indikator :
1. Menjelaskan tentang karakter dan sifat orang, nama binatang dan benda dalam mempelajari bahasa inggris dari vicabulary.
2. Menyebutkan contoh-contoh ucapan, tekanan kata, intonasi, dan sikap yang benar.
D. Tujuan Pembelajaran :
1. Menunjukkan kesungguhan dalam belajar bahasa Inggris dengan menjelaskan tentang karakter dan sifat orang, nama binatang dan benda dalam mempelajari vocabulary.
2. Meniru contoh-contoh interaksi dengan menyebutkan dan menanyakan sifat orang, binatang, dan sikap yang benar.
3. Dengan bimbingan dan arahan guru, siswa mengidentifikasi ciri- ciri fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dalam menyebutkan dan menanyakan sifat orang, binatang, benda.
4. Secara kolaboratif, siswa berusaha menggunakan bahasa inggris untuk menyebutkan dan menanyakan sifat orang, binatang, benda dalam konteks pembelajaran, simulasi, role- play, dan kegiatan lain yang berstruktur.
E. Materi Pembelajaran :
a. Kata sifat terkait fisik, mental, psikologis, dan pekerjaan b. Kata tanya What ... look like? How?
c. Nama-nama benda dan hewan yang sangat lazim dirumah, kelas, sekolah, dan sekitarnya.
d. Ucapan, tekanan kata, intonasi, ejaan dan tanda baca e. Kosakata dan tata bahasa baku
f. Tulisan tangan.
F. Metode Pembelajaran : Vocabulary G. Kegiatan Pembelajaran :
1. Kegiatan Awal a. Menyapa siswa b. Berdoa
c. Memeriksa kehadiran siswa d. Memotivasi siswa
e. Menyampaikan tujuan pembelajaran 2. Kegiatan inti
a. Menerangkan materi
b. Memberi tugas secara individu berdasarkan penjelasan
c. Mengevaluasi hasil latihan individu beberapa siswa 3. Kegiatan Akhir
a. Setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran siswa-siswa ditanya bagaimana pembelajarannya (refleksi).
b. Siswa dan guru secara bersama-sama membuat kesimpulan pembelajaran
c. Memberikan pekerjaan rumah (PR)
d. Menginformasikan materi untuk pertemuan berikutnya H. Sumber Belajar :
1. Media : Gambar, white board, board marker
2. Sumber : Bahasa inggris “When the English Rings the Bell”
APPENDIX 2 : INSTRUMENT OF THE RESEARCH
JUDUL : THE EFFECT OF HANGMAN GAME ON STUDENTS’
VOCABULARY AT SMPN 19 MAKASSAR Keterangan :
. 1. Test ini bertujuan untuk mengukur penguasaan kosakata siswa.
2. Hasil test ini akan menjadi data dalam penyusunan skripsi strata satu (s1) jurusan pendidikan bahasa inggris fakultas keguruan dan ilmu pendidikan Universitas “45” Makassar.
3. Peneliti mengharapkan agar siswa dapat meningkatkan penguasaan kosakata.
4. Atas kerjasama dari para siswa peneliti mengucapkan terimakasih.
Name : ...
Reg. Number : ...
Class : ...
Petunjuk pengisian :
1. Bacalah saoal-soal dibawah ini dengan seksama sebelum anda menjawabnya.
2. Tuliskan jawaban anda dalam lembar soal yang telah disediakan.
3. Berikan tanda silang (ᵡ) pada jawaban yang menurut anda benar.
A. Direction : complete the sentences by choosing one of the words given below.
1. My mother teaches at junior high school. She is a...
2. My father files a plane. He is a...
3. Dewi always brings a letter, and work in the post office. He is a...
4. My Brother helps the doctor, she works in the hospital. He is a...
5. Agnes Monica sing a pop song. She is a...
B. Cross one of (A, B, C, or D) which had not found in a group by another three words, such as the exampled.
Example : A. Plate, B. Glass, C. Spoon, D. Lip 1. A. Knee
B. Finger C. Leg D. Spoon 2. A. Chair
B. Ear C. Teeth D. Eyes 3. A. Mango
B. Banana C. Comb D. Apple
1. Singer - teacher - nurse - pilot - postman