Interpretation of the Findings

51 students’ speaking ability of the post-test between students who are taught with discussion technique in the English teaching and learning process and those who are not taught with discussion technique in the English teaching and learning process is significantly different. Table 18. T-test Result of the Gain Variable � � � � 5 D ƒ Р Conclusion KA- TPA 6.103 1.697 30 0.00 � � � � The table indicates that � � is higher than the t value at the significance level of 5, which is. 6.103 1.697. The significance level is 0.00 It is lower than 0.05. Thus, the null hypothesis of no treatment effect is rejected and the proposed hypothesis which states “There is a significant difference in the student’s mastery of speaking between the students who are taught using discussions technique and those who are taught without using discussion technique ” is accepted.

4.3 Interpretation of the Findings

Based on the analysis, it shows that there is a significant difference in the speaking skill mastery between the students who are taught using discussion technique in the English teaching and learning process and those students who are not taught using discussions technique. In general, the students’ scores of experimental group are higher than the students’ scores of control group after the implementation of the discussion technique. Moreover, the parameters, which are counted statistically, determine that experimental group experiences much improvement in score than the control 52 group. The result of post-test indicates that � � is higher than the t value at the significance level of 5, which is. 4.219 1.697. The significance level is 0.00. It is lower than 0.05. Furthermore, the gain that shows the mean score of the experimental group is 21.77 while the control group is 11.05. The standard deviation of the experimental group decreases from 7.63 to 7.43 or the scores of the experimental group from pre-test to post-test are more homogenous. While, the standard deviation of the control group increases from 7.51 to 8.46 or the scores of the control group from pre-test to post-test are more heterogeneous. Thus, it can be concluded that the mean and the t-test in experimental group are higher than the control group. Besides, the scores of the experimental group become homogenous while the scores of the control group become heterogeneous. As a group, then it can be concluded that the experimental group performed better. With discussion technique, students are helped to improve their performance. There are also some results based on the observation. Discussion technique provides opportunities, motivations and challenges for the students. In terms of opportunity, the students are encouraged to express their feelings and ideas and also to exchange experiences. Related to motivation, the discussion technique can raise the students’ interest and enthusiasm in learning English. The pleasure offered by this method can also reduce the students’ boredom. Meanwhile, the challenge implies an element of competition and cooperation for the individual or for the members of group. The students can work together to gain the goals or to solve the problems through discussions technique. The use of discussion technique as a good technique also invites the students to be more 53 actively involved and become more enthusiastic and more willing to do their tasks. Furthermore, the use of discussion technique can provide the new atmosphere for students in the classroom. Therefore, it is clear that the discussion technique is an effective technique in improving students’ speaking skill mastery of English as shown in the experimental group. Thus, the null hypothesis of no treatment effect is rejected and the proposed hypothesis which states that “There is a significant difference in the student’s mastery of speaking between the students who are taught using discussion technique and those who are not taught without using discussion technique ” is accepted. Furthermore, it is also indicated that the activities of the discussion technique such as peer relationship, buzz group, controversial topic, and debate, which propose by the researchers such as Jones 1998 and Harmer 1991 have been proved to increase s tudent’s mastery of speaking. The successful of speaking mastery is showed based on statistically counts on the students’ score. The scores categorization is determined by the rubric, which is considered based on the specific items in categorization of speaking mastery, and criteria of students’ performances that can be measured such as structural and communicative criteria proposed by Littlewood 1981 and CEF as quoted by Luoma 2004 54

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS