CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
E. Technique of Data Analysis
2. Reliability Test
According to the table above, they were 20 items of questionaire.
But there were 1 invalid items. It means that they were 19 valid questionaires which take to students.
Table 3.3 Table of Varians
Item Number Varians
1 1,080
2 0,620
3 1,378
4 1,042
5 0,931
6 1,227
7 0,420
8 0,482
9 1,167
10 0,631
11 1,010
12 0,991
13 0,516
14 0,771
15 1,048
16 0,608
17 1,222
18 1,066
19 0,902
Total 9,892
According to the table, they were 19 valid questionaire with the different varians in every items and the researcher found the total all of the varians.
∑ = ∑ ∑
=
= 2.810,74074 – 2.72,45984 = 108,2809
Alpha Cronbach formulation:
r11 =
Notes :
k = Number of Item81
Formulating Reliability (Alpha Cronbach):
= ∑
=
=
= 0,955
From the formulation above, the researcher found reliability. If r11˃ r table
so, the instrument is reliable. And if r11 < r table so the instrument is not reliable.
The result of parents involvement is 0,955. It can be conclude 0,955 ˃ 0,174 so the research instrument are reliable.
81Andhita Dessy Wulansari, Penelitian Pendidikan: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik dengan Menggunakan SPSS, 90.
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULT
In previous chapter, the researcher has already checked validity and reliability to ensure that questionnaire measurable. In this chapter, the researcher serves research result. It involves research general description, and specific description. General description explains parents involvement and English achievement in MA AL-ISLAM Joresan. While, specific description serves data description, data analysis, discussion and intepretation.
A. General Description
This research was conducted in MA AL-ISLAM Joresan. The researcher found that parents involvement in students learning process is less.
Students do not do home work, do not have a book, and complete the stationary. Therefore, their students English achievement is less.
That condition is unique problem because it contrast with most parents and children condition in general. Usually parents involvement in students learning process are good. But that happens in MA AL-ISLAM Joresan just the opposite. Researcher found phenomenon related to parents involvement in their students learning process.
The first is parenting. Parents never support to improve their students skill, remind students home work, and never asked about students problem. The second is communicating. Parents do not have good communication with students and school. Parents never communicate with
49
teacher about students progress and learning outcome, parents rarely communicate with their children about lesson. So parents didn’t know what students need to support learning process. The third is volunteering. Parents rarely active at school volunteer for example take a rapport, and attend in parents meeting. Beside it, parents rarely participate in school events like class meeting sport, graduation events and give donation for school development. The fourth is learning at home. Everyday, parents does not manage the time to study at home, parents just accompany them every examination, parents didn’t turn off TV when children are learning, didn’t help in students do the home work and sometimes parents give the reward if the students success in study. The five is decision making. Some time parents listen the students problem in learning process, but parents never give concrete solution for the students problem and some time, parents help the students in making choice to improve the students skill. The last is collaborating with community. Parents never control students intercommunication with community and some time parents don’t give permission to collaborate with their friends.
B. Specific Description 1. Data Description
The population of this research was the students of tenth grade at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan. The Sample was taken by Cochran sampling formulation. As explained above, the total sample was 135 students from class A, B, C, D, E, and G 19 students and at class F 18 students. The list of sample is shown as follow.
a. Data of Parents Involvement
In this research, to get the score of parents involvement, the researcher used parents involvement questionaire. It consists of 19 related questions, for each of which 4 options are considered (always
= 4 points, often = 3 points, sime times = 2 points, never = 1 point).
