137
USING TRASH CAN BASKETBALL IN IMPROVING THE STUDENTS’
VOCABULARY AT SMP YP PGRI 4 MAKASSAR
Robertus Pado1, Rita Roswita Duyo2, Sri Yulianti Ardiningtyas3
STKIP YPUP Makassar, Email: [email protected] STKIP YPUP Makassar, Email: [email protected] STKIP YPUP Makassar, Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
The objective of this research is to know whether or not the implementation of Trashcan Basketball can improve students' vocabulary mastery of the second-grade students at SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar. This research used a pre experimental method with one group pre-test and post-test design. The population of this research was the second-grade at SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar. The total sample was 14 students. The result of the data showed that the mean score of post-test was greater than the pre-test (53,57>73,21) and the t-test value was greater than the t- table value (8.721˃2.160)) at the level of significant 0.05. So, it can be concluded that Trashcan Basketball significantly improve students' vocabulary mastery of the second- grade students at SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar.
Keywords: Students' vocabulary mastery of the second-grade students SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar
INTRODUCTION Background
English is an international language in the world. In the global era, English takes an important role as a communication language used in any sector of lives, such as trading, bilateral relationship, politic, science technology and many others. People use the language to express their feelings, ideas, and desires.
Vocabulary is an important aspect to support the English language, Al Qahtani (2015) component skills, namely: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Learning vocabulary for learners is important because the ability of students to learn English is determined by vocabulary that they have.
Learning language will never be successful without learning and understanding vocabulary, having a good knowledge of vocabulary support student to master English.
Before learning a language, it is necessary to learn vocabulary first. As we know vocabulary is one of the language elements that play an important role in mastering English both in oral and written. It is impossible to learn a language without
138 vocabularies, because it is the basic and very principle requirement for learning all languages. It is the element. Which conveys of sense of what we want to express through writing or speaking?
Vocabulary is one of minor skill of the language that needs to be increased. It is obvious that vocabulary as a fundamental requirement influences the achievement of students in studying English. Vocabulary is very important in English teaching and learning. If the learners do not know the meaning of the words, they will have difficulty in understanding what they see, read, and learn. Their vocabulary will increase if they read more words. This reason makes vocabulary very important a bad vocabulary will cause bad understanding of the text. Vocabulary has an important role in determining the achievement of each skill. Daily communication needs vocabulary. The more vocabulary the learners have, the more easily they will communicate and express what they want to say.
Based on explanation above, the researcher conducted the research under the title
“Using Trash Can Basketball in improving the students’ the students’ vocabulary at SMP YP-PGRI 4 MAKASSAR”.
Based on the background, the researcher formulated the problem statement research as follow. “How does using Trash Can Basketball Improve The Students’
vocabulary at SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar?”. Relating to the problem statement previous the objective of this research was the specified to find out whether or not the use trash can basketball for teaching vocabulary at second –grade students of SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar in 2020/2021.
This research expected to be valuable information and contribution for the teaching and learning process trash can basketball was the good technique in teaching and learning process. It was expected to be useful information to improve teaching English vocabulary. Then for the English teacher it was expected to give alternative contribution and information about the new method in teaching especially vocabulary for the junior high school.
This research was under the discipline of applied linguistics this is limited to the use of second-grade students of SMP YPGRI 4 Makassar. The researcher just focused on the using Trash Can Basketball. The vocabulary was the verbs and noun with specific theme.
Research Method and Design
1. This researchThis method used in this research was pre-experimental. The method consisted of one group that used pre-test, treatment and post-test.
2. Research Design
The research design presented as follows:
01 X O2 Where:
O₁: Pretest X: Treatment
139 O₂: Posttest
Gay (2012) There were two research variables in this research:
1. Independent variable was the Trash Can Basketball
2.
Dependent variable was students’ vocabularyThe population of this research was the second-grade students of SMP 4 YP-PGRI Makassar which consisted of 3 classes and the total number of the population were 40 students. In this research, the researcher used purposive sampling. The researcher took one class as experimental class. The researcher took
second which consisted of
20 students.This was chosen because most of students had low ability in vocabulary and lack of attention.
