CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
H. Technique of Data Analysis
To analyze the result of the test conducted both at pre-test and post-test, the researcher used the data analysis method with descriptive statistics and prerequisite test with inferential statistics.
1. Descriptive Statistics
A term of the process in analyzing data that describe, show or summarize data in a meaningful way was called as descriptive statistics. Typically, there are two statistic ways that are used in describing the data, those are:
a. Measures of central tendency
These are ways of describing the central position of a frequency distribution for a group of data which include mode, median, and mean. The formulas are as follows:
1) Mean score:
Where:
M: The mean score Sumed up score n: The number of sample 2) Median
Where:
Me : Median
L : The lower limit of the interval within which the median lies
I : Interval
Cfb: The cumulative frequency in all interval below the interval containing the median
fw : The frequency of cases within the interval containing the median
3) Mode
Where:
Mo: Modus
L : The lower limit of the interval within which the median lies
i : Interval
f1 : The frequency in above of interval containing mode f2 : The frequency in below of interval containing mode
b. Measures of spread
These are ways of summarizing a group of data by describing how spreads out the scores are that stand for the range, quartiles, variance, and standard deviation. The formulas are as follows:
1) Variance
Where:
: Variance Ʃ : Sum of
x² : deviation of each score from the mean squared N : number of cases in the distribution
2) Standard deviation
Where:
SD : Standard Deviation
ƩD² : Different scores squared, then summed (ƩD)² : Difference scores summed then squared N : Number of pairs
2. Prerequisite Test and Inferential Statistics
Inferential statistics used to make a generalization or conclusion related to the populations where the sample data come from in a research. In this study, inferential statistics analysis was
used in hypothesis testing using independent t-test. Before the hypothesis testing was conducted, the researcher first did the prerequisite testing in aimed to find the normality and homogeneity of the data obtained.
a. Normality test
The normality test used the Kolmogorov-Smirnovand Shapiro- Wilk formula in SPSS 16.0. If the Sig. values > 0.05, it means the distribution of sample data is normal, on the other hand, if the Sig.
values < 0.05, it indicates that the sample data is non normal distributed.
b. Homogeneity test
The homogeneity test used the Levene statistic in SPSS 16.0. If the Sig. values Based on Mean> 0.05, it means that the data variance is homogeneous. However, if the Sig. values Based on Mean < 0.05, it indicates that data variance is not homogeneous.
c. Hypothesis Testing
After obtaining the scores, the writer then analyzed the data by using independent t-test. The writer calculated the data by using paired sample t-test through SPSS 16.0 to find out whether there is a significant effect of using power card strategy on students ‘ability in writing descriptive text or not. In testing the hypothesis, there are two conditions which defined the conclusion of this study as following:
1) If is t-test of < t-table in the significance of 0.05, Ho rejected. It means that the experimental groups have higher skill in descriptive text than control groups.
2) If t-test > t-table in the significance level of 0.05, Ho is accepted. It means that the control groups have lower skill in descriptive text than experimental groups.
I. Validity and Reliability 1. Validity
The validity is a measurement that shows validity of the instrument. In this research, the researcher used content validity. Heaton opines that the instrument test which applied content validity should be constructed as a representative of the material that has been learned by the students40. The researcher constructed the instrument based on core competence in K-13 syllabus in Senior High School, especially for tenth grade.
The researcher conducted validation for English learning testing experts from Mr. Afif Ikhwanul Muslimin, M.Pd.
2. Reliability
Reliability is a vital characteristic for both public achievement and proficiency test at the classroom. An instrument test can be considered as a reliable if the result is consistent and dependable. The given test to the same student or matched students on two different occasions should
40 John Brian Heaton, Writing English Language Tests, (United States of America:
Longman 1988), .P. 160
have a similar outcome to know if the used test is reliable. In this research, the researcher used inter-rater reliability. According to Heale and Twycross, inter-rater reliability is a procedure that includes a quantitative system in order to determining the level of agreement between two or more raters41. This study employed two raters. The first rater is the tenth-grade English teacher from MA Al-Faqih Mantang and the second is the English teacher of SMAN 1 Kopang. The raters were gave the assessment at different place as well as the time, and occasion. If the students’ scores are similar or consistent, then the instrument is reliable.
41 Roberta Heale, & Alison Twycross, “Validity and Reliability in Quantitative Research” Journals BMJ. Vol. 18, No. 3, July 2015., p, 67.
