CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the result of the study and its discussion. They are presented as follows:
4.1. Data Analysis
The study is categorized as an action research that took place at State Junior High School 13 Semarang, specifically at grade VII-C. It was conducted into four
meetings. The first meeting was for pre-test, the second meeting was for the first cycle and the first post-test, the third meeting was for the second cycle and the last
meeting was for the last post-test and administering questionnaire. The schedule of the research could be seen in the following table:
Table 4.1 Schedule of the Research
Date 2011 Pre-Test
1
st
Cycle 1
st
cycle test
2
nd
cycle Post-Test
Questionnaire May 23
th
May 24
th
May 30
th
May 31
st
4.1.1 Analysis of Pre-test
Pre-test was conducted on May 23
th
2011 in grade VII C of SMP N 13 Semarang. It was conducted at the beginning session of the research. This pre-test
was attended by 32 students in that class without any absent students. The purpose of
52
c e
A
I
T conducting
especially in Appendix 6.
Grade
1 2
3 4
In addition t
= 46.6 The result is
the pre-test n spoken de
. The follow
T Categ
Poo Poor to
Fair to Good to e
to that, here
s shown in th was to kno
escriptive te ing table dis
Table 4.2 Su gory
or o fair
good excellent
The Lowes The Highes
is the averag
he diagram, a ow how we
ext. The res splays the su
ummary of P Score
0-49 50-59
60-79 80-100
st Score st Score
ge of the stud
as follows: ell the stude
sult of the p ummary of th
Pre-Test Res Frequ
2 5
5
dents’ score ents’ spoken
pre-test cou he pre-test re
sult uency
P
22 5
5
in pre-test. n English w
uld be seen eport:
Percentage
69 15.5
15.5
26.6 76.6
was in
w d
s a
e w
S
g m
a Base
were poor, describing s
still poor be also only 5
excellent cat was very low
School Sem Pre-te
grammar an most difficu
also did som
10 20
30 40
50 60
70
Presentage
ed on the tab 5 students o
omething. T ecause there
students w tegory. Furt
w if it is com arang which
est data show d pronuncia
ult aspects th me mistakes
Poor
Figure 4.
ble and the f or 15.5 w
The result of were many
who got scor thermore, th
mpared with h is 70.00.
wed that m ation. These
hat the stud in other asp
Fair 69
1 Diagram o
figure above were fair, and
f pre-test sho y students wh
re in good he mean of s
Criteria Ma
most of the two aspects
ents got in pects like voc
Go
Category
15.5
of Pre- Test
e, there were d 5 student
owed that stu ho got the p
and none o students’ pre
astery of Lea
students did of speaking
speaking cla cabulary, flu
ood 15.5
t
e 22 student or 15.5
udents’ spea poor categor
of them who e-test was 46
arning of Sta
d many mis g skill could
ass. Some o uency and co
Excellent
ts or 69 w were good
aking skill w ry. There we
o got score 6.6. This resu
ate Junior Hi
stakes in th be said as t
of the studen omprehensio
who in
was ere
in ult
igh
eir the
nts on.
In the pre-test, almost all students were lack of grammar understanding. They understood the form of simple present tense but they could not apply it correctly. The
students forgot to add ses at the end of the verb. They also could not make correct sentence with adjectives. In addition, the students pronounced many words
incorrectly which could cause misunderstanding. They frequently needed long pauses to rephrase an appropriate word and many of them used visual gestures to replace the
missing words which they did not understand. Moreover, most of the students felt nervous so they only used limited vocabulary items and could not speak fluently.
The pre-test result was that the students could not describe the object in a good sentence and in correct pronunciation. Therefore, treatment given was important to
improve their speaking skill. The data which I got in the pre-test was used as the basis to conduct classroom action research in order to improve students’ speaking skill by
using RoundRobin structure.
4.1.2 Cycle One
Kategori