Data Description RESEARCH FINDINGS

Furthermore, to see the further information about the result of post-test score in experiment class, it can be seen as follows: Table 4.4 Data Description of Post-test Result of Experiment Class Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean posttest 35 68 92 2772 79.20 Valid N listwise 35 The table 4.4 shows that the total number of data in experiment class is 35. The minimum score of post-test in experiment class is 68 and the maximum score is 92. The total score is 2772 while the mean score of post-test in experiment class is 79.20. According to the table above, it can be formed a table of frequency distribution as follows: Table 4.5 Frequency Distribution of Post-test Result of Experiment Class Posttest Frequency Valid 68 4 72 4 76 7 80 9 84 5 88 3 92 3 Total 35 From the table above, it can be seen the most frequent score is 80 which was had from 9 students. The second is 76 which was had from 7 students. The third is 84 which was had from 5 students, the forth is 68 and 72 which was had from 4 students. The less frequent score is 88 and 92 which was had from 3 students. 2. Data of Controlled Class The table 4.4 below presented the students’ pre-test and post-test score of controlled class. There were 35 students in controlled class variable Y. Table 4.6 The score of Controlled Class Students Pre-test Post-test Gain Score 1 44 64 20 2 60 68 8 3 64 72 8 4 48 64 16 5 52 76 24 6 68 80 12 7 44 60 16 8 56 72 16 9 52 76 24 10 68 76 8 11 60 80 20 12 56 72 16 13 44 68 24 14 60 76 16 15 48 72 24 16 60 84 24 17 52 64 12 18 64 80 16 19 60 68 8 20 68 76 8 21 52 72 20 22 60 68 8 23 64 80 16 24 48 64 16 25 64 72 8 26 68 84 16 27 60 76 16 28 72 72 29 64 84 20 30 72 88 16 31 72 76 4 32 56 64 8 33 72 88 16 34 76 84 8 35 64 76 12 2092 2596 504 59.77 74.17 14.4 According to the table of the score of controlled class above, it could be seen that from 35 students in the class, the mean of pre-test is 59.77 and the mean of post- test is 74.17. The smallest score from the pre-test is 44 and the highest score is 76. The data showed the smallest score in post-test was 60 and the highest score is 88. After conducting pre-test and post-test, the mean of the gain score of controlled class is 14.14. It means that there is also a significant difference between the students’ comprehension of pre-test and post-test. Although the students’ score of controlled class was also increased, it was not as significant as the students’ score of experiment class. It can be conclu ded that the students’ score of experiment class which is learning reading narrative text using story mapping was higher than the students’ score of controlled class which was learning reading narrative text without using story mapping. The further information about pre-test in controlled class can be seen through table below: Table 4.7 Data Description of Pre-test Result of Controlled Class Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean pretest 35 44 76 2092 59.77 Valid N listwise 35 The table 4.7 shows that the total number of data in controlled class is 35. The minimum score of pre-test in controlled class is 44 and the maximum score is 76. The total score is 2092 while the mean score of pre-test in controlled class is 59.77. According to the table above, it can be formed a table of frequency distribution as follows: Table 4.8 Frequency Distribution of Pre-test Result of Controlled Class pretest Frequency Valid 44 3 48 3 52 4 56 3 60 7 64 6 68 4 72 4 76 1 Total 35 From the table above, it can be seen the most frequent score is 60 which was had from 7 students. The second is 64 which was had from 6 students. The third is 52, 68 and 72 which was had from 4 students, the forth is 44, 48 and 56 which was had from 3 students. The less frequent score is 76 which was had from 1 student. In addition, to see the data description of the result of post-test score in controlled class, it can be seen as follows: Table 4.9 Data Description of Post-test Result of Controlled Class Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean posttest 35 60 88 2596 74.17 Valid N listwise 35 The table 4.9 shows that the total number of data in controlled class is 35. The minimum score of post-test in controlled class is 60 and the maximum score is 88. The total score is 2596 while the mean score of post-test in controlled class is 74.17. According to the table above, it can be formed a table of frequency distribution as follows: Table 4.10 Frequency Distribution of Post-test Result of Controlled Class Posttest Frequency Valid 60 1 64 5 68 4 72 7 76 8 80 4 84 4 88 2 Total 35 From the table above, it can be seen the most frequent score is 76 which was had from 8 students. The second is 72 which was had from 7 students. The third is 64 which was had from 5 students, the forth are 68, 80 and 84 which was had from 4 students. The fifth is 88 which was had from 2 students and the less frequent score is 60 which was had from 1 student.

