Technique of Data Analysis - RESEARCH METHOD

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

F. Technique of Data Analysis

In completing the data, the next step was data analysis. Method of analyzing data was a method to process the findings data into research. Which the researcher focused on analysis the significant difference of students’

vocabulary in writing narrative text before used animation video and after used it in learning process. In this study, the researcher used statistical analysis. In measuring the data, the researcher used Statistical Product and Service Solution (SPSS 22) as a statistic program application which had high ability in statistic calculation. Used SPSS 22 application gave information more accurate so the missing data could avoid.

The data was collected and analyze as follows:

1. Scoring the result of the students’ vocabulary

Table 3.2.Classifying Number of Vocabulary of the students

Number of Vocabulary Classifications

211 - 250 Excellent

176 - 210 Very Good

141 -175 Good

106 - 140 Fairly Good

71 – 105 Fair

36 – 70 Poor

00 – 35 Very Poor

Adopted from Depikbud, 2010

2. Calculating the percentage of the students’ vocabulary with the following formula:

P = X

₂

−X

₁

X

₁

× 100%

P = Percentage

X2 = Post-test mean score X1 = Pre-test mean score

(Mason,2006:19)

4. After that, the researcher calculates the mean score of the students’ by using SPSS 22.

5. Calculates the standard deviation of students' pre-test and post-test by using SPSS 22.

This chapter consists of findings and discussion. Its presents the result or findings of the research and provides an analysis of findings.

A. Findings

Findings present the data related the students’ number of vocabularies in writing narrative text and implementation of animation video.

1. Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Texts in Pre-Test

Students’ vocabularies are students’ capabilities in using words in their narrative text in pre-test.

a. Mean of The Number of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Pre-Test

Mean of the number of students’ vocabularies refers to the students’ averages vocabularies that they had in their narrative texts in pre-test. The data can be seen in able 4.1

Table 4.1 Mean of the Number of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Pre-Test

Category

Mean of The Number of Students’

Vocabularies

Number of Vocabulary 78

Table 4.1 shows that the students’ mean of the number of students’ vocabularies in pre-test are 78.

b. Frequency and Percentage of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Pre-Test

Frequency described number of vocabularies use by the students in different range in pre-test and their percentage in each category.

The data description can be seen in Table 4.2

Table 4.2 Frequency and Percentage of the Students’

Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Pre-Test

No. Category Number of Vocabulary

Pre-test F P (%)

1. Excellent 211-250 0 0

2. Very Good 176-210 1 4

3. Good 141-175 1 4

4. Fairly Good 106-140 0 0

5. Fair 71-105 7 28

6. Poor 36-70 16 64

7. Very Poor 0-35 0 0

Total 25 100

Table 4.2 shows the students’ score frequency and percentage in pre-test, it can be seen that there are 16 (64%) students got poor, 7 (28%) students got fair, 1 (4%) student got good, and 1 (4%) student got very good.

2. Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Texts in Post-Test

Students’ vocabularies are students’ capabilities to write various words in their narrative text in post-test.

a. Mean of the Number of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Post-Test

Mean of the number of students’ vocabularies refers to the students’ averages vocabularies that they had in their narrative texts in post-test. The data can be seen in table 4.3

Table 4.3 Mean of the Number of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Post-Test

Category

Mean of the Number of

Students’

Vocabularies

Number of Vocabulary 92

Table 4.3 shows that the students’ mean of the number of students’ vocabularies in pre-test are 92.

b. Frequency and Percentage of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Post-Test

Frequency described number of vocabularies use by the students in different range in post-test and their percentage in each category.

The data description can be seen in Table 4.4

Table 4.4 Frequency and Percentage of the Students’

Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Post-Test

No. Category Score

Post test

F P

(%)

1. Excellent 211-250 0 0

2. Very Good 176-210 2 8

3. Good 141-175 0 0

4. Fairly Good 106-140 0 0

5. Fair 71-105 23 92

6. Poor 36-70 0 0

7. Very Poor 0-35 0 0

Total 25 100

Table 4.4 shows the students’ score frequency and percentage in post-test, it can be seen that there are 23 (92%) students got fair and 2 (8%) students got very good.

