Figure 4.6 Pie Chart of Studen
ts’ Posttest Achievement of Control Class
c. The Comparison between Experimental Class and Control Class The comparison between experimental class and control class was briefly
summarized on the Table 4.11 below. Table 4.11
Comparison of Recapitulation Data between Experimental and Control Class
Class Test
Mean Min
Max Median
Modus STDEV
Experimental
Pretest 82.04
60 100
85 95
12.73 Posttest
84.81 60
100 90
95 11.89
Control
Pretest 85.74
60 100
85 95
9.38 Posttest
82.04 35
100 90
95 17.66
The result of pretest mean score in experimental class was lower than in control class. In experimental class, the mean score was only 82.04 while in
control class the mean score was 85.74. But, the result of posttest mean score in experimental class increased into 84.81 and the posttest mean score in control
class was decreased into 82.04. The comparison of the mean score between experimental class and control class was depicted in Figure 4.7 below.
37
30 33
Control Class
Increased Stable
Decreased
Figure 4.7 Bar Diagram of Mean Score Comparison between
Experimental and Control Class
From the Table 4.11, it could be seen that there were increases and decreases of students’ achievement in both experimental class and control class.
From the data, the mean score comparison of both the classes was formulated into percentage as on the Table 4.12 follow.
Table 4.12 Percentage of Students’ Achievement
Class Percentage
Status
Experimental 3.39
Increased Control
-4.32 Decreased
Percentage in both classes was obtained from the calculation of the posttest mean score subtracted from the pretest mean score. The result then divided by
pretest the mean score and multiplied by 100.
80,00 81,00
82,00 83,00
84,00 85,00
86,00 87,00
Experimental Class Control Class
A v
e ra
g e
Nu m
b e
r
Data Result
Pretest Posttest
3. Normality Test
a. Normality Test of Experimental Class From the tests implemented in experimental class and control class
—pretest and posttest, normality test was used by the writer at the 0.05 level of
significance.
Table 4.13 Pretest Normality Test of Experimental Class
Pretest N
27 Normal Parametersa,b Mean
82,04 Std. Deviation
12,729 Most Extreme
Differences Absolute
,148 Positive
,124 Negative
-,148 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
,767 Asymp. Sig. 2-tailed
,599
From the Table 4.13, it can be seen that the significance of pretest score in experimental class is 0.599. If the significance score of Asyim Sig 2 tailed
0.05, so the data comes from the normal population, but if Asyim Sig 2 tailed 0.05, so the data does not come from the normal population. It can be concluded
that the data are normally distributed because 0.599 0.05. Meanwhile the significance of posttest in experimental class can be seen on the Table 4.14 below.
The significance of posttest score in experimental class is 0.301. Therefore, the data are normally distributed because 0.301 0.05. In other words, the pretest and
posttest result in experimental class are normally distributed.
Table 4.14 Posttest Normality Test of Experimental Class
Posttest N
27 Normal Parametersa,b Mean
84,81 Std. Deviation
11,887 Most Extreme
Differences Absolute
,187 Positive
,122 Negative
-,187 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
,973 Asymp. Sig. 2-tailed
,301
b. Normality Test of Control Class Table 4.15
Pretest Normality Test of Control Class
Pretest N
27 Normal Parametersa,b Mean
85,74 Std. Deviation
9,375 Most Extreme
Differences Absolute
,172 Positive
,125 Negative
-,172 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
,892 Asymp. Sig. 2-tailed
,404
From the Table 4.15, it can be seen that the significance of pretest score in control class is 0.404. According to the explanation earlier that if the significance
score of Asyim Sig 2 tailed 0.05, so the data comes from the normal population, but if Asyim Sig 2 tailed 0.05, so the data does not come from the
normal population. It can be concluded that the data are normally distributed because 0.404 0.05. Meanwhile the significance of posttest in control class can
be seen on the Table 4.16 below. The significance of posttest score in control class is 0.106. Therefore, the data are normally distributed because 0.106 0.05.
In other words, the pretest and posttest result in experimental class are normally distributed.
Table 4.16 Posttest Normality Test of Control Class
Posttest N
27 Normal Parametersa,b Mean
82,04 Std. Deviation
17,665 Most Extreme
Differences Absolute
,233 Positive
,157 Negative
-,233 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1,212 Asymp. Sig. 2-tailed
,106
4. Homogeneity Test
Based on the calculation of normality, the writer got the result that all data in pretest and posttest of both the classes have been distributed normally. The next
step of the calculation was finding the pretest and posttest homogeneity of the data using SPSS 15.0 for Windows Evaluation Version. The result of pretest
homogeneity test of the data is presented as follows:
a. Homogeneity Test of Pretest Table 4.17
Homogeneity Pretest Results between Experimental Class and Control Class
Levene Statistic
df1 df2
Sig. 3,822
1 52
,056
The Table 4.17 shows that the significance of pretest result between experimental class and control class is 0.056. Therefore, it can be concluded that
the data between experimental class and control class are similar, because 0.056 0.05.
b. Homogeneity Test of Posttest The posttest homogeneity test is also done by using SPSS 15.0 for
Windows Evaluation Version. The result of posttest homogeneity test of the data is presented as follows:
Table 4.18 Homogeneity Posttest Results between Experimental Class and Control Class
Levene Statistic
df1 df2
Sig. 3,018
1 52
,088
The Table 4.18 shows that the significance of postest result between experimental class and control class is 0.088. Therefore, it can be concluded that
the posttest data between experimental class and control class are similar, because 0.088 0.05.
5. Hypothesis Testing
The last calculation was testing the hypothesis. The writer used SPSS 15.0 for Windows Evaluation program which is Paired Sample Test. Based on the
hypothesis that has been explained in chapter III, which is: There is no effectiveness of using mind mapping on students
’ reading of narrative text.
There is effectiveness of using mind mapping technique on students ’ reading
of narrative text. So, the criteria for hypothesis test are as follow:
If the significance of T-test T-table the Ho is accepted, Ha is rejected If the significance of T-test T-table the Ho is rejected, Ha is accepted
The Table 4.19 below shows the result between the experimental class which were given mind mapping technique in reading class and the control class
which were not given mind mapping technique. To get the result, first the writer input the posttest data of experimental and control group into different table in
SPSS program. Then, the writer chose analyze – compare means – Paired-Sample