In this research, the researcher used missing word test, which consist of pretest and posttest. The purpose of pretest was to know how far the vocabulary mastery of the students before using trash can basketball and the purpose of posttest was to know the improvement of students’ vocabulary after using trash can basketball.
This research analyzed by using statistical analysis; the steps are taken in statistical analysis as follows:
A. Scoring the students correct answer:
B. Classifying the score of the students’ pretest and posttest:
Table 3.1 Scoring Classification
Scale Classification
80 – 100 very Good
70 – 79 Good
50 – 69 Fair
30 – 49 Poor
0 – 29 Very Poor
3. Calculating the frequency of percentage by using SPSS 22.0 Version.
4. Calculating the mean score of students’ answer by using SPSS 22.0 Version.
5. Finding out the standard deviation of the students’ pre-test and post-test by calculating the value of T-test by using SPSS 22.0 Version.
6. Finding out the significance difference between pre-test and post-test value of the test by using SPSS 22.0 Version
𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑥 100
140
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Result
Table 4.1
Students’ score Classification in Pre-test (X1)
No Sample Score Classification
1 Ald 65 Average
2 Als Sm 55 Average
3 Rmt 50 Average
4 Apr Pa 40 Poor
5 Bnd Ca 40 Poor
6 Ths LM 35 Poor
7 Fln Mr 30 Poor
8 Brt Nh 30 Poor
9 Frs 65 Average
10 Jf Afn 60 Average
11 Mr YS 65 Average
12 Adr Sr 70 Good
13 Mr DD 75 Good
14 Mr GM 70 Good
Total N = 14 ∑X1= 750
Mean Score 53,57
Where:
N : The total number of students
∑X1 : The total scores of the students pre-test
The describing data above shows that the highest score of their pre-test result was 75 that consisted of one students and the lowest score was 30 that was consist of two students. The total score of pre-test were 750 and mean score were 53.57. These data were clearly explained that the students’ vocabulary skill were still low.
Table 4.2
The Classification, Frequency, and Rate Percentage of the Students’ score in Pre- Test (X1)
No Classification Frequency Percentage
1 Very Good (80 – 100) - 0%
2 Good (70 – 79) 3 21,5%
3 Average (50 – 69) 6 42,8%
4 Poor (30 – 49) 5 35,7%
5 Very Poor (0 – 29) - 0%
Total 14 100%
141 The table above shows the categories of students score based on the classification score and illustrates the rate percentage and frequency of the students’ pre-test. Based on the table above, the students’ result of pre-test can be classified as follow:None of the student (0%) were classified into very good, three students (21,5%) were classified into good, six students (42,8%) were classified into average, five students (35,7%) were classified into poor, and none of the students (0%) were classified into very poor.
Table 4.3
Students’ score Classification in Post-test (X2)
No Sample Score Classification
1 Ald 80 Very Good
2 Als Sm 70 Good
3 Rmt 70 Good
4 Apr Pa 65 Average
5 Bnd Ca 65 Average
6 Ths LM 65 Average
7 Fln Mr 65 Average
8 Brt Nh 60 Average
9 Frs 75 Good
10 Jf Afn 75 Good
11 Mr YS 70 Good
12 Adr Sr 85 Very Good
13 Mr DD 95 Very Good
14 Mr GM 85 Very Good
Total N = 14 ∑X2=1025
Mean Score 73,21
Where:
N : The total number of students
∑X2 : The total scores of the students’ post-test
The table above shows that there were two students got one ninety five (95) score from total number students were 14, there was two student got eighty five (85) score, there were one students got eighty (80) score. There are four students whose vocabulary can be classified as very good in the range 80-100. There were two students got seventy five (75) score and there were three students got seventy (70) score There are five students whose vocabulary can be classified as good in the range 70-75. There were four students got sixty five (65) score. There was one students got sixty (60) score. There were five students whose vocabulary can be classified as average in 65 score.
