41
and thenthe quantitative data were described and presentedin the form of tables and percentage.
H. Research Procedures
The research uses the procedure of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart 1988 in Born 1999. The procedure is as follow:
a. Reconnaissance In this step, the research carried out the research collaboratively with the
English teacher in the school and also another research team member in the school. In this step, information concerning on the students’ speaking
abilitycould be found out. Observing and interviewingthe English teachers were conducted to identify the existing problem on the students’ speaking
ability. b. Planning
After doing
the observation
in the
reconnaissance step,
then the
researcherwould make some plans that were feasible to be implemented in the field. In planning actions the research conductor worked together with the
English teacher of grade VIII SMP N 3 Mertoyudan. The aim of the actions was to increase the students’ speaking ability. The action plan was using comic
strips to improve students’ speaking ability.
42
c. Acting and observing the action In this process, the actions which have been planned in the class were carried
out. The actions which were implemented in some cycles depends on the need of the research.
d. Evaluation In this process, notes on how the students reacted to the actions and some
obstacles of implementing the actions were taken. e. Reflection
In last process, the researcher maked some reviews on what happened in the implementing action process. Moreover, this reflection was close to find out
whether the action was successful or not. If the action was successful, the researcherwould continue to implement it. If the action was not successful, the
research modified the action or find out the suitable action so that the condition will be better.
I. Data Validity and Reliability
To get the validity of the data, Anderson et al. 1994 in Burns 1999 state that there were five criteria of validity: democratic validity, result outcome
validity, process validity, catalytic validity, and dialogic validity. However, the
43
researcheronly used four criteria of validity. They were democratic validity, outcome validity, process validity, and dialogic validity.
a. Democratic validity was related to stakeholders’ chances to give their opinion, ideas, and comments about the implication of the action research. To get
democratic validity the research made an interview to ask the students’ and the teacher’s opinion, ideas, and suggestions.
b. Outcome validity was related to the result achieved by the research. The achievement of the result involved not only problem solving but also appearing
new questions in the related research. c. Process validity meant that actions done in the research were believable. This
criterion was applied to validate the data by looking at the teaching and learning process during the research conduct.
d. The dialogic validity meant that the research tried to get outcome validity by looking at the result of the action done. This research involved the teacher as
the collaborator who could monitor the research process. The researcher wouldsee the success and the failure of the action. The researcher found the
weakness by doing reflection with the teacher and the students. To avoid the subjectivity in analyzing the data and to enhance the
trustworthiness of the data, the researcher used triangulation. The aim of
Kategori