0.2 0.5
0.8 = Smalllow effect
= Mediummoderate effect = Largehigh effect
G. Statistical Hypothesis
In order to get the answer of the hypothesis above, the researcher proposed alternative hypothesis H
1
and null hypothesis H which was provided as
follows: H
= sig. 2-tailed of t-test 0.05 H
1
= sig. 2-tailed of t-test 0.05 Where:
H : There is no effect of using Question Generation Strategy in learning
reading of narrative text. H
1
: There is an effect of using Question Generation Strategy in learning reading of narrative text.
If sig. 2-tailed of t-test 0.05, H null hypothesis is accepted, and H
1
alternative hypothesis is rejected. If sig. 2-tailed of t-test 0.05, H
null hypothesis is rejected, and H
1
alternative hypothesis is accepted.
5
Lee A. Becker, http:web.uccs.edulbeckerPsy590es.htm
retrieved on November 1
st
2016.
34
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND INTERPRETATION
This chapter discusses about result and interpretation of the study. The chapter provides the description of the data, the analysis of the data, and the
interpretation of the data.
A. Result
1. The Description of the Data
After conducting the research at SMPN 1 Tambun Selatan, the writer got the data by taking students’ pre-test and post-test score on reading narrative text
test. The pre-test was given before the treatment and the post-test was given after the treatment.
In this research, the researcher gave treatments to both experimental class and control class about reading narrative text. In the experimental class the
researcher implemented Question Generation Strategy QGS, while in the control class the researcher implemented silent reading.
The Table 4.1 below showed the result of the test which was analyzed the students’ scores of pre-test and post-test in experimental class variable X.
Table 4.1 Pre-test and Post-test score of Experimental Class
Students X
Pre-test Post test
Gained score
1 88
96 8
2 48
84 36
3 72
96 24
4 56
80 24
5 84
92 8
6 56
76 20
7 64
84 20
8 76
84 8
9 64
80 16
10 68
88 20
11 68
84 16
12 68
88 20
Kategori