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the research findings and discussion of the study which has been conducted at the tenth-grade students of SMAN 1 Kopang.
A. Research Findings
In this section, the researcher would present the final result of this study in form of descriptive data. The objective of this research is to find out whether there is a significant effect of using power card strategy on students’ ability in writing descriptive text or not. There are two classes that the researcher took as the sample; those are X MIPA 1 as the control group and X MIPA 3 as the experiment group which both of the group consisting of 30 students. After conducting the experiment, the researcher obtained the desired data. The data analyzed in this research were pre-test and post-test of writing descriptive text scores from both of the groups, experiment and control group. The pre-test and post-test scores of both the experiment and the control groups were compared by using independent t-test.
1. Data Description
The data description of each group, control and experiment group will be presented by using Microsoft Excel 2007 analysis as follows:
a. Pre-test Result in Control and Experiment Group
The pre-test data at control group obtained the lowest score was 25 and the highest score was 53 from 30 students in writing descriptive text. While the pre-test data at experiment group
42
obtained the lowest score was 28 and the highest score was 63 from 30 students in writing descriptive text (see in Appendix 4). The researcher then described the data in pre-test both in control and experiment group as follows:
Table 4.1
Descriptive Data of Pre-test at Control and Experiment Group Descriptive Data Control Group Experiment Group
Pre-test Pre-test
Mean 37.0 44.1
Median 38.5 41
Mode 41 35
Variance 61.30 116.25
Standard
Deviation 7.82 10.78
Maximum 53 63
Minimum 25 28
Range 28 35
Total 1112 1324
It can be seen that the pre-test score at experiment group gained higher mean score (44.1) than does the pre-test score at control group (37.0). The median score in pre-test at control group were 38.5, while the mode score was 41 with the variance score was 61.30 and the standard deviation was 7.82. While at experiment group, the median score was 41 with mode score was 35, the variance was 116.25 and standard deviation was 10.78.
Additionally, the total of pre-test score in experiment group was 1324 which indicated that it was higher than the total score of pre- test in control group which only gained 1112 as showed at Table
4.2. Furthermore, the pre-test score both at experiment and control group were presented in form of histogram as following:
Figure 4.1
Histogram of Pre-test Score at Control Group
Figure 4.2
Histogram of Pre-test Score at Experiment Group
b. Post-test Result in Control and Experiment Group
The post-test data at control group obtained the lowest score was and the highest score was 57 from 30 students in writing descriptive text. While the post-test data at experimental group obtained the highest score was 57 and the lowest score was 28 from 30 students in writing descriptive text (see in Appendix 4) . The researcher then described the data in post-test both in control and experiment group as follows:
Table 4.2
Descriptive Data of Post-test at Control and Experiment Group Descriptive Data Control Group Experiment Group
Post-test Post-test
Mean 39.2 66.9
Median 38.5 66
Mode 28 75
Variance 80.04 135.75
Standar Deviation 8.94 11.65
Maximum 57 86
Minimum 28 50
Range 29 36
Total 1177 2009
It can be seen that the post-test in experiment group gained higher mean score (66.9) than the post-test in control group (39.2).
The median score in post-test at control group were 38.5, while the mode score was 28 with the variance score was 80.04 and the standard deviation was 8.94. While at experiment group, the median score was 66 with mode score was 75, the variance was 135.75 and standard deviation was 11.65. Additionally, the total score in experiment group was 2009 which indicated that it was
higher than the total score in control group which only gained 1177. Furthermore, the post-test score both at experiment and control group were presented in form of histogram as following:
Figure 4.3
Histogram of Post-test Score at Experiment Group
Figure 4.4
Histogram of Post-test Score at Control Group
c. The Calculated Score of Control and Experiment Group
According to the data obtained, the writer compared the scores that students at control group achieved at both pre-test and post-test in composing a descriptive text about person. It showed no significant difference between pre-test and post-test. Among 30 students, only 14 students got higher score in post-test from their pre-test score, 7 students got the same score from pre-test to post- test, and the rest got their score decreased in post-test. In addition, the writer found that the total score in pre-test (Ʃy1) was 1112, the total score in post-test (Ʃy2) was 1156, and the difference score between pre-test and post-test (Ʃy) was 65. While in experiment group, the writer found such a great achievement that the students’
got from pre-test to post-test in writing descriptive text about person which was increased. Among 30 students, 28 students got their score significantly increased in post-test, while the rest 2 students got higher score in post-test, however, its not significant.