B. Analysis of Data

1. Normality of Data

Before analyzing the hypothesis, the data had to be analyzed by the normality of data. This normality of data was used to measure that the data had in research was normally distributed or not. The writer used SPSS v. 22 for windows with the criteria α 0.05. a. Normality of Pre-test 1. Normality of Pre-test in Experimental Class The normality test was used at the 0.05 level of significance. Table 4.11 Normality Pre-test Result of Experiment Class Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnov a Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig. Pretest .139 35 .087 .957 35 .181 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction It can be seen as table 4.11 above, the significace of pre-test score in Experiment Class based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov was 0.087. If the significance score is higher than α = 0.05, it means that the data is normally distributed. It can be concluded that the significance score of Pre-test in Experiment Class is normally distributed because 0.087 is higher than 0.05 0.087 0.05. 2. Normality of Pre-test in Controlled Class Table 4.12 Normality Pre-test Result of Controlled Class Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnov a Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig. pretest .139 35 .086 .955 35 .159 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction It can be seen as table 4.12 above, the significance of pre-test score in controlled class based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov is 0.086. If the significance score is higher than α = 0.05, it means that the data is normal distributed. It can be concluded that the significance score of Pre-test in controlled class is normally distributed because 0.086 is higher than 0.05 0.086 0.05.

b. Normality of Post-test 1. Normality of Post-test in Experiment Class

Table 4.13 Normality Post-test Result in Experiment Class Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnov a Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig. posttest .140 35 .082 .947 35 .088 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction From the table 4.13 above, it can be seen that the significance of post-test score in experiment class based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov is 0.082. If the significance score is higher than α = 0.05, it means that the data is normal distributed. It can be concluded that the significance score of post-test in experiment class is normally distributed because 0.082 is higher than 0.05 0.082 0.05 2. Normality of Post-test in Controlled Class Table 4.14 Normality Post-test Result in Controlled Class Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnov a Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig. posttest .116 35 .200 .959 35 .208 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction From the table 4.14 above, it can be seen that the significance of post-test score in controlled class based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov is 0.200. If the significance score is higher than α = 0.05, it means that the data is normal distributed. It can be concluded that the significance score of post-test in controlled class is normally distributed because 0.200 is higher than 0.05 0.200 0.05.

2. Homogeneity of Data

After conducting normality test, the result showed the data is normally distributed, the next step of the calculation is homogeneity test of pre-test and post-test using SPSS v. 22. The purpose of this test is to see whether the data in both classes are homogenous or heterogeneous. If the significance of the data is higher than 0.05, it means that the data is homogenous. The result of the homogeneity test of experiment and controlled class is presented as follows:

a. Homogeneity of Pre-test

The analysis of homogeneity variances of both classes in pre-test was done by using Levene’s statistic test in SPSS v. 22 for window. Here are the result of calculation: Table 4.15 Homogeneity of Pre-test Result between Experiment Class and Controlled Class Test of Homogeneity of Variances pretest Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. 1.938 7 26 .104 Table 4.15 showed that the significance of pre-test between experiment class and controlled class is 0.104. It can be concluded that the pre-test data of both classes are homogeneous because the result of significance pre-test 0.104 is higher than 0.05. 0.104 0.05 b. Homogeneity of Post-test The analysis of homogeneity variances of both classes in post-test was done by using Levene’s statistic test in SPSS v. 22 for window. Here are the result of calculation: Table 4.16 Homogeneity of Post-test Result between Experiment Class and Controlled Class Test of Homogeneity of Variances posttest Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. .785 6 27 .589 Table 4.16 showed that the significance of post-test between experiment class and controlled class is 0.589. It can be concluded that the post-test data of both classes are homogeneous because the result of significance post-test 0.589 is higher than 0.05. After both data was proved normally distributed and homogenous, the last calculation is testing the hypothesis. The data is calculated by using t-test formula to know the answer of the question whether there is a significance different between students’ reading comprehension of narrative text by using story mapping technique in experiment class and students’ reading comprehension of narrative text without using story mapping technique in controlled class. The two classes were compared, the experiment class was X variable and the controlled class was Y variable.

Dokumen yang terkait

The Effectiveness of Using Storyboard Technique on Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Tenth Grade of MAN 1 Tangerang Selatan)

3 41 145

Applying Think-aloud Technique in Improving Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text (Quasi Experimental Study of Tenth Grade Students of SMK Bhakti 17 Jagakarsa)

0 11 119

The Effectiveness Of Using Story Mapping Technique Towards Students’ Reading Ability Of Narrative Text (A Quasi-Experimental Study At Tenth Grade Students Of Sma N 4 Tangerang Selatan)

4 78 108

The effectiveness of using mind mapping technique on students’ reading of narrative text: a quasi-experimental study at the second grade of MAN 19 Jakarta

0 4 181

The Effectiveness of Using Jigsaw Technique to Develop Students’ Reading Comprehension on Narrative Text; A Quasi Experimental Study at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Negeri 63 Jakarta Selatan

0 6 139

The Effectiveness of Using Mind Mapping in Improving Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text A Quasi Experimental Study at the Second Grade of SMA Mathla’ul Huda Parung Panjang-Bogor.

0 5 126

Improving student's reading comprehention of narrative text through story mapping (a classroom action research at eight grade students of SMP PGRI 2 Ciputat)

0 17 0

The Effect of Video Game towards Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text; (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Eighth Grade Students' of SMP Negeri 96 Jakarta in the Academic Year of 2015/2016)

1 28 129

The Effectiveness of Question Generation Strategy on Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 1 Tambun Selatan)

1 10 143

The Effectiveness Of Using Short Story Towards Students’ Reading Comprehension Of Narrative Text (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Second Grade Students of Mts. AT-TAQWA Batu Ceper- Tangerang)

0 21 184