3. Hypothesis Testing

The hypothesis was tested by using inferential analysis. In this case, the researcher used t-test (test of significance) for paired sample T- test, that was a test to know the significant difference between the result of students’ mean scores in pretest and post-test the researcher used t-test analysis on the level of significant (α) = 0.05 with the degree of freedom (df) = N – 1, where N = Number of subject (25 students), the hypotheses are as follows.

H1 is accepted if sig <α = 0.05 H0 is accepted if sig >α = 0.05

Pair sample T-test of students’ vocabularies show the significant difference of students’ vocabulary scores in pre-test and post-test by using animation video. The result of the data calculation was calculated using SPSS. The result of students’ number of vocabularies in their narrative text is presented as follows.

Table 4.5 The Significance of Students’ Vocabularies in Their Narrative Text in Pre-Test and Post-Test

Paired Samples Test Paired Differences

t df

Sig. (2- tailed) Mean

Std.

Dev iatio n

Std.

Erro r Mea

95%

Confidence Interval of the

Difference Lowe

r Upper Pair

PreTest - Post- Test

- 14.00 000

5.45 436

1.09 087

- 16.25 145

- 11.74 855

- 12.8 34

24 .000

From the table 4.5, it conclude that the students’ vocabularies in their narrative text between pre-test and post-test are significantly different, it can be seen the Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 which is smaller than α = 0.05. The alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted whereas null hypothesis (H0) is rejected.

B. Discussions

This section presented the analysis of findings which showed the significant difference of students’ vocabularies in pretest and post-test. For examples, Nurul Aulia in pre-test she write 155 words in her narrative text and she write 184 words in her narrative text in post-test.

The number of students’ vocabulary mean score before being treated by using animation video was shown through pre-test score that was 78. Then after giving treatment, the students’ vocabulary mean score was 92. This

score showed that the students’ vocabularies were improved after being treated using animation video.

Using SPSS 22, the Sig (2-tailed) was 0.00 at the level of sig < α (0.05).

Based on this result, the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. It can be conclude that there is significant different between pre-test and post-test. The significant indicator defines that the use of animation video in improving students’ number of vocabulary is effective.

The result found was in line with the research done by Aridha (2018) on her research said the use of animation video is able to improve students’

number of vocabulary. The implementation of animation video was helpful to impove the students’ number of vocabulary because with the animation video the students can see and listen new vocabularies and the number of vocabulary in their narrative text was improved.

Based on the statement above, the resercher believe that using animation video can help students to improve number of vocabulary in their narrative text because they can see and listen new vocabularies.

33 findings and the second part is suggestion.

A. Conclusion

Based on the findings and discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher concludes that the use of animation video can improve students’

number of vocabularies in their narrative text. The students’ mean score before being the treated using animation video in improving vocabulary in writing narrative text was 78. After giving a treatment, the students’ mean score was 92. After the students’ score analyzed using SPSS 22, both pre-test and post-test were significantly different. It was proved by the Sig (2-tailed) (0.000) which is lower than α = 0.05. Thus, it can be meant that there is a significant difference of using animation video in improving students’

number of vocabulary in writing narrative text at the tenth grade of MA Assalam Timbuseng Takalar.

B. Suggestion

The researcher presents some suggestions. It is suggested to the English teachers at the tenth grade of MA Assalam Timbuseng to use animation video as an alternative way that can be used as a media in teaching the materials expecially in improving vocabularies in writing narrative text. It is suggested the next researcher who has similar research with this research to conduct a

new research with a different framework and contexts that could enrich students’ vocabularies in writing narrative text.

Aisyarani. 2014. The Vocabulary Mastery of The Eleventh Grade Students of MA Nahdlatul Muslimin in The Academic Year 2013/2014 Taught By Using Animation Video. Kudus: Skripsi.

AlQahtani, Mofareh. 2015. The Importance of Vocabulary InLanguage Learning and How To Be Taught. International Journal of Teaching and Education, 3 (3), pp. 21-34.

Anderson. 2003. Text Type in English. Melbourne: Macmillan Edcation Austalia.

Aridha, A.Y. 2018. The Use of Animation Video in Improving Vocabulary of TheSecond Grade Student of SMP Negeri 6 Watampone. TEFLIN International Conference, 65(1): 41-45. Makassar: Universitas Negeri

Makassar. (Retrived from

https://ojs.unm.ac.id/teflin65/article/view/6247/pdf_2).

Arikunto. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: PT.

Rineka Cipta.

Artanti, E.F. 2015. Improving Students’ Vocabulary Mastery Using Animation Video.Thesis. Surakarta: Universitas Slamet Riyadi. (Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/EightOne/Downloads/213-642-1-PB%20(3).pdf).

Boardman. 2002. Writing to Communicate. Nee York: Pearson Education.

Brown, H. Douglas. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices.

White Plains, New York: Pearson Eduaction.

Bushel. 2011. Writing A Narrative Paragraph. (Retrieved from http://www.berniejones.com/lessonplans/36writingNarativeParagraph.htm.

Cameron. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. New York:

CambridgeUniversity Press.

Derewianka, B.ND. Exploring How Text Work. Australia: Primary English Teaching Assosication.

Devi, I. 2012. Animation Video to Improve Students' Vocabulary Mastery.

JurnalPendidikan Bahasa Inggris, 1 (1): 1-7. (Retrieved from https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/60691-EN-animation-video- to-improve-students-voca.pdf).

Gay, L.R. 1983. Educational Research competencies for Analysis & Application.

2^nd Edition. Ohio: A Bell & Howell Company.

Gorski, Kelly. 2002. The Lunacy of TheFictional Narrative. (Retrieved from http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Lunacyof-the-Fictional-

Narrative&id=299267).

Gusparia et.al. 2014. Improving Students Writing Skill of Narrative Text By Using Animation Video At Garde XI Science 2Program of SMA N 1 Teluk Kuantan. Journal English Language Teaching (ELT), 2(2).

Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York:

Associated Companies throughout the World.

Harmer. 2004. How To Teach Writing. Longman: Pearson Education Limited: 31.

(Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/33185006/How_to_teach_Writing_by_jeremy_

harmer)

Hewings. 2004. Pronunciation Practice Activities. Cambridge: Cambride University Press.

Hornby. 1974. Oxford Leaner’s Dictionary of Current English. Oxford University Press.

Hudak. 2008. Narrative Paragraph. USA: Weigel Publisher Inc.

Kamil and Heibert. 2005. Improving Vocabulary Learning in Foreign Language Learning Through Reciprocal Teaching Strategy. Internaational Journal of Learning & Development, 2(6). (Retrieved from www.macrothink.org.ijld) Kemendikbud.(2014). BukuPanduanUntukPenilaianSekolahMenengahAtas.

Jakarta: KementrianPendidikandanKebudayaan RI.

Langan, John. 2001. English Skill. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Melly. 2006. All kinds of Writing (Writing description or Deskriptive Writing).

USA. Blackwell Publishing.

Meyers, Alan. 2005. Gateways to Academic Writing: Effectiveness Sentences, Paragraphs, and Essays. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Nation. 2000. Designing A Vocabulary Size Test for The Second Semester Students of Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.Skripsi Online. Yogyakarta.

Nation, I. S. P. 2001.Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. 2003. Practical English language teaching.First Edition. New York:

Mc graw hill.

Peha, S. 2010. Writing Teacher’s Strategy Guide.(Retrieved from https://www.ttms.org/PDFs/01%20Writing%20Strategy%20Guide%20v00 1%20(Full).pdf)

Richards. 2002. Literacy and Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.

Richards, J.C,&Renandya, W.A..2002. Methodology in Language Teaching. New York : Cambridge University Press.

Roza. 2011. An Analysis on the Ability of the Fourth Year English Department Students of Bung Hatta University in Writing Chronological Order Essay.

Unpubslished Thesis.Padang: Universitas Bung Hatta.

Sanjaya, et.al. 2014. The Use of Animation Film in Improving Students’ Narrative Writing Ability. UNILA Journal of English Teaching. 3(1).

Sugiyono. 2018. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan (Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, R & D). Bandung: CV. Alfabeta.

Taylor, Richard. 1996. The Encyclopedia of Animation Techniques. Philadelphia:

Running Press. (Retrieved from

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/Encyclopedia-Animation-Techniques-Taylor- Richard-Running/1372651758/bd).

