Description of the Participants Description of the Data

5 : strongly agree with the statement 4 : agree with the statement 3 : doubt with the statement 2 : disagree with the statement 1 : strongly disagree with the statement The result of the evaluation was clarified in the table below: Table 4.5: The Description of the Data Central Tendency No Respondent’s Evaluation N Mn 1 The basic competencies are well formulated. 3 3.7 2 The indicators are well formulated. 3 3.4 3 The topics are well arranged. 3 3.7 4 The materials are suitable and appropriate for the eighth grade students of Junior High School. 3 4 5 The language function used in each unit has been presented properly. 3 3.4 6 The materials are able to improve the students’ communicative skills. 3 4.4 7 The tasksactivities are well elaborated and provide the opportunity for the students to speak much. 3 3.7 8 The steps in giving instructions are clear and helpful for the teacher and the students. 3 4 9 The number of activities in each unit has been sufficient for the time given. 3 4.4 10 Generally, the materials are well arranged. 3 4 Grand Mean 3.87 Besides giving evaluation, the participants were also given opportunity to give their opinion and suggestions on the designed materials. They were: a. Decreasing time allotment for the pre-teaching activities and providing more opportunities in the whilst-teaching. b. Varying the numbers of group work for each meeting. The members for each group consisted of not only three students, but could be less or more than that. c. Providing more pictures related to the situations to attract students’ interests. d. Providing vocabularies and expressions likely to be used in Role Plays. Some of the dictions were difficult and had not been used in the eighth grade of junior high school. e. Mentioning the language functions at the beginning of each unit, not just in the syllabus. f. Including competencies standard, basic competencies, and indicators in the syllabus. g. The indicators in the lesson plans needed to be improved to be able to measure students’ achievement.

C. Discussion on the Results of the Survey

In this part, the writer discussed the process of analyzing the result and considering the suggestions to revise and improve the materials. The data formulated in table 4.5 showed that the average degree of agreement was ranged from 3.4 to 4.7. The data showed the grand mean on the designed materials was 3.87. The writer, therefore, could draw a conclusion that the designed materials were acceptable. Based on the participants’ suggestions, the writer made some revisions and improvements in order to get better materials. Most of the suggestion were accepted and used for the improvement. However, there were also few suggestions that were not used. All of the acceptance and refusal were made using some consideration. The results of the revisions were: 1. Revising the lesson plans, rearranging the time allotment, and stating more detailed indicators for each unit. 2. Varying the numbers of group members into three, four, or five students at the maximum. The more members in a group, the less effective the process run. 3. Giving enough pictures in each pages of the unit. Too many pictures in a page would distract students’ focus on the speaking practice. 4. Providing some words related to the situations in the role-play. However, the writer would not provide expressions in the role-play since the expressions had already been provided in the Think of It part and it was the time for the students to practice what they had learnt. 5. Checking the words to be used in the materials. However, some of the difficult words would not be omitted. By keeping those words, the students could enrich their vocabulary mastery. 6. Revising the syllabus

D. The Presentation of the Designed Materials

The final version of the designed materials was able to answer the second problem stated in chapter one that was “What does the designed set of English