Table 4.1
The Students’ Parents Involvement Score 10A Class
No. Name Score
1 Boy Mustakhim Amrulloh 50
2 Dandi Indra Gunawan 64
3 Falih Sunnimadi 52
4 Haekal Sainatra Agaci 41
5 Imam Mustakhim 62
6 Muhammad Ibnu Rosyid 53
7 Hamdan Zulfa Ramadhan 51
8 Khasanul Hidayatulloh 70
9 Binti Masruroh 54
10 Akiya Qidam Hayya 69
11 Tariska Latifah Mufidah 49
12 Ruhil Amany 66
13 Zahroh Rohana 56
14 Sa’adatur Rohmah 54
15 Nurlaily Fauziyah 57
16 Roihatul Jannah 63
17 Mustardiyah 52
18 Ani Sulistyowati 56
19 Ikhda Zahrotul L 55
10B Class
No Name Score
1 Ikhsan Syaifudin 56
2 Ahmad Naufal 51
3 Adi Yusuf 52
4 M. Rifqi Bahrul U 47
5 Rijal Aminudin 43
6 Zainul Musthofa 65
7 Aswin Hidayatulloh 68
8 Khizam Amru Rosyada 61
9 Barzakhi Al Mahdi 41
10 Alfina Oktavia Khamidah 41
11 Zuhria Aini 36
12 Siti Khotimah 60
13 Novita Aliv La Firdaus 44
14 Fatimatuz Zahroh 53
15 Azka Tazkiyah Fitri Laili 48
16 Dina Muhamadatur R 41
17 Elma elviyanti 69
18 Wike Astuti 37
19 Riska Riskiani 56
10 C Class
No. Name Score
1 Ahmad fuad Fauzi 49
2 Zaenal Arifin 35
3 M. Dzulfikar Al Kautsar 48
4 Nasrul 57
5 Sayidah Dwi Rahmawati 67
6 Novinda Ellysta Sari 52
7 Anif Zubaidi 46
8 Isma Rahmawati 57
9 Hanik Setyani 57
10 Rofiatul Mahmudah 48
11 Uswatun Khasanah 44
12 Whan Nurdiana 51
13 Eka Kurnia Fadilah 36
14 Luluk Sri Setyani 49
15 M.Sabihul Malik 39
16 Malik Fahad 50
17 Septiana Eka Pratiwi 40
18 Qooniatul Khasanah 42
19 Novanda Eka Nurazizah 44 10D Class
No. Name Score
1 Luthfi Ikhsanudin 54
2 M.Minhajul Khowin 46
3 Baharudin Ahmad Yusuf 34
4 Zufa Rully Alifah 33
5 Siti Handriati R 37
6 Siska Kartika Sari 65
7 Abdillah Muhammad Nur 70
8 Alfin Nurfaizin 46
9 Ali Nur Mahmudi 40
10 Sefi Hanasda 37
11 Naufa Hasnaul Marifah 56
12 Endang Lestari 66
13 Eka Ngazizatul Azka 70
14 Dwi Ngesti Kholimah 70
15 Diah Ayu Rosyta 69
16 Annisa Seviyatul M 70
17 Solikah Nur S 70
18 Nio Nilasari N V 62
19 Sindita Febiola 62
10E Class
No. Name Class
1 Nadham Aulia Mumtaza 54
2 M. Akil Wasilah N 51
3 Salam Nur Nafiah 42
4 Zuyyina Ulfati 42
5 Vyna Kartika Dewi 64
6 Adham Bashori 47
7 Ahmad Ainur Rofik 51
8 Afifah Santi Pratiwi 40
9 Niken Setyoresmi W 63
10 Kurnia Dwi Lestari 54
11 M. Alvian M 51
12 Faidhatul Khasanah 70
13 Gebby Putri Nurhaida 46
14 Mutiah Kurnianingsih 73
15 Zidna Lythfia Hudaaka 47
16 Hay Dwi Arianti 66
17 Ibrotul Liulil Albab 33
18 M.Luthfan M 39
19 Ayu Rifqi Faradisa 57
10F Class
No. Name Score
1 Pipit Kumalasari 66
2 Santi pujirahayu 36
3 Eko Saputro 44
4 Fauzan Reza Ardiansyah 55
5 Shela Oktaviani 59
6 Zakiya Amaliya 52
7 Zulviana Vinda Dwi N E 35
8 Ahmad Sulham Habibi 44
9 Alfan Tedy Sanjaya 43
10 Salim Prabowo 66
11 Nodik Qodweal Husanain 68 12 Fikria Dina Dairotul U 62
13 Rosykhatun Nafiah 42
14 Hadi Mustakhim 39
15 M. Subhan Musyafa 31
16 M. Ansyori Rokhmatulloh 59
17 Suhaq Salma Ananda 48
18 Leony Ulsha Putri 53
10 G Class
No. Name Score
1 Mulidya Putri Fitriani 48
2 Sindy Nur Avitasari 48
3 M. Bayu Setiyawan 65
4 Adzka Iqbal El Rosyadi 43
5 Miftakhul Khoiri 63
6 Fatma Eka Susmita 47
7 M. Iqbal Musthofa 48
8 M.Ikhwanul Haqiqi 48
9 Iin Kusmia Dian R 58
10 Indriyani Dwi Astuti 68
11 Keviana Sari 54
12 Muhammad Rijhwan 48
13 M. Romadhoni Saputra 58
14 M.Muchsin Abdulloh 57
15 Laila Fitri Nur A 37
16 Susilaning Rahayu 47
17 Zulva Nimal Wafiroh 56
18 Izza Amalia Dewi 41
19 M.Fiqi Islamudin 45
For the table above, the researcher concluded that the parents involvement score is very varies, the lowest score is 31 and the highest score is 73.
b. Data of Students’ English achievement
The data of students’ English achievement were gotten from teacher documentation of English assesment in the last meeting before examination test. The data were used to measure students’
English level score. From the level, the researcher known students who get high, intermediate, and low English score . The categories that shown the analysis of students’ English achievement score were explained in the next detail.
Table 4.2 The Students’ English Achievement 10 A Class
No. Name Score
1 Boy Mustakhim Amrulloh 75
2 Dandi Indra Gunawan 85
3 Falih Sunnimadi 85
4 Haekal Sainatra Agaci 90
5 Imam Mustakhim 90
6 Muhammad Ibnu Rosyid 80
7 Hamdan Zulfa Ramadhan 75 8 Khasanul Hidayatulloh 77
9 Binti Masruroh 88
10 Akiya Qidam Hayya 90
11 Tariska Latifah Mufidah 87
12 Ruhil Amany 83
13 Zahroh Rohana 95
14 Sa’adatur Rohmah 90
15 Nurlaily Fauziyah 92
16 Roihatul Jannah 91
17 Mustardiyah 90
18 Ani Sulistyowati 85
19 Ikhda Zahrotul L 70
10 B Class
No Name Score
1 Ikhsan Syaifudin 83
2 Ahmad Naufal 92
3 Adi Yusuf 87
4 M. Rifqi Bahrul U 85
5 Rijal Aminudin 77
6 Zainul Musthofa 85
7 Aswin Hidayatulloh 90
8 Khizam Amru Rosyada 95
9 Barzakhi Al Mahdi 87
10 Alfina Oktavia Khamidah 93
11 Zuhria Aini 95
12 Siti Khotimah 90
13 Novita Aliv La Firdaus 95
14 Fatimatuz Zahroh 90
15 Azka Tazkiyah Fitri Laili 95
16 Dina Muhamadatur R 95
17 Elma elviyanti 90
18 Wike Astuti 90
19 Riska Riskiani 95
10 C Class
No. Name Score
1 Ahmad fuad Fauzi 82
2 Zaenal Arifin 85 3 M. Dzulfikar Al Kautsar 83
4 Nasrul 85
5 Sayidah Dwi Rahmawati 90
6 Novinda Ellysta Sari 85
7 Anif Zubaidi 80
8 Isma Rahmawati 90
9 Hanik Setyani 80
10 Rofiatul Mahmudah 93
11 Uswatun Khasanah 90
12 Whan Nurdiana 85
13 Eka Kurnia Fadilah 95
14 Luluk Sri Setyani 90
15 M.Sabihul Malik 75
16 Malik Fahad 77
17 Septiana Eka Pratiwi 95
18 Qooniatul Khasanah 85
19 Novanda Eka Nurazizah 90 10 D Class
No. Name Score
1 Luthfi Ikhsanudin 85
2 M.Minhajul Khowin 85
3 Baharudin Ahmad Yusuf 80
4 Zufa Rully Alifah 90
5 Siti Handriati R 92
6 Siska Kartika Sari 90
7 Abdillah Muhammad Nur 80
8 Alfin Nurfaizin 85
9 Ali Nur Mahmudi 85
10 Sefi Hanasda 90
11 Naufa Hasnaul Marifah 95
12 Endang Lestari 95
13 Eka Ngazizatul Azka 90
14 Dwi Ngesti Kholimah 90
15 Diah Ayu Rosyta 95
16 Annisa Seviyatul M 95
17 Solikah Nur S 90
18 Nio Nilasari N V 95
19 Sindita Febiola 90
10 E Class
No. Name Class
1 Nadham Aulia Mumtaza 92
2 M. Akil Wasilah N 90
3 Salam Nur Nafiah 95
4 Zuyyina Ulfati 90
5 Vyna Kartika Dewi 95
6 Adham Bashori 97
7 Ahmad Ainur Rofik 95
8 Afifah Santi Pratiwi 95
9 Niken Setyoresmi W 97
10 Kurnia Dwi Lestari 95
11 M. Alvian M 90
12 Faidhatul Khasanah 95
13 Gebby Putri Nurhaida 97
14 Mutiah Kurnianingsih 95
15 Zidna Lythfia Hudaaka 93
16 Hay Dwi Arianti 95
17 Ibrotul Liulil Albab 90
18 M.Luthfan M 92
19 Ayu Rifqi Faradisa 93
10 F Class
No. Name Score
1 Pipit Kumalasari 95
2 Santi pujirahayu 97
3 Eko Saputro 80
4 Fauzan Reza Ardiansyah 85
5 Shela Oktaviani 95
6 Zakiya Amaliya 95
7 Zulviana Vinda Dwi N E 95
8 Ahmad Sulham Habibi 90
9 Alfan Tedy Sanjaya 90
10 Salim Prabowo 85
11 Nodik Qodweal Husanain 80 12 Fikria Dina Dairotul U 80
13 Rosykhatun Nafiah 95
14 Hadi Mustakhim 80
15 M. Subhan Musyafa 80
16 M. Ansyori Rokhmatulloh 80
17 Suhaq Salma Ananda 80
18 Leony Ulsha Putri 95
10 G Class
No. Name Score
1 Mulidya Putri Fitriani 85
2 Sindy Nur Avitasari 80
3 M. Bayu Setiyawan 70
4 Adzka Iqbal El Rosyadi 80
5 Miftakhul Khoiri 80
6 Fatma Eka Susmita 95
7 M. Iqbal Musthofa 75
8 M.Ikhwanul Haqiqi 85
9 Iin Kusmia Dian R 85
10 Indriyani Dwi Astuti 80
11 Keviana Sari 87
12 Muhammad Rijhwan 70
13 M. Romadhoni Saputra 80
14 M.Muchsin Abdulloh 75
15 Laila Fitri Nur A 80
16 Susilaning Rahayu 80
17 Zulva Nimal Wafiroh 85
18 Izza Amalia Dewi 80
19 M.Fiqi Islamudin 75
For the table above, the researcher concluded that the students English score is very varies, the lowest score is 70 and the highest score is 97.
C. Data Analysis
In this research, the researcher took 135 students as research samples. Those samples were the tenth grade students of MA AL- ISLAM Joresan in academic year 2016/2017.
a. Analysis Parents Involvement of the Tenth Grade Students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in Academic Year 2016/2017
The analysis was conducted to determine the parents involvement of the tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in
academic year 2016/2017. The parents involvement could be determined from the score of parents involvement which made into score interval. The steps were explain:
1. To determine MX 2. To determine SDx
3. To determine top up of parents involvement 4. To determine bottom of parents involvement 5. To make an analysis of parents involvement
Table 4.3 Analysis Data of parents involvement
X F Fx x=(X-Mx) x2 f.x2
73 1 73 21 441 441
70 7 490 18 324 2268
69 183 207 17 289 867
68 3 204 16 256 768
67 1 67 15 225 225
66 5 330 14 196 980
65 3 195 13 169 507
64 2 128 12 144 288
63 2 126 11 121 242
52 4 248 10 100 400
61 1 61 9 81 81
60 1 60 8 64 64
59 2 118 7 49 98
58 2 116 6 36 72
57 5 285 5 25 125
56 4 224 4 16 64
55 3 165 3 9 27
54 6 324 2 4 24
53 3 159 1 1 3
52 5 260 0 0 0
51 5 255 -1 1 5
50 2 100 -2 4 8
Mx = ∑ =
= 51,681 = 52
After determining MX , then the researcher determined SDX . It was conducted to know how much the standart of deviation of parents involvement score. The formula was explain:
SDx = √∑
= √
=
= 0,893 = 1
49 3 147 -3 9 27
48 11 528 -4 16 176
47 8 376 -5 25 200
46 4 184 -6 36 144
45 2 90 -7 49 98
44 5 220 -8 64 320
43 3 129 -9 81 243
42 4 168 -10 100 400
41 6 246 -11 121 726
40 3 120 -12 144 432
39 3 117 -13 169 507
37 4 148 -15 225 900
36 3 108 -16 256 768
35 2 70 -17 289 578
34 1 34 -18 324 324
33 2 66 -19 361 722
31 1 31 -21 441 441
∑ 6977 14563
After determining MX and SDX, then the researcher determines top up and bottom of parents involvement score. It is conducted to know the limitation of standart category from parents involvement score.