Wahyuni, S. 2016. The Effect of Animated Film on Students’ Ability to Write Narrative Text at Class X MIA 5 of SMAN 9 Kendari.Journal of Teaching of English, 1 (2). (Retrieved from oj.uho.a.c.i d).

P P E N D I C

E

S

APPENDIX I

Writing Pre-test

Write down narrative text based on the pictures below!

APPENDIX II

Writing Post-test

Rewrite content of the animation video that has been watch!

APPENDIX III

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN (RPP)

Sekolah : MA Assalam Timbuseng Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas / Semester : X

Materi pokok : Narrative Text Sub Materi : Writing

Alokasi Waktu : 4x40 menit (2 Meetings)

A. KOMPETENSI INTI (KI)

KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.

KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggung jawab, peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam pergaulan dunia.

KI3: Memahami, menerapkan, menganalisis pengetahuan faktual, konseptual, prosedural berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni, budaya, dan humaniora dengan wawasan kemanusiaan, kebangsaan, kenegaraan, dan peradaban terkait penyebab fenomena dan kejadian, serta menerapkan pengetahuan prosedural pada bidang kajian yang spesifik sesuai dengan bakat dan minatnya untuk memecahkan masalah.

KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.

B. KOMPETENSI DASAR DAN INDIKATOR

Kompetensi Dasar Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi 3.9 Menganalisis fungsi sosial,

struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan pada teks naratif sederhana berbentuk legenda rakyat, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.

3.9.1 Mengidentifikasi struktur teks naratif berbentuk legenda rakyat, sesuai dengan konteks

penggunaannya.

3.9.2 Mengidentifikasi unsur kebahasaan dalam teks naratif berbentuk legenda rakyat, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.

4.15 Menangkap makna teks naratif lisan dan tulis berbentuk legenda, sederhana.

4.15.1 Mengungkapkan makna teks naratif lisan dan tulis, berbentuk legenda rakyat pendek dan sederhana dengan menggunakan kosa kata yangtelah diajarkan dengan jumlah yang lebih banyak dan lebih luas

sesuai dengan konteks

penggunaannya

C. TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN

Setelah megikuti serangakaian kegiatan pembelajaran, peseta didik dapat:

1. Mengidentifikasi struktur teks dari teks narrative sederhana berbentuk cerita rakyat.

2. Mengidnetifikasi unsur kebahasaan dalam teks naratif berbentuk legenda rakyat

3. Merespon makna teks naratif lisan dan tulis, berbentuk legenda rakyat pendek dan sederhana dengan menggunakan jumlah kata yang lebih banyak dan lebih luas sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.

D. MATERI PEMBELAJARAN 1. Pengertian Narrative Text

Narrative Text adalah suatu jenis teks yang berupa cerita khayalan, kisah nyata yang direkayasa, atau dongeng. Narrative text menceritakan suatu cerita yang memiliki rangkaian peristiwa kronologis yang saling terhubung.

2. Tujuan Narrative Text

a. Untuk menghibur pembaca

b. Untuk mengajar dan memberi informasi c. Menarik minat pembaca

3. Struktur Narrative Text a. Orientation/Orientasi

Orientasi adalah pengnalan dalam sebuah cerita (dalam orientasi/orientation itu menjawab pertanyaan: siapa, kapan, apa, dan dimana).

b. Complication/Komplikasi

Complication menceritakan awal masalah yang menyebabkan

puncak masalah atau yang biasa disebut dengan klimaks. Bagian ini biasanya melibatkan karakter utama dari cerita tersebut.

c. Resolution/Resolusi

Bagian ini adalah akhir dari cerita atau berupa solusi dari masalah yang terjadi. Masalah dapat diselesaikan dapat menjadi lebih baik atau malah lebih buruk yang nantinya akan membuat cerita berakhir dengan bahagia atau sebaliknya.

d. Re-orientation/Re-orientasi

Bagian adalah penutup dari suatu cerita yang bersifat opsional. Re- orientation bisa berisi tentang pelajaran moral, saran atau pengajarandari penulis.