142 Table 4.4
The Classification, Frequency, and Rate Percentage of the Students’ score in Post- test (X2)
No Classification Frequency Percentage
1 Very Good (80 – 100) 4 28,58%
2 Good (70 – 79) 5 35,71%
3 Average (50 – 69) 5 35,71%
4 Poor (30 – 49) 0 0%
5 Very Poor (0 – 29) 0 0%
Total 14 100%
The students’ score of post-test was classified into some criteria. The criteria frequency and percentage table score of the students in post-test. The researcher showed the result of the criteria percentage and frequency of the students score of post-test were showed as in the following table above.The data of the table above shows the rate percentage and frequency of the students’ post-test in learning English vocabulary by using Trash Can Basketball. Based on the table above, four students (28,58%) were classified into very good, five students (35,71%) were classified into good, five students (35,71%) were classified into average, none students (0%) were classified into poor, and none of the students (0%) were classified into very poor. It can be said that the rate percentage in the post-test was greater than the rate percentage in the pre-test
Table 4.5
The comparison of rate percentage between pre-test and Post-test
No Classification Rate Percentage
Pre-test Post-test
1 Very good 0% 28,58%
2 Good 21,5% 35,71%
3 Average 42,8% 35,71%
4 Poor 35,7% 0%
5 Very poor 0% 0%
From the table 4.5 above, it can be known that the students’ vocabulary mastery by using Gamification has been developed. In pre-test there was 0% students was classified as very good while in post-test there were 28,58% students classified as very good. There were 21,5% students was classified as good in pre-test and in post-test there were 35,71% students classified as good. In pre-test there were 42,8% students was categorized as average while in post-test 35,71% was categorized as average. In pre-test there were 35,7% students was classified as poor while in post-test there was 0% classified as poor. In pre-test and post-test there was none students’ in very poor classification
143 Table 4.6
The total raw of students’ pre-test and post-test
No Sample Pre-test
(X1)
Post-test
(X2) Gain (D) Square of gain (D2)
1 Ald 65 80 15 225
2 Als Sm 55 70 15 225
3 Rmt 50 70 15 225
4 Apr Pa 40 65 25 625
5 Bnd Ca 40 65 25 625
6 Ths LM 35 65 30 900
7 Fln Mr 30 65 35 1.225
8 Brt Nh 30 60 30 900
9 Frs 65 75 5 25
10 Jf Afn 60 75 15 225
11 Mr YS 65 70 5 25
12 Adr Sr 70 85 15 225
13 Mr DD 75 95 20 400
14 Mr GM 70 85 25 625
Total N=14 ∑X1= 750 ∑X2=1025 ∑D=275 ∑D2 = 12.950
After giving pre-test, the researcher gave the students treatment. In treatment activities, the researcher used a picture as the media. The researcher took four meeting in treatment, each meeting took 60 minutes. After finished the procedure in this research, the researcher calculated the result of the students’ vocabulary test. The students score of pre- test (X1) and post-test (X2), gain differences between matched pairs (D) and the square of gain (D2) were presented in table 4.7.
Table 4.7
The Simulation Score of Students Pre-Test and Post-Test
Situation of score Number of students Percentage
Improve 14 100%
Unchanged 0 0%
Decrease 0 0%
Total 14 100%
According to the table above, it explained that there were 14 students with percentage 100% students whose improve, none students get the bad score in post-test. The researcher
144 could categorize that 100% of students got improving their post-test score. It means that all the students of the second grade in SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar could change their skill from the low level into the high level in mastering vocabulary by using Trash Can Basketball.
Table 4.8 Students Mean Score
Test Mean score Total score
Pre-test (x1) 53,57 750
Post-test (x2) 73,21 1025
The calculating of the mean score of the students’ result in pre-test and post-test and the mean score of gain was presented as in the following table above.Based on the table above, the mean score of students’ pre-test (X1) were 53,57 from the total score of 750 and the mean score of students’ post-test (X2) were 73,21 from the total score 1025. It could be concluded that the mean of post-test score was greater than the mean of pre-test score. It means that the use of Trash Can Basketball could improve the students’
vocabulary mastery at the second-grade students of SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar.