Top up of parents involvement score = Mx + 1.SDx
= 52 + 1.1
= 52 + 1
= 53
Bottom of parents involvement score = Mx - 1.SDx
= 52 - 1.1
= 52 - 1
= 51
The parents involvement of tenth grade students at MA AL- ISLAM Joresan can be determined by accumulating data above. The analysis can be seen clearly as the table below:
Table 4.4 The Analysis of parents involvement Interval F Category Percentage
53 – 73 58 High 42,96%
52 5 Fair 3,70%
31 – 51 72 Low 53,33%
From the calculation above, it was known that the parents involvement was very variaties. There were 42,96% or 58 parents included high category and score were between 53 - 73. Then 3,70%
or 5 parents were fair category then score was 52, and 53,33% or 72
parents included low category by in line the score were between 31- 51. So, the researcher concluded that the parents involvement of the tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in Academic Year 2016/2017 is low.
b. Analysis English Achievement of the Tenth Grade Students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in Academic Year 2016/2017
The analysis was conducted to determine the students English achievement of tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in academic year 2016/2017. The English achievement could be determined from its score which made into score interval.
The steps were explain:
1. To determine My 2. To determine SDy
3. To determine top up of the students English achievement 4. To determine bottom of the students English achievement 5. To make an analysis of studentsEnglish achievement
Table 4.5 Analysis Data of Students’ English achievement
Y F Fy y=(Y-My) y2 f.y2
97 4 388 9 81 324
95 29 2755 8 64 1856
93 4 372 6 36 144
92 5 460 5 25 125
91 1 91 4 16 16
90 28 2520 3 9 252
88 1 88 1 1 1
87 4 348 0 0 0
85 21 1785 -2 4 84
83 3 249 -4 16 48
82 1 82 -5 25 25
80 20 1600 -7 49 980
77 3 231 -10 100 300
75 7 525 -12 144 1008
70 4 280 -17 289 1156
∑ 11774 6319
My = ∑ =
= 87,214 = 87
After determining My , then the researcher determined SDy . It was conducted to know how much the standart of deviation of students English achievement. The formula was as follows:
SDy = √∑
= √
=
= 0,588 = 1
After determining My and SDy, then the researcher determines top up and bottom of English achievement score. It is conducted to know the limitation of standard category from English achievement score.
Top up of English achievement score = My + 1.SDy
= 87 + 1.1
= 52 + 1
= 88
Bottom of English achievement score = My - 1.SDy
= 87 - 1.1
= 87 - 1
= 86
The English achievement of tenth grade students at MA AL- ISLAM Joresan can be determined by accumulating data above. The analysis can be seen clearly as the table below.
Table 4.6 The Analysis of Students’ English achievement Interval F Category Percentage
88 – 97 72 High 53,33%
87 4 Fair 2,96%
70 – 86 59 Low 43,70 %
From the calculation above, it was known that the students’
English achievement were very varies. There were 53,33% or 72 students include high category and the score were between 88-97, and 2,96% or 4 students were fair category then score was 87, and 43,70
% or 59 students included low category by in line the score were between 70-86. So, the researcher concluded that the English achievement from the tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in Academic Year 1016/2017 is High.
c. The Correlation between Parents Involvement and Students English Achievement to the Tenth Grade Students at MA AL- ISLAM Joresan in Academic Year 2016/2017
This research is conducted to find out whether there is correlation between parents involvement and students English achievement or not. There are two variables, independent variable and dependent variable. Independent variable is parents involvement, while dependent variable is students’ English achievement.
To know the correlation between those variables, the researcher takes some steps. The steps were explain:
1. Preparing the correlation map, the upper side was X variable with the lowest interval in the left side.
Variable X has H=73 and L=31 K=1+3,322 x log 135
= 1 + 3,322 x 2,13033 = 8,075
R = H - L k =
= 73 – 31 = 42 = = 5,2 = 5
It means the lowest interval is 31–35 and the highest is 69- 73.
Variable Y has H=97 and L=70
R = H – L k =
= 97 – 70 = = 27 = 3,37 = 3
It means the lowest interval is 70-72 and the highest 95-97.
97-99 4+48 4 +5 +20 25 100 48
94-96 4+16 10+80 15+180 29 +4 +116 16 464 276
91-93 8+24 2+12 10 +3 +30 9 90 36
88-90 7-42 10-20 12 0 29 +2 +58 4 116 -62
85-87 12-12 10 0 2+2 1+4 25 +1 +25 1 25 -6
82-84 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
79-81 18+36 2+2 20 -1 -20 1 20 38
76-78 1+6 2+8 3 -2 -6 4 12 14
73-75 4+48 3+27 7 -3 -21 9 63 75
70-72 2+32 2+18 4 -4 -16 16 64 50
f(x) 6 13 20 28 22 14 12 19 1 135 +186 954 469
x' -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
fx' -24 -39 -40 -28 0 +14 +24 +57 +4 -32
x'2 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 16
f.x'2 96 117 80 28 0 14 48 171 16 570
fx'y' 80 9 44 -30 0 42 92 228 4 469 Cross Check
2. Determining Cx’ and Cy’
Cx’ = ∑ Cy’ = ∑
=
=
= -0,2370 = 1,3777
3. Determining SDx’ and SDy’
SDx’ = i √∑ ∑
= 1 √
= √ = 2,0411
SDy’ = i √∑ ∑
= 1 √
= √ = 2,2734
4. Computing rxy to the formula:
rxy =
∑
=
=
= 0,8190
2. Discussion and Intepretation
Hypothesis test was used to measure the correlation between parents involvement and students English achievement. According to the data analysis above, it can be identified that the coefficient correlation product moment between parents involvement and students English achievement was 0,8190. This data acquired from the correlation product moment group data. The hypothesis test can be viewed by determining the significant standart 5% and 1% in the product moment table (rt). Whether, rxy > rt meant that there is significant correlation between parents involvement and students English achievement. While, rxy < rt it meant that there was no correlation between parents involvement and students English achievement.
From the calculation above can be identified that rxy = 0,8190.
while rtable with degrees of freedom calculate by formula below.
df = N – nr = 135 – 2 = 133
From the formula above, it was known that df = 133. In the standart significant table 133 was none, so that the near was 125.82 Furthermore, standart significant of 125 in 5% rt was 0,174. It meant rxy >
rt. While, standart significant 125 in 1% rt is 0,228. It meant rxy > rt.83 Based on the proof above the researcher concluded that there was significant correlation between Parents involvement and students English achievement of tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in academic year 2016/2017. It meant that the hypothesis which promoted by the researcher was true. And corresponding with the Prindle theory in Xitao Fan and Michael Chen that parents involvement has positive effect on students’ academic achievement.84
82Retno Widyaningrum, Statistik: Edisi Revisi, 230
83Ibid, 121.
84Xitao Fan and Michael Chen, “Parental Involvement and Students’ academic Achievement : A Meta Analysis,”(Thesis, Mississippi University, Washington, 1999), 4.
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION
A.Conclusion
According to the analyzing data and calculating in previous chapter, it has been found that the coefficient correlation product moment (rxy) between parents involvement and students English achievement is 0,8190. This is greater than “r” value in the table (rt), which is 0,174 at 5% and 0,228 at 1%
significant level, with df = 133. The researcher concludes that, there is significant correlation between parents involvement and students English achievement of tenth grade students at MA AL-ISLAM Joresan in academic year 2016/2017
B.Suggestion
Based on the research result, some suggestion can be presented to : 1. For the Parents
The parents must give attention and involvement to improve students skill, especially to English lesson
2. For the Teacher
The teacher should increase their students’ competence, especially to motivate students to study English
3. For the Students
The students should study English every time, in order to get good score and increase their skill.
71
Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training Syarif Hidayatulloh University.
www.uinjkt.ac.id, Accessed on 26th August 2016.
Ahmed, Sawsan and Abdul Amir Alamin. Assessing Speaking Ability in Academic Context four Fourth Year Taif University Students. International Journal of English linguistics, (online), Vol 4, No.6, 2014.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v4n6p97, Accessed on 12th January 2017.
Bauch, Jerold P. 1994. “Categories of Parent Involvement”. The School Community Journal. (online), Vol. 4, No. 1.www.ccvq.org. Accessed on 12th November 2016.
