CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
D. Technique of Collecting Data
The researcher gave a pre-test before doing the treatment at the first meeting in the class with a speaking test. The students take one of stikenote and describe what they got on stikenote.
2. Post-test
The researcher gave a post-test after doing treatment in speaking test. The students take one of the stikenote and describe what they got on stikenote.
E. Technique of Data Analysis
The method of data analysis in this research was a quantitative descriptive method. In this term of quantitative, the researcher used statistical procedures to calculate the numeral data. After the data has been collected, the next step in this research was to analyze the data. The result was tested by using SPSS to see whether the difference of students‟ results between pre-test and post- test is significant or not.
1. To determine the level of significance generated through the used of Snowball Games in learning, a hypothesis is formulated with the decision rules:
a. If α = 0, 05 greater than or equal sig value (α = 0, 05≥ sig) then HO
rejected Ha accepted.
b. If α = 0, 05 less than or equal to the sig value (α = 0, 05≤ sig) then HO
accepted. Ha rejected.
To test the research hypothesis, the data analysis technique was using the t-test (independent sample test), which is to test the average difference between the sample, the calculations used SPSS.
2. Scoring System
a. To find the students‟ improvement the formula as follow:
P = Where:
P = Percentage
X2 = Average score of Post-test X1 = Average score of Pre-test
(Gay, 2006 :336)
3. Classifying the score of the students‟ using the following:
Table 3.1
Rating Scale Structure
Accuracy Indicators Score
Utterances almost always correct 6 Structure Most utterances rendered correctly,
with some minor structural errors
5 Many correct utterances, but with
definite structural problems
4 Some utterances rendered correctly,
but major structural problems remain
3 Very few structurally correct 2 No utterances structurally correct 1
Omaggio, (1986:347) Table 3.2
Rating Scale Vocabulary
Classi fication Code Score Criterion
Vocabulary
4.1-5.0 Use of vocabulary and idiom virtually that is of native speaker 3.1-4.0 Sometimes use inappropriate terms
and must rephrase ideas, because of lexical inadequacies
2.1-3.0 Frequently use the wrong word, conversation somewhat lmited because of inadequate vocabulary.
1.1-2.0 Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite difficult
0-1 Speech is so halting and fragmentary as to make conversation virtually impossible.
(Harris (1975: 84) Table 3.3
Calculating students’ score Scale Score Category 4.1-5.0 100-85 Very good 3.1-4.0 84-75 Good 2.1-3.0 74-60 Fair 1.1-2.0 59-40 Poor
0-1 39-0 Very poor
(Nurgiyantoro(2010)
Table 3.4
Calculating students’ score
(Depdiknas as cited in wahdania,2016) Scale Score Category
5.1-6.0 90-100 exellent 4.1-5.0 80-89 Very good 3.1-4.0 70-79 Good 2.1-3.0 60-69 Fairly good 1.1-2.0 50-59 Poor 0-1 X<50 Very poor
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Findings
1. The Improvement of Accuracy Structure
In this part, the research findings of this study were taken from data using snowball games to improve students speaking skills at the second grade of SMPN 1 Balocci. This part, frequency and speaking skills of students‟
especially in accuracy structure in the pre-test and post-test can be seen in the table.
Table 4.1 Mean score of Accuracy Structure in pre and post-test
Criteria Pre-test Post-test
Accuracy Structure 43.53 73.86
Based on Table 4.1 improvement in accuracy structure before and after gave the treatment showed that, the students‟ score in pre-test (43,53) and post-test (73,86). It means that pre-test lower than post-test.
Figure 4.1 mean score of accuracy structure in pre-test and post-test Based on the research after calculating the data, it is found that the mean score of students pre-test was 43.53 and standard deviation 10.105 and post-test
43,53
73,86
0 50 100
pre-test post-test
pre and post-test accuracy structure
pre-test post-test
was 73.86 for the mean score and standard deviation 6.75. It means that the score of the post-test is higher than the pre-test (73.86>43.53).