4. Tata Bahasa Narrative Text

a. Menggunakan pola kalimat simple past

b. Diawali dengan kata keterangan waktu (adverb of time). Misalnya:

once upon a time.., long time ago.

c. Menggunakan action verb dalam bentuk past tense. Contoh: climed, brought, ate.

d. Mengggunakan kata sifat yang membentuk noun phrase

e. Menggunakan time connectives atau conjunction untuk mengurutkan kejadian-kejadian

f. Menggunakan adver atau adverbial phrase untuk menunjukkan lokasi kejadian atau peristiwa. Misalanya: I the mountain and ever after.

Topik : Snow White and Seven Dwarfs 1^stmeeting

Noun Verb Adjective Adverb

Trusty Grew Delicate Then

Thump Asked Wicked Now

Servant Shocked Tiny Unexpectedly

Castle Screamed Furious Away

Majesty Disguised Greedy Quickly

2^ndmeeting

Noun Verb Adjective Adverb

Despite Plotting Leaved Evilly

Reward Rid Terrible Loudly

Deed Fell Strange Magically

Tiredness Dashed Reluctant Back

Cottage Chuckling Darker When

E. METODE PEMBELAJARAN/TEKNIK Picture and picture

F. MEDIA, ALAT, DAN SUMBER PEMBELAJARAN 1. Media : Videos

2. Alat : Laptop, LCD

3. Sumber pembelajaran :

 Kamus

 Buku yang relevan

 Video yang relevan.

G. LANGKAH-LANGKAH KEGIATAN PEMBELAJARAN

Uraian kegiatan Alokasi

waktu

Kegiatan awal 10 menit

 Guru mengawali proses pembelajaran dengan salam, berdoa, dan mengabsen.

 Confirming readiness (mengkonfirmasi kesiapan siswa)

 Apersepsi: guru member stimulus kepada siswa dengan bertanya jawab

 Motivasi: menjelaskan pentingnya materi yang akan dipelajari berikut kompetensi yang harus dikuasai siswa

Kegiatan inti 60 menit

Mengamati

 𝑺𝒊𝒔𝒘𝒂 𝒎𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒉𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒌𝒂𝒏 𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒏 𝒔𝒆𝒌𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒐 𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒊 yang berikan oleh guru

 Siswa mempelajari dan mencatat kosa kata baru yang ada dalam video

Menanya

 Siswa menanyakan arti kosa kata yang sudah dicatat dan belum diketahui

Mengumpulkan informasi/mengeksplorasi

 Guru meminta siswa untuk menuliskan isi teks yang ada dalam video menggunakan kosa kata yang telah dipelajari Mengasosiasi

 Siswa saling bertukar teks dan memberikan masukan satu sama lain

Mengkomunikasikan

 Siswa mempresentasikan kosa kata baru yang telah ditulis

Kegiatan penutup 10 menit

 Guru mengkonfirmasi pemahaman siswa

 Feedback (menanyakan kesulitan siswa selama KBM)

 Guru bersama siswa menyimpulkan tentang materi yang telah dipelajari

 Guru mengingatkan materi yang akan dipelajari pada pertemuan berikutnya.

H. Pedoman Penilaian 1. Teknik penilaian

Score Classifications

211 – 250 Excellent

176 – 210 Very Good

141 – 175 Good

106 – 140 Fairly Good

71 – 105 Fair

36 – 70 Poor

00 – 35 Very Poor

Adopted from Depikpud, 2010

2. Pembelajaran Remedial dan Pengayaan a. Materi: Narrative text

b. Ketuntasan Personal

1) Peserta didik yang memperoleh nilai sama atau di atas standar KKM dinyatakan TUNTAS.

2) Peserta didik yag memperoleh nilai di bawah standar KKM harus mengikuti kegiatan remedial.

3) Nilai remedial: Jika nilai remedial berada sama atau di atas rata- rata KKM, maka nilai yang dimasukkan adalah nilaistandarKKM sedangkan jika nilai remedial berada di bawah standar KKM, maka nilai yang dimasukkan adalah nilai apa adanya.

c. Ketuntasan Kolektif

1) Jika skor soal yang dicapai ≥ 65% materi pelajaran bisa dilanjutkan.

2) Jika skor soal yang dicapai < 65%, materi pelajaran harus di ulang terutama soal yang ketuntasannya< 65%.

Makassar, November 2019 Mahasiswa,

NURUL KHAIRAT NIM.10535646415