Chaudhry, Abdul Qayyum. 2005. Parent’s Involvement in their Child Academic Achievement. Pakistan Vision, (online), Vol. 15, No. 2.
www.researchgate.net , Accessed on 12th January 2017.
Fan, Xitao and Michael Chen.1999. “Parental Involvement and Students’
academic Achievement: A Meta Analysis. A Thesis, Department of Psychology Mississippi University. www. Springer.com, Accessed on 16th February 2017
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/purposive+sampling, Acessed on 29 April 2017
http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=238, Acessed on 29 April 2017.
http://www.Idonline.org/article/Simple_Ways_to_Assess_the_Writing_Skills_of_
Students_with_learning_Disabilities, accessed on 27th January 2017.
http://www.Idonline.org/article/Simple_Ways_to_Assess_the_Writing_Skills_of_
Students_with_learning_Disabilities, accessed on 27th January 2017.
http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/3/cu6/html, accessed on 28 December 2016.
http://www.pmsbookshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?product_id=1279, accessed on 26th December 2016.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s187742811009554, accessed on 9 August 2017
Jafarov, Javid, 2015. Factors Affecting Parental Involvement in Education: The Analysis of Literature, Queen’s University of Belfast. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, (online), Page. 35-41 Vol. 18 No.4.
www.ijhssnet.com. Accessed on 12th November 2016.
Lemesse, Zenebe. 2015. “Factors that Affect Students’ Academic Achievement in Government Secondary Schools of Asella Town, Oromia National Regional State”. A Thesis, School of Education and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Educational Planning and Management, Postgraduate Program Directorate Haramaya University. www.bitstream.com, Accessed on 26th December 2016
Mutodi, Paul. 2014. The impact of Parental Involvement on Student performance : A Case Study of a South African Secondary School. Mediterranean Journal of Social Science, vol. 5, No. 8, www.researchgate.net. Accessed on 19th January 2017.
Rafiq, Hafiz Muhammad Wakaz, et al. 2013. Parental Involvement and Academic Achievement; A Study on Secondary School Students of Lahore, (Online), Page 209-223,Vol 3 No.8, (Special Issue-April 2013). International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. www.ijhssnet.com, accessed on 12th November 2016.
Suleman, Qaiser and Ishtiaq Hissain. 2014. Effect of Classroom Physical Environment on the Academic Achievement Scores of Secondary School Students in Kohat Division Pakistan, (online), Page 71-82, Vol. 4 No.1, International Journal of Learning and Development. www.Enotes.com, accessed on 12th January 2017.
Ahmadi, Abu and Widodo Supriyono. 2008. Psikologi Belajar. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik, Yogyakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Ary, Donald, et.al. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education Eighth Edition. USA : Wadswort.
Blaxter, Loraine et al. 2006. How to Research 3rd Ed. New York: Open University Press.
Denscombe, Martyn. 2003. The Good Research Guide (2nd Edition). Philadelpia:
Open University Press.
Haryono, Amirulhadi. 1998. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan. Bandung:
Pustaka Setia.
Hornby, A. S. 2005. Oxford Advanced learner’s Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kame’enui, E J and D. C Sommons. 2001. The Role Fluency in Reading Competence, Assessment and Instruction. France: Informa Company.
Nation and J. Newton. 2009. Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking.
London: Routledge.
Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching in Methodology a Text Book Teacher. UK: Prentice Hall.
Purwanto, Ngalim. 2009. Prinsip-Prinsip dan Teknik: Evaluasi Pengajaran. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Scott, Wendy A and Lisbeth H. Ytreberg. 2000. Teaching English to Children.
New York: Longman.
Sugiyono. 2007. Statistika untuk Penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sukmadinata, Nana Syaodih. 2005. La ndasan Psikologi Proses Pendidikan. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Topor, David R, et, al. 2010. Parents Involvement and Student Academic Performance: A Multiple Mediational Analysis. Arkansas: j Prev Intrev Community.
Widyaningrum, Retno. 2013. Statistik: Edisi Revisi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Felicha.
Wulansari, Andhita Dessy. 2012. Penelitian Pendidikan Suatu Pendekatan Praktik dengan Menggunakan SPSS. Ponorogo: STAIN PO PRESS.
Zolten, Kristin and Nicholas Long. 2006. Parent/Child Communication. USA:
Arkansas University.