Table 4.2 Students improvement in accuracy structure
Crit eria
Mean Pre- test
Mean Post-
test Improving
Accuracy Structure 43.53 73.86 69.68%
Based on the table 4.2 show that the mean score of pre-test was 43,53 and post-test 73.86. The improvement of pre-test and post-test was 69.68%, it means that using snowbal games can improve students‟ accuracy structure.
The students‟ score was classified into some criteria and percentage as follow:
Table 4.3 the students‟ score of pre-test and post-test in accuracy structure
No. Classification Score
Test Pre-
test Percentage% Post-
test Percentage%
1. Excellent 90-100 - - - -
2. Very Good 80-89 - - 4 27%
3. Good 70-79 - - 9 60%
4. Fairly Good 60-69 1 6% 2 13%
5. Poor 50-59 4 27% - -
6. Very Poor X<50 10 67% - -
Total 15 100% 15 100%
Based on Table 4.3 the students‟ score pre-test in Accuracy Structure before gave the treatment showed that the score and rate percentage fairly good classification 1(6%), poor classification 4(27%), very poor classification 10(67%), none got excellent and very good classification.
Based on Table 4.3 the students‟ score post-test score in Accuracy Structure after given the treatment showed that, the score and percentage very good classification 4(27%), good classification 9(60%), fairly good classification 2(13%), none of the poor and very poor classification, and none got excellent classification.
2. The Improvement of Accuracy Vocabulary
In this part, the frequency and the percentage of the students‟ speaking skills especally Accuracy Vocabulary can be seen in the table.
Table 4.4 Mean score of Accuracy Structure in pre and post-test
Criteria Pre-test Post-test
Accuracy Vocabulary 44.93 73.86
Based on the table 4.4 before and after gave the treatment using snowball games show that the students‟ score in pre-test (44,93) and in post-test (73,86).
It means that post-test higher than pre-test.
Figure 4.2 mean score of accuracy vocabulary in pre-test and post-test Based on the research after calculating the data, it is found that the mean score of students pre-test was 44.93 and standard deviation 10.133 and post-test was 73.86 for the mean score and standard deviation 9.17. It means that the mean score of the post-test is higher than the pre-test (73.86>44.93).
44,93
73,86
0 20 40 60 80
pre-test post-test
pre and post-test accuracy vocabulary
pre-test post-test
Table 4.5 students‟ improvement in accuracy vocabulary
Criteria
Mean Pre- test
Mean Post-
test Improving
Accuracy Vocabulary 44.93 73.86 64.39%
Based on the table above the mean score of pre-test was 44,93 and pos-test 73,86. The improvement of pre-test and post-test after gave the treaatment was 64.39%. So, using snowball games can improve students‟ accuracy vocabulary.
The students‟ score was classified into some criteria and percentage as follow.
Table 4.6 the students‟ score of pre-test and post-test in accuracy vocabulary
No. Classification Score
Test Pre-
test Percentage% Post-
test Percentage%
1. Very Good 100-85 - - 3 20%
2. Good 84-75 - - 7 47%
3. Fair 74-60 1 7% 5 33%
4. Poor 59-40 12 80% - -
5. Very Poor 39-0 2 13% - -
Total 15 100% 15 100%
Based on Table 4.6 students‟ pre-test in accuracy vocabulary before given treatment or pre-test showed that 1(7%) fair category, 12(80%) students were in the poor category, 2(13%) students were in very poor category and none of the good and very good category.
Based on Table 4.6 above, students‟ score post-test in accuracy vocabulary after given the treatment showed that 5(33%) fair category, 7(47%) good category, 3(20%) very good category and none got poor and very poor.
3. Significant Testing (t-test)
Inferential static was used to test the hypotheses. For the pendant sample test, the research used utilized a paired t-test (testing of significance). It was designed to determine the significance of the difference between the pre-test and the post-test result of the students‟ mean scores in the experimental.
