Mann-Whitney Test
Table 7:
Ranks
29 22,59
655,00 30
37,17 1115,00
59 kategori
WITHOUT SANM WITH SANM
Total perubahan
N Mean Rank
Sum of Ranks
Based on the data above, the mean rank for class A data with SANM was 37.17. Meanwhile, for class B data without SANM was 22.59. The
mean rank for class A data was higher than the mean rank for class B.
Table 8:
Test Statistics
a
220,000 655,000
-3,479 ,001
Mann-Whitney U Wilcoxon W
Z Asymp. Sig. 2-tailed
perubahan
Grouping Variable: kategori a.
4.2 Discussion
It has been explained on the previous chapter that experimental research is a research that compares two classes, one class as the experimental class,
69
the other one is control class. In this research, there was two classes, class A and class B. Class A was experimental class, class B was control class.
Tabel 1 was the score list of the experimental class class A, consist of 30 students. There were 2 kinds of score in this table, pre-test and final test.
The highest score in the pretest was 7 meanwhile the lowest score was 5. There were 3 students who got 7. Based on the categories from Brown’s
scoring rubric, the organization was fair but the development of the ideas was not complete. The ideas were getting through, there was a problem in
grammar. There were errors in general writing conventions, and there was still some vocabularies misused.
The lowest score was 5. They got 5 because there was a shaky recognizable in introduction, severe problems with ordering of ideas, the
ideas was incomplete, there were inadequate effort in area of content. There were numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar review of some
areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also poor expression of the ideas and also problems in vocabularies.
Meanwhile, in final test, the score improved. For example, the students who got 7 in the pre-test, had increased to 7.5. It happened because the
organization improved from fair into adequate but the development of the ideas was still not complete. The ideas were getting through but grammar still
a problem. There were still errors in general writing conventions, and there was still some vocabularies misused.
70
In final test, the lowest score was 3. In this test there were 3 groups of students, students who got an improvement on their scores, the students who
had the same scores in the pretest and final test, and the students who score decreased. The students who got an improvement because there was still a
shaky recognizable in introduction, severe problems with ordering of ideas but the ideas were getting through but there were inadequate effort in area of
content. There were numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar review of some areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also
poor expression of the ideas and also problems in vocabularies. Meanwhile for the students who had the same scores in pretest and final test were no
improvement in their writing, they still have the same. The students who score decreased, it happened because there was a shaky recognizable in
introduction, severe problems with ordering of ideas, the ideas was incomplete, there were inadequate effort in area of content. There were
numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar review of some areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also poor expression of the
ideas and also problems in vocabularies.
Tabel 2 was the score list of the control class class B, consist of 29 students. There were 2 kinds of score also in this table, pre-test and final test.
The highest score in the pretest was 7.5 meanwhile the lowest score was 5.5. There were 2 students who got 7.5. Based on the categories from Brown’s
71
scoring rubric, the organization was fair but the development of the ideas was not complete. The ideas were getting through, there was a problem in
grammar. There were errors in general writing conventions, and there was still some vocabularies misused.
The lowest score on this table was 5. It happened because there was a shaky recognizable in introduction, severe problems with ordering of ideas,
the ideas was incomplete, there were inadequate effort in area of content. There were numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar review of
some areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also poor expression of the ideas and also problems in vocabularies.
The condition of final test in table 1 also happened in table 2. The students who got an improvement because the organization improved from
fair into adequate but the development of the ideas was still not complete. The ideas were getting through but grammar still a problem. There were still
errors in general writing conventions, and there was still some vocabularies misused.
Meanwhile, for the students who had the same scores happened because there was a shaky recognizable in introduction, severe problems with ordering
of ideas, the ideas was incomplete, there were inadequate effort in area of content. There were numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar
review of some areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also poor expression of the ideas and also problems in vocabularies.
72
The students who score decreased happened because there was a shaky recognizable in introduction, severe problems with ordering of ideas, the
ideas was incomplete, there were inadequate effort in area of content. There were numerous problems in grammar, it needed grammar review of some
areas. There were errors in sentence punctuation and also poor expression of the ideas and also problems in vocabularies.
Based on tabel 1 and table 2 of final test, the researcher concluded that the method suceed. The amount of students who got highest score for final
test in table 1 were 3, meanwhile in table 2, the amount of students who got highest score in final test were 2.
Tabel 3 discussed about that all of the data had score. It means that there was no misssing score. It was called as case processing summary. The
categories on the table 3 were without SANM and with SANM. Without SANM means that the class did not get the Spreading Activation Network
model, with SANM means the class got the Spreading Activation Network model.
Tabel 4 described about the mean and median scores for the two classes. The mean score for without SANM which also called as class B was
0.2586, meanwhile the mean score for SANM which also called as class A was 0.6833. For median score, class B was 0.2156, class A was 0.5000.
Tabel 5 informed about test of normality. This test was for knowing the data distribution, the result for the sig. point for class B without SANM was
73
0.000 0.05 5 and the sig point for class A with SANM was 0.000 0.05 5. It can be concluded that the data distribution for class B without
SANM and class A with SANM was not normal because the sig point was smaller than 0.05
Tabel 7 discussed about ranks. The mean rank for class A data with SANM was 37.17. Meanwhile, for class B data without SANM was 22.59.
The mean rank for class A data was higher than the mean rank for class B. From the calculation result, the Z score was -3.479, it was higher than Z
table 1,96 and the sig score was 0.000 0.05. So, based on the result, there
was a significant difference between class A with SANM and class B without SANM. So, the data for class A with SANM was higher than the
data for class B without SANM. For class A, this model motivated and helped them finishing their writing. When they did the post-test, the
researcher found that the most of the students of class A could finish their writing before the time.
74
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consists of the conclusion of the research and also suggestions for the next researcher, teacher and also the students
5.1 Conclusion
