Furthermore, the writer also gained the data from the interview. All the data functioned as the consideration for the writer to design materials using
Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition CIRC for the eleventh grade students of SMA Negeri 4 Yogyakarta.
2. Data Analysis Technique of the Evaluation Survey
In the evaluation survey on the designed materials, the writer used the second questionnaire for the two English teachers of SMA Negeri 4 Yogyakarta
and one lecturer of English Language Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The second questionnaire was divided into Part A and Part B.
In Part A, the respondents were to give their opinions by choosing from the options given. The options were based on the Points of Agreement using
“Likert Scale”, in which the respondents were asked to register their responses on 5 points of agreement. Actually, in this study, the writer didn’t use all the points
of agreement in order to avoid uncertain answers for point three. In line with it, the writer only used four points of agreement.
The points of agreement and the meanings can be seen in Table 3.2
Table 3.2 Points of Agreement of the Respondents’ Opinions
Points of Agreement
Meaning
1
If the respondents strongly disagree with the statement
2
If the respondents disagree with the statement
3
If the respondents agree with the statement
4
If the respondents strongly agree with the statement
The data of Part A were calculated by using central tendency that is mean. According to Brown and Rodgers 2004: 128, mean is “the sum of all the values
in a distribution divided by the number of values”. The mean X was obtained
by counting the sum of the respondents’ answer ∑x divided by the number of
the respondents N. The formula is as follows.
Note: X
= mean the average point x = the sum of respondents’ answer
N = the number of respondents
The writer counted the average and then the data were presented in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3 The Data of the Respondents’ Opinions Blank
No.
Respondents’ Opinions on N
Central Tendency Mean
After the results were calculated and analyzed in term of mean, the results were then interpreted based on the criteria presented in Table 3.4.
N x
X
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
