• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Result of the Research Explanation

Dalam dokumen an undergraduated thesis - IAIN Repository (Halaman 85-94)

B. Research Data

3. Result of the Research Explanation

64

16 MA 76 79 3 Improve

17 MM 75 80 5 Improve

18 MS 62 69 7 Improve

19 MP 52 58 6 Improve

20 MHS 60 77 17 Improve

21 OD 54 80 26 Improve

22 OI 68 79 11 Improve

23 PC 55 64 9 Improve

24 RAD 54 60 6 Improve

25 RAW 68 76 8 Improve

26 RF 56 67 11 Improve

27 RN 56 69 13 Improve

28 SAL 83 85 2 Improve

29 ST 63 76 13 Improve

30 UMR 60 78 18 Improve

31 UKI 65 76 11 Improve

32 UOA 45 62 17 Improve

Total 2061 2342

The Highest 85 88

The Lowest 45 62

Average 64,41 73,18

According to the table above, it can be explained that there were 31 students (96,875%) improved their scores. The students who gained scores <75 were 1 students (3,125%) they had not been achieved the minimum standard score; 75. It can be concluded that the

66

result of the post test I has improved. The chart of improvement is presented below:

Figure 3

Chart of the Students’ Result in Pre-Test and Post-Test 1

From the chart above, it could be concluded that there was an improving of students’ result in pre test and post test 1. It could be seen from the average result in pre test and post test 1. In pre test the average was 64,41 and become 73,18 in post test 1. It means that the average score of the students’ improve 8.77 from pre test to post test 1.

2. The Result of the Students’ Learning in Cycle 2

Significant improvement from post test I up to post test II occurred in cycle 2. The score of the result in cycle 2 can be seen in table below:

60 65 70 75

Pre-Test Post-Test 1

Average

Table 12

The Result of the Writing descriptive Score in Post Test I and Post Test II

No Students Code

Post Test 1

Post Test 2

Increasing Score

Note

1 AAN 76 77 1 Improve

2 ADK 78 80 2 Improve

3 AGP 63 77 14 Improve

4 ANA 78 79 1 Improve

5 ARL 76 77 1 Improve

6 ARN 76 78 2 Improve

7 AZR 60 76 6 Improve

8 ANA 79 80 1 Improve

9 AFH 67 79 12 Improve

10 ADS 88 89 1 Improve

11 BAT 65 72 7 Improve

12 BI 77 78 1 Improve

13 IA 76 79 3 Improve

14 KTJ 69 80 11 Improve

15 HAQ 78 79 1 Improve

16 MA 79 82 3 Improve

17 MM 80 81 1 Improve

18 MS 69 78 9 Improve

19 MP 58 79 11 Improve

20 MHS 77 78 1 Improve

21 OD 80 82 2 Improve

22 OI 79 80 1 Improve

23 PC 64 61 1 Improve

68

24 RAD 60 62 2 Improve

25 RAW 76 78 2 Improve

26 RF 67 76 9 Improve

27 RN 69 70 1 Improve

28 SAL 85 87 2 Improve

29 ST 76 77 1 Improve

30 UMR 78 80 2 Improve

31 UKI 76 78 2 Improve

32 UOA 62 70 8 Improve

Total 2342 2479

The Highest 88 89

The Lowest 58 61

Average 73,18 77,5

From the table above, we know that the students’ score increased cycle by cycle. It can be seen from their average score was 73,18 in post-test 1 in cycle 1 became 77,5 in post-test 2 in cycle 2. It could know that cue card pictures could improve the writing descriptive ability. The students were enthusiasts during the learning process. All students attended the class from the first treatment until the last treatment. They were also interest to ask and answer the questions.

70 75 80

Post Test 1

Post Test 2 73

78

Average

Table 13

The Frequency of the Students’ Post-Test 2 Score

No Grade Explanation Frequency Percentage (%)

1 ≥75 Passed 28 87,5%

2 <75 Failed 4 12,5%

Total 32 100%

According to the table above, it can be explained that there were 28 students (87,5%) successfully reached out the minimum standard score 75 and 4 student (12,5%) were not success to reach out the minimum standard can be concluded that the result of the post test II was improved. The chart of improvement was presented below:

Figure 4

Chart of the Students’ Result in Post-Test I and Post-Test II

From the chart above, it could be concluded that there was an increasing of students’ result in post test 1 and post test 2. It could be seen from the average result in post test 1 and post test 2. In post test 1 the average is 73,18, and become 77,5 in post test 2. It means that the average score of the students increase 4.32 from post test 1 to post test 2.

70

3. Result of the Study

The table below will show the recapitulation of the students’

improvement in descriptive writing score from pre test, post test 1 and post test 2:

Table 14

The Recapitulation of Students’ Improvement in Descriptive Writing Score.

No Students’

Code Pre-Test Post- Test 1

Post- Test 2

Note

1 AAN 69 76 77 Improve

2 ADK 75 78 80 Improve

3 AGP 63 63 77 Improve

4 ANA 76 78 79 Improve

5 ARL 61 76 77 Improve

6 ARN 69 76 78 Improve

7 AZR 55 60 76 Improve

8 ANA 73 79 80 Improve

9 AFH 62 67 79 Improve

10 ADS 85 88 89 Improve

11 BAT 50 65 72 Improve

12 BI 69 77 78 Improve

13 IA 67 76 79 Improve

14 KTJ 60 69 80 Improve

15 HAQ 75 78 79 Improve

16 MA 76 79 82 Improve

17 MM 75 80 81 Improve

18 MS 62 69 78 Improve

19 MP 52 58 79 Improve

20 MHS 60 77 78 Improve

21 OD 54 80 82 Improve

22 OI 68 79 80 Improve

23 PC 55 64 61 Improve

24 RAD 54 60 62 Improve

25 RAW 68 76 78 Improve

26 RF 56 67 76 Improve

27 RN 56 69 70 Improve

28 SAL 83 85 87 Improve

29 ST 63 76 77 Improve

30 UMR 60 78 80 Improve

31 UKI 65 76 78 Improve

32 UOA 45 62 70 Improve

Total 2061 2342 2479

Average 64,41 73,18 77,5

The Highest Score 85 88 89

The Lowest Score 45 58 62

The data on the table above presented the improving score of descriptive writing ability. It can be seen from the result of the students’ score in pre test; the mean score was only 64,41 which were far from satisfying but after using STAD (Students Team Achievement Divisions) type the score improved and increased 8,77 point; from 64,41 up to 73,18

The proof of the students’ descriptive writing ability had an improvement that can be examined from the result of the post test I

72

Pre-Test Post-Test 1 Post-Test 2

64,41 73,18 77,5

Average Score

and post test II where the mean score of the students’ score in post test I was 73.18 and the mean score of post test II was 77,5; the score has increased 4,32 point. The improvement can be seen in the chart below:

Figure 5

Chart of the Students’ Result in Pre-Test, Post-Test 1, and Post-Test 2

Based on the chart above, it can be concluded that the using STAD (Students Team Achievement Divisions) type can improve the students’ descriptive writing ability. It can be seen from the chart, there were improvement from the students’ average score from the pre test, and post test I and post test II.

4. The Result of the students’ Activity in Cycle 1 & II

Dalam dokumen an undergraduated thesis - IAIN Repository (Halaman 85-94)

Dokumen terkait