Table 4.11
Comparison of the T-test and T-table result 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
Posttest -19,643 8,427 2,252 -24,509 -14,777 -8,721 13 ,000
From the level significance P=0,05 and df=N-1 (14-1). So, the value of t-test was 8.721. For level of significance = 0,05 and t-table was 2.160. So, the value of T-test was 8,721˃2,160. It means that the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted because there was significant between pre-test and post-test by using Trash Can Basketball and null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected. The table above showed that T-Table value was smaller than T-Test on the score the students’ vocabulary mastery.
145 Table 4.12
Frequency Statistics Comparison Score of Students Between Pre-test and Post-test
Statistics
Pretest Posttest
N Valid 14 14
Missing 0 0
Mean 53,57 73,21
Std. Error of Mean 4,240 2,652
Median 57,50 70,00
Mode 65 65
Std. Deviation 15,863 9,924
Variance 251,648 98,489
Range 45 35
Minimum 30 60
Maximum 75 95
Sum 750 1025
Based on the Table above, it could illustrated that the total score of pre-test was 750 and the total score of post-test was 1025. Maximum score in pre-test was 75 while in post- test were 95. The minimum score in pre-test 30 while in post-test was 60. Range of pre- test was 45 while in post-test was 35. The mean score in post-test was 53,57 while in pre- test was 73,21. Median and mode in pre-test were 57,50 while in post-test were 70,00 and 90. Std.Deviation in pre-test was 15.853 and in post-test were 9.924.
Frequency Table Pretest
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid 30 2 14,3 14,3 14,3
35 1 7,1 7,1 21,4
40 2 14,3 14,3 35,7
50 1 7,1 7,1 42,9
55 1 7,1 7,1 50,0
60 1 7,1 7,1 57,1
65 3 21,4 21,4 78,6
70 2 14,3 14,3 92,9
75 1 7,1 7,1 100,0
Total 14 100,0 100,0
146 Posttest
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid 60 1 7,1 7,1 7,1
65 4 28,6 28,6 35,7
70 3 21,4 21,4 57,1
75 2 14,3 14,3 71,4
80 1 7,1 7,1 78,6
85 2 14,3 14,3 92,9
95 1 7,1 7,1 100,0
Total 14 100,0 100,0
The scoring of the students’ vocabulary mastey on the pretest and posttest was classified in to six levels there were (excellent, very good, good, average, poor, and very poor) the process classification has been explained on the previous chapter. Frecquency and persentage of the students pretest and posttest score in vocabulary mastery by using Trash Can Basketball.
Discussion
The following is detail discussion of the students’ result in both pre-test and post- test. Referring to the data both pre-test and post-test, it can be seen that the total score of pre- test (ΣX1) is 750 and total score post-test (ΣX2) is 1025 and difference between matched pairs (ΣD) 275 and square of gain (Σ𝐷2) is 12.950. It can be concluded that the students’
total score of post-test is higher than the students’ total score of pre-test after they have been taught by using Trash Can Basketball. Based on the comparison the data score pre-test and post-test before, it could be concluded that the classification of pre-test dominant in poor and average classifications and in post-test was dominant in very good classification. So it could be concluded that there was significant difference between students pre-test and post-test result.
Based on the pre-test result it can be seen that the students found it difficult to analysed the vocabulary test. Generally the students were lack of vocabulary and difficult to find the meaning of the words. The learning of vocabulary is an important part in foreign language learning. Therefore, in order to know the significance difference of students pre-test and post-test, the researcher determined students’ score by using Trash Can Basketball in teaching vocabulary.
In connection, the important in teaching vocabulary plays an important role in language acquisition because the mastery of vocabulary would help students to master all the language skills; speaking; listening; writing; and reading. The students should have a good
147 idea of how to expand their vocabulary so that they can improve their interest in learning the language.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis, research findings and discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher formulates the conclusion as follow:
The pre-test was given before the students had the treatments. It aimed to find out the students’ vocabulary prior knowledge. The order of this test was based on vocabulary purpose. Based on the explanation in the previous chapter, the objective of this research was to determine whether or not the use of Trash Can Basketball improve students vocabulary mastery in the second grade of SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar. It has been stated also that the data were collect through vocabulary test. It was contained multiple choices. The test was delivery for two times, namely pre-test and post-test with the aim to know whether or not there was significance after giving the treatment by using Trash Can Basketball to improve students’ vocabulary mastery. While the test, the researcher found many difficulties that most of the students were confused in dFoing test, most of them were asked their friends and asked the researcher to tell them about the answers. When the test ongoing the students asked the researcher about the translation of the test even few of them offered to use dictionary because they had never seen yet before. But the researcher asked them to do it by themselves and to do as best as they could. After the students finished doing the test, the researcher collected the students’ answers sheets.