Paired Samples Test Paired Differences
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean t df
Sig. (2- tailed) Pair 1 pretest structure -
posttest structure
-30.33333 4.86484 1.25610 -24.149 14 .000
Pair 2 pretest vocabulary - posttest vocabulary
-28.93333 6.13499 1.58405 -18.265 14 .000
Table 4.7 t-test calculation/value
Based on the data, the result showed that t-value 24.149 with 14 degrees of freedom and p-value was 0.00. Based on degree of freedom we can know that t-table 1.761, according to the hypothesis testing criteria, H0 is accepted if the t-value>t-table and p-value<α(0.05). Based on the data above Ha was accepted, because t-value (24.149)>t-table(1.761) and p-value (0.00<α(0.05)).
Based on the data using snowball games can improve students‟ speaking skill in term of accuracy structure.
Based on the data after calculating, it is found that the result showed that t- test value 18.265 with 14 degrees of freedom and p-value was 0.00. Based on the degree of freedom we can know that the t-table 1.761, according to the hypothesis testing criteria, H0 is accepted if the t-value<t-table and p- value<α(0.05). based on the data Ha was accepted, because t-value (18.265)>t- table(1.761) and p-value (0.00)<α(0.05). Based on the date using snowball games can improve speaking skill in terms of accuracy vocabulary.
B. Discussion
This section which explains a discussion of the research findings the students‟ speaking skill especially accuracy structure and accuracy vocabulary aspect. The research design for this study is based on pre-experimental research. The outcome of the students‟ score is derived using the t-test by SPSS, all the data acquired from the research instrument.
1. The Improvement of Accuracy Structure
The research is carried out in three stages. The first is to give the students a pre-test before treatment by using snowball games to know the students speaking scores. The second is giving the treatment and using snowball games to the students. And the third was given a post-test to the students after the treatment and using snowball games to know the students‟ speaking score.
Based on findings, we can know that the mean score pre-test of the students is 43.53 becomes 73.86 in the post-test in accuracy structure out of 15 students.
And t-value>t-table (24.149>1.761), the research found that p-value (0.00) at the level significance (0.05) so (0.00<0.05). It shows that there is different speaking score before and after being taught by using snowball games.
The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected based on the hypothesis testing. Teaching speaking by using snowball games can improve students‟ speaking skill. By using snowball games, the students feel enjoy in learning and interested in speaking up when they use snowball games. According to (Agus, 2009) describs the technique of snowball
throwing games is some of active learning method for the direct attention of learners to the material presented.
During the process of teaching by using snowball games, students began to be active, cooperative with their friends, and enjoy while studying, this fact convinced the researcher that the application of snowball games could improve students‟ speaking skill. As seen from learning outcomes, students‟ scores increased after using the snowball games. The researcher also gave appreciation to encourage students to participate actively without feeling guilty.
According to Komalasari (2010:67) is a learning strategy that combines an imaginative game with a group to examine students‟ potential leadership in a group and their creativity in proposing and answering the question. Students will be able to work cooperatively with their peers, and making learning more interesting that they are not bored while learning English.
Following the computation of the result, it is concluded that the students get good achievement in speaking skill after being taught by using snowball games. There was a difference significant between pre-test and post-test in this research after treatment. So using snowball games can improve students‟
speaking skill at the second grade SMPN 1 Balocci. Farrel and Jacobs (2010) describe that snowball throwing is a useful cooperative learning method. It can be motivating the students to have good capability in speaking participation in the classroom, because this game contains a rich communication where the students must be active.
