Theoretical Framework REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
21
I O1
X1 O2
II O1 X2
O2
According to Hadjar 1996, there is an alternative method; the researcher can use comparison group design, without using control group. The steps are the
same with non-equivalent control group design. The difference is in the third step, each group is given different treatment.
The researcher used two experimental groups. In one group Group A, the researcher used deductive approach and in another group Group B, the
researcher used inductive approach. The teaching and learning activity in both groups were conducted inside the classroom.
There were two classes that were observed. They were six Tholhah and six Hamzah. In this research, Tholhah class was called as group A and Hamzah class
was called as group B. The researcher used deductive approach in Group A and inductive approach in Group B.
The pre-test was conducted in both classes. The researcher compared the result of the pre-test as the pre-test data. The researcher used deductive approach
in Group A. In the same week, the researcher also taught group B by using inductive approach. The teaching learning activities was done around 2 weeks.
The researcher used GTM and CLT in teaching grammar. Grammar Translation Method GTM was used to teach grammar, especially simple present
tense, in Group A. Meanwhile, the researcher used Communicative Language Teaching CLT in Group B.
22
In Grammar Translation Method GTM, the materials were taught deductively. The teaching and learning consisted of presentation and the study of
the grammar rules. After that, the students practiced through translation exercises. However, in Communicative Language Teaching CLT, the teaching activities
consisted of groups and pair activities, language games, role-play, etc Richards and Rodgers, 1986.
The experiment lasted for about a month. The researcher carried out the teaching and learning process in four meetings for each group to conduct the
research. Two meetings were used to teach in each group and the other two meetings were used to do the pre-test and post-test. The consideration was that
there was one meeting in every week. Both deductive group and inductive group received the same materials and tests. The difference was the approach that was
used to teach grammar. At the end of the teaching and learning process, the students were given
post-test. The results of those tests were compared. The result of the post-test showed whether there was an improvement of the students’ grammar mastery or
not from each group. From the result, the researcher got the result of which approach that was more effective to teach grammar, especially simple present
tense, to the sixth graders of Aisyiyah Full Day Elementary School.