The use of Trash Can Basketball as treatment of the research was applied by teaching vocabulary. The students means score in pre-test was 53.57. score which could be categorized as poor, while on the students’ mean score in post-test was 80,63 which could be categorized as very good. Thus, the application of treatment by using Trash Can Basketball in teaching and learning vocabulary could improve students’ achievement from 53.57 to 73,21.
score. It means that the treatment has increased to the achievement of students’ post-test score because it was higher than the pretest scores. It is concluded that using Trash Can Basketball can improve students’ vocabulary mastery.
Generally, using Trash Can Basketball was effective in improving the students’
vocabulary mastery at the second-grade students of SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar.
Suggestion
The researcher would like to offer suggestions which may be useful in improving students’ vocabulary mastery. For the English teacher to apply Trash Can Basketball as teaching and learning strategy especially in teaching vocabulary, creative to manage material and technique to avoid students boring in teaching vocabulary. In order to make them fun and easy to memorize the words. For the next researcher who would like to study the same field (vocabulary), the researcher who wants conducted a research about Trash Can Basketball.
The result of the research can be used as an additional reference for further research.
148 The researcher also hope the students of SMP YP-PGRI 4 Makassar should practice their English more in rich their vocabulary and practice much English in the classroom and outside classroom.
For future researcher, the researcher had to be better to choose the strategies or method, and game used in teaching vocabulary and got many experience about how to chosen the technique to improve vocabulary mastery of students and how to learn with others. The result of this research can also be used as an additional reference or further researcher with different discussion.
REFERENCES
Cagda Kvvanc Caganaga,C K. (2016) “The Importance of Using Games In EFL Classrooms” English Language Teaching Department, European University of Lefke, Cyprus, Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, Near East University
Dewi Nur Asyiah (2017) “The Vocabulay Teaching and Vocabulary Learning: Perception, Strategies, And Infulues On Students’ Vocabulary Mastery”’ Jurnal Bahasa Lingua Sience, vol.9 No. 2, November. Indonesia University of Education, Bandung
Erikson Saragih (2020) “Features Of Vocabulary Exercises in English Book at Ten Grade Students” Jurnal Pendididkan Bahasa Inggris Undiksha volume 8, Number 1, English Education Departement, University of Prima Indonesia, Medan, Indonesia
Gay, L.R & Peter W. (2012) “ Educational Researcher. Tenth Edition. Pearson Boston Columbus. Retrieved 27/07?2020a
Komang Trisna Mardayani (2016) “Penerapan Permainan Tradisional Engklek Untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Motorik Kasar Kelompok B di Paud Widhya Laksami” e-Journal pendidikan Anak Usia Dini Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Jurusan Pendidikan Guru Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini volume 4,Fakulas Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Pedidikan Ganesha,Singaaraja, Bali
Mofareh Alqahtani (2015) “The Importance Of Vocabulary In Language Learning and How To Be Taught” international Journal of Teaching and Education vol.III, No.3/2015, King Khaled Academy, Saudi Arabi
Shomo Sharan (2012) “The Handbook of Cooperative Learning” Yogyakarta
Solopress (2015) “ The Importance of Vocabulary” . https://www.solopres.com/blog/print- inspiration/the-importance-of-vocabulay
Saniago Dahki (2019) “The Principles and the Teaching of English Vocabulary: A Review”
English Education Department, Faculty of The Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
149 Saniago Dahki (2019) “The Principles and the Teaching of English Vocabulary: A Review”
English Education Department, Faculty of The Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