2. The Improvement of Accuracy Vocabulary
Based on the findings above, the comparison of students‟ progress can be proven by comparing pre-test and post-test. We can know that the mean score of students is 44.93 become 73.86 in the post-test in accuracy vocabulary out of 15 students, After treatment, we can see that the score has improved, the research found that p-value (0.00) at the level significance (0.05) so (0.00<0.05). It showed that there was different speaking score before and after being taught by using snowball games.Enhance student‟s motivation by using games in learning process will make they are learning better because they have some feeling that they has making improvement and games can make students had fun feeling, so it can omit their fear of learning English. (Jack Richard, 2006)
From the result of the study, before doing the treatment, it can be seen that the pre-test is lower than the post-test. It is because they lack the motivation to study, lack of confidence and the use of media in the classroom makes the students less motivated to learn, especially in terms of accuracy vocabulary. According to Nuryati, (2015:2) Snowball Throwing is a technique that requires active students in teaching and learning activities. Snowball Throwing technique as a way in teaching-learning speaking in the form question and answers through play and throw snowball in a group to another group or in the group individually. After doing the treatment, student learning outcomes increase, we can see from the post-test score. Chastain in Castillo (2007:78) declares that speaking is a productive skill which involves many
components. It is more than producing the right sounds, choosing the right words or getting constructions of grammatically correct.
Based on the data, the hypothesis testing null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. We can know that t-value (18.265)>t-table (1.761) and p-value (0.00)<(0.05). Thus, the score of the students‟ after doing snowball games were increasing. Suprijono (2009:128) states that snowball throwing games is one of the active learning methods for direct attention of learners to the material presented.
By comparing the result of pre-test and post-test in accuracy vocabulary, the researcher concluded that applying snowball games can improve students‟ speaking skill, students are also active,fun and enjoy in the classroom, and students were also cooperative with their friends. So, there was a different significance before and after applying snowball games.
3. Significant Testing (t-test)
From finding above, the researcehr could conclude the statistical calculation uing SPSS, the significant value of the research is 0.00 and significant level is 0.05. So, p-value (0.00<0.05) significant level, it means teaching speaking by using snowball games gives significant effect on the students‟ speaking abilty.
Based on the data after calculating using SPSS, t-test then compared with t- table. The research found that the t-test is higher than the t-table, in accuracy structure t-test is (24.149)>(1.761) t-tabel. And significant value is 0.00 and significan level is 0.05, so p-value (0.00<0.05) significant level. It means that (H0) null hypothesis is rejected and (Ha) alternative hypothesis is accepted
because there is significant. By teaching snowball games, students felt enjoyble in speaking, according (Sanchez, 2010) Snowball throwing technique allowed the students to partcipate in brainstorming the idea and giving feedback each other confidently.
In accuracy vocabulary after calculating the data using SPSS, we can show that t-test is higer then t-table. Where t-test is (18.265) and t-table is (1.761), so t-test (18.265) > (1.761) t-table. And the significant value is 0.00 and significant level is 0.05, so p-value (0.00<0.05) significant level. It means that there is significant and improvement after gave treatment using snowball games.
From the discussion above, can be conclude that using snowball games is one of the active learning it can improve students‟ speaking skill especially in accuracy structure and accuracy vocabulary. And from discussion above, there is significant improvement.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion
This study deals with using snowball games on students‟ speaking skill.
Based on the research finding, the researcher concludes that snowball games can improve students speaking skill especially in accuracy structure and accuracy vocabulary, there were:
1. The mean score of accuracy structure in the pre-test was 43.53, meanwhile, the mean score of the post-test after giving the treatment was 73.86.
Therefore Ha was accepted, because t-value>t-table and p- value(0.00)<α(0.05).
2. The mean score of accuracy vocabulary in the pre-test before giving the treatment was 44.93, meanwhile, the mean score of the post-test after giving the treatment was 73.86. Therefore, H1 was accepted, because t-value>t- table and p-value(0.00)<α(0.05).
3. From accuracy structure and accuracy vocabulary there is a significant improvement. We can see from both of them, t-value>t-table and (0.00<0.05).
B. Suggestion
Concering conclusion above, the researcher point out some suggestion there are :
1. For the English teacher to find the appropriate method and effective media for teaching speaking. Snowball games can be used by the teacher for
developing students‟ speaking or as an alternative teacher used other methods.