Moreover, the total score in pre-test (Ʃx1) experiment group was 1324, the total score in post-test (Ʃx2) was 2009 and the difference total between pre-test and post-test score was 685 (see in Appendix 5).
2. Prerequisite Test
There are two kind of perquisite test; those are normality test and homogeneity test. This research try to do the normality test in order to
find out whether the sample of data has been normally distributed or not.
While homogeneity test in this research aims to find out whether the both samples, control group and experiment group, are homogeneous. In analyzing the normality and homogeneity testing in this research, the writer used SPSS 16.0.
a. Normality Test
Table 4.3
Normality Test in Control Group
Test
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic Df Sig.
control group writing skill
pre test .146 30 .102 .941 30 .099
post test
.124 29 .200* .918 29 .028
Table 4.4
Normality Test in Experiment Group
Test
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic Df Sig.
Experiment group writing skill
pre test .181 30 .013 .911 30 .015
post test
.188 30 .008 .910 30 .015
Based on Table 4.3, the sample data in control group showed that the Sig. values in Kolmogorov-Smirnovand Shapiro- Wilk was > 0.05 both at the pre-test (0.102 & 0.099) and post-test (0.102 & 0.028) which indicated that sample data in control group was normally distributed. The same result also acquired in experiment group’s sample data as the Table 4.4 showed. The
Sig.values in Kolmogorov-Smirnovand Shapiro-Wilk was > 0.05 both at pre-test (0.013 & 0.015) and post-test ( 0.08 & 0.015) which means that the sample data in experiment group was in normal distribution.
b. Homogeneity Test
Table 4.5
Homogeneity Test in Pre-test
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
writing skill at pretest Based on Mean 6.624 1 58 .013
Based on Median 3.295 1 58 .075
Based on Median and
with adjusted df 3.295 1 51.846 .075
Based on trimmed mean 6.418 1 58 .014
Table 4.6
Homogeneity Test in Post-test
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
writing skill at posttest Based on Mean 3.041 1 58 .086
Based on Median 2.571 1 58 .114
Based on Median and
with adjusted df 2.571 1 55.506 .114
Based on trimmed mean 2.983 1 58 .089
Drawing to the Table 4.5 and Table 4.6, the Sig. value Based on Mean in control and experiment group showed a greater value than 0.05 (Sig. Based on Mean> 0.05), it indicated that the
data variance both in control and experiment group were homogeneous.
3. Hypothesis Testing
The table 4.7 presented the outputs of paired sample t-test analysis, as follow:
Table 4.7 Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
T df Sig.
(2- tailed
) Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 pretest
control group - postest control group
-2.16667 6.57625 1.20065 -4.62228 .28895 -1.805 29 .082
Pair 2 pretest experime ntal group - posttest experime ntal group
-2.28333 9.59556 1.75190 -26.41637 -19.25029 -13.033 29 .000
From the data above, the result of tcount in pair 2 experiment group pre-test and post-test is 13.033 with degree freedom (df) = 29 and significance value (Sig. 2-tailed) 0.000. Then, the df 29 was found in ttable score at significance level 5% (0.05) and the result was 2.045. Based on the statistical analysis using t-test, it showed that ttable = 2.045 and tcount=13.033 which means that tcount was higher than ttable (13.033>2.045). It concluded that if the tcount>ttable
(13.033 > 2.045) the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which stated that there is a significant effect of using power card strategy on
students’ ability in writing descriptive text was accepted.
Moreover, the significance value (Sig. 2-tailed) was less than 0.05 (0.000<0.05) which means the null hypothesis (H0) that stated that there is no any significant effect of using power card strategy on students’ ability in writing descriptive text was rejected.
B. Discussion
1. The use of Power Card Strategy
In this study, power card was used as a media and strategy at the same time in teaching writing skill for the tenth-grade students of SMAN 1 Kopang especially at the experiment group which is class X MIPA 3. The use of power card strategy in learning writing descriptive text activity can help both students at the experiment group and the teacher to deliver and accept the material easily. By the application of power card strategy, the students can write the descriptive text about person effectively if we compare it with the students does in control group. Power card strategy allowed the students in experiment group to write a descriptive paragraph based on person/character they liked with some related vocabulary that can help them to built a sentences easily.