2. For students, it is suggested to improve their ability in English class by applying Snowball Games.
41 pustaka belajar, Yogyakarta.
Brown, H. D. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Pearson Education, Inc, 2004.
DarusminD.K, Delfi S and Masyhur (2012). Using Snowball Throwing Model to Increase Speaking Ability of the Second Year Students of SMP N 21 Pekanbaru. Academic Journal.
Dulay, Heidi, et.al. 1982. Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ersoz, A. 2000.Six games for the EFL/ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Farrell, T. S. C., and Jacobs, M. G. (2010). Essentials for Successful English
Language Teaching. Great Britain: Continuum.
Gani, S. A., Yusuf, Y. Q., & Erwina, R. (2017). The Effectiveness of Snowball Throwing Technique in Teaching Reading Comprehension. Proceedings of the 1st National Conference on Teachers’ Professional, (October).
Gay, L.R. (1981) Education Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. U.S.A: Charles E. Merill publishing co.
Gay, L.R. (2006). Educational Research CompotenciesFor Analysis and Applications.Florida: Late of Florida International University.
Hamdayama, J. 2014. Model dan Metode Pembelajaran Kreatif dan Berkarakter.
(Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia).
Harris. P. David, 1986. Testing English as a Second Language. New York:
Georgetown University.
Harris, David P. 1974. Testing English as a Second Language. New Delhi: Tata Mc Graw-Hill Publishing.
Harris, R. 1997. ‘Romantic Bilingualism: time for change? „In Leung, C. & Cable, C. (Eds.) English as an Additional Language: Changing Persperctives.
Watford: NALDIC. Longman.
Jaques, D., Salmon, G. (2006). Learning in group: A handbook for face-to-face and online environment (4th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
jia, B. &. (2002). writing to communicate paragraps and essay. new york:
longman.
Komalasari, Kokom. 2010. Pembelajaran Kontekstual Konsep dan Aplikasi.
Bandung: Refika Aditama.
Lynne Cameron. 2001. Teaching Language to Young Learners. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Manser, Martin. H. 2013. Oxford Learner's Pocket Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McCarthy Michael, O‟Keeffe Anne, Walsh Steve.2010 Vocabulary Matrix.
Nurgiyantoro, B. (2010). Penilaian Pembelajaran Bahasa. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
Nuryati, D., Antoni, R., & Erippudin. (2015). No TiImproving Students’ Reading Comprehension in Recount Text by Using Snowball Throwing at Grade Viii Smpn 4 Pagaran Tapah Darussalam Provinsi Riautle.
Onesty R, Fitrawati (2013). Using Word by Word Games in Teaching Grammar for Junior High School Students. 1 (2).
Omaggio, A. (1986). Teaching Language in Context: Proficiency-Oriented Instruction.
Richards J.C and Reppen R (2014). Towards a Pedagogy of Grammar Instruction.
RELC Journal, 45 (1) 5-25.
Richards, Jack C. 2009. Teaching Listening and Speaking: From theory to Practice (RELC Portfolio Series). Singapore: Regional Language Center available -speaking-from-theory-to-practice.pdf
Sanches, P. (2010). Interactive classroom strategies &stuctures for success. New York, NY: Nicolas Sanchez.
Scrivener, J. 2005. Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English Language Teachers Second Edition. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
SuharsimiArikunto. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta:
PT Rineka Cipta.
Tarigan, H.G. 1981. Berbicara sebagai suatu ketrampilan berbahasa. Bandung:
Angkasa.
Ur, derstanding, Learning, Teaching. United Kingdom: CengageHeinle Learning.
Wallace Micheal J. 1989. Teaching Vocabulary. New York. Oxford University.
Web, S. and Nation, P. 2017. How Vocabulary is learned, (United Kingdom:
OxfordUniversity Press), p. 2.