2. Students Writing Descriptive Text Ability
Students’ score from pre-test to post-test at experiment group showed a significant improvement. Among 30 students, 28 students showed a good improvement score from pre-test to post-test score which indicated that there is a significant effect of using power card
strategy on students’ ability in writing descriptive text. While the remains 2 students got higher score in post-test, however, its not significant. From 5 aspects (Content, Organization, Grammar, Vocabulary, and Mechanics), a great changes score from pre-test to post-test was showed from the content, organization, and vocabulary aspects. Mostly of the students in experiment group got score 3 (3= The topic is complete and clear but the details are almost relating to the topic) at post-test in content aspect because they already know what to write and seems to be more focus on the topic they talked about in writing descriptive text about person by using power card than at pre- test. While in organization aspect, students in experiment group seems to be understand how to write the identification statements and description statements and they already know where to put the identification part and the description part properly since the researcher has been conducted the treatment for three times. The last, students in experiment group mostly got 3 (3= Few misuse of vocabulary, word forms, but not change the meaning) in vocabulary aspect at post-test once mostly of them got 1 (1= Very poor knowledge of words, word forms, and not understandable) and 2 (2= Limited range confusing words and word form) at pre-test.
Based on the cognitive theory in second language acquisition, the main aspects in SLA is aim to build up students’ knowledge which can
unconsciously automatically recollected42. Thus, the students must be provided with knowledge by some strategies or technique skill to the target language to understand and socially participate in social context.
As the EFL students, the samples of this study were expected to write in L2 which is totally different to the L1. In order to provide effective pedagogy, L2 writing teacher need to understand the social and cognitive errors factors occured in the process of second language acquisition. In this present study, the social error acquired from the students was the lack motivation in writing toward the target language which is English. While in cognitive factor, the students found it difficult in acquiring academic vocabulary and understand discourse style which caused they don’t know how to generate ideas they need to write. According to cognitive theory, communicating orally or in writing is such an active process of skill development and gradually decreasing error as the learner inputting the language43.
To agree with the cognitive theory, the use of power card strategy in writing skill help the students in solving the social and cognitive error as it has shown its positive influence in generating students’
motivation and solving students’ vocabulary items mastery by providing the students with the L2 academic vocabulary items since power card contains some related vocabulary that students’ need in
42 Einar Garibaldi Stefánsson, “Second Language Acquisition:” (Thesis, Universitatis Islandiae, 2013), p, 4.
43Johanne Miles, “Second Language Writing and Research: The Writing Process and Error Analysis in Student Texts” Journals TESL-EJ. Vol. 6, No. 2, September 2002.
writing descriptive text especially for those students who don’t have an English dictionary.
Some previous studies (e.g., Habsari, Vika, and Sholechah) were in line with the result of this current study. The use of visual aids in writing descriptive text has a good influence for students by solving students’ problems in writing descriptive text, such as lack motivation, lack of ideas, and lack of vocabulary items mastery. Habsari’s study which employes flashcard as the visual aids in writing descriptive text stated that the use of flashcard can motivate students to compose paragraph easily and more focus on the topic than ever before44. In addition, flashcard/picture/photograph also helps the students to find the ideas what to write immediately as they look to the visual aids.45
Drawing on the presented data on the previous Table 4.1 to Table 4.2, it is clear that there is a significant effect of using power card strategy on students’ ability to write descriptive text by looking to the difference between the total score in pre-test and post-test (1324>2009) and the difference total between pre-test and post-test score was 685 which indicates there is a great improvement of students’ achievement
44 Nindita Irma Habsari, “The Use of Flashcard and BBC Nature Video to Improve Students Ability in Writing Descriptive Text” (Thesis Sarjana, English Department, Semarang State University, 2014), p.95.
45 Nindita Irma Habsari, “The Use of Flashcard and BBC Nature Video to Improve Students Ability in Writing Descriptive Text” (Thesis Sarjana, English Department, Semarang State University, 2014), p. 95,; Farahsari Vika Nurina, “The Use of Photograph and Pair Work on Descriptive Text to Improve Students’ Writing Skill” (Thesis Sarjana, English Education Department IAIN Surakarta, 2017), p. 60,; Zuma’rini Juni Solechah, “The Effectiveness of Teaching Writing in Descriptive Text by Using Edmodo, (Thesis Sarjana, English Education Department IAIN Surakara, Surakarta, 2017), p. 58.