Analysis of the Post Test

make it easier to observe the class, the writer constructed observation list. The list was consisted of three parts to observe, they were the exposure to the target language, the memorization enhancement, and the output the usage. Facts 1 to 7 showed the comprehensible input which was represented by the exposure to target language uttered by the teacher and the students’ respond to the teacher’s language instruction. Items 8 to 10 represented the effort to encourage memorization. The language use by the students in the real communication referred to number 11 to 14. The statements of the fact items to be observed can be seen in the appendix. The following table shows the results of the observation. Meeting Activity I II III IV V VI VII VIII ∑ Mean 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 38 4.75 2 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 35 4.375 3 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 39 4.875 4 4 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 35 4.375 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 32 4 6 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 30 3.75 7 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 31 3.875 8 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 37 4.625 9 - 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 3.5 10 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 29 3.625 11 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 27 3.375 12 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 31 3.875 13 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 28 3.5 14 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 19 2.375 Table 4.6 Observation List Score of the Experimental Group Meeting Activity I II III IV V VI VII VIII ∑ Mean 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 24 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 25 3.125 3 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 38 4.75 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 23 2.875 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 32 4 6 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 36 4.5 7 4 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 32 4 8 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 36 4.5 9 - 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 23 2.875 10 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 18 2.25 11 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 20 2.5 12 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 17 2.125 13 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 2 14 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 10 1.25 Table 4.7 Observation List Score of the Control Group Note : 1 = never occur 2 = rarely occur 3 = occasionally occur 4 = frequently occur 5 = always occur The observation lists of experimental and control group above was used to see the contribution of the Natural Method in improving the students’ vocabulary mastery. In order to see the contribution, the writer compared the scores of the two groups. Activity1 was about the target language exposure uttered by the teacher. The score of the experimental group was 4.75 which was 1.75 higher than that of the control group. It means that the students in the experimental group got much input than the students in the control group. In the experimental group, the teacher talked in the target language. This technique supplied the students with much input both the vocabulary intended to be taught and the frequently used vocabulary. Activities 2 to 4 represented the use of demonstration gesture and realia by the teacher when presenting the lesson. It can be seen in the observation lists above that the experimental group had higher score than the control group. As stated in the previous chapter, the gesture demonstration and realia help the students to comprehend the language. Therefore, it means that the students in the experimental group were provided with more help of gesture and demonstration than that of the control group which made the input comprehensible for the students. In order to see the students’ respond in the class, activities 5 to 7 told about it. The score of the control group was higher than that of the experimental group. The instruction in the students’ native language was more easily understood by the students rather than the instruction in the target language. Therefore, the students in the control group could almost do all what they were told to do correctly. However, from the observation, it was found that the students in the experimental group were still able to do the instruction correctly because the teacher demonstratedacted out what she said. The teacher demonstrated the instruction; hence the students could perform the instruction correctly. Activities 8 to 10 referred to the use of repetition to enhance the students’ memorization of the vocabulary. Both groups showed that the teachers of the two groups encouraged memorization by repeating new vocabulary several times. However, from the observation score number 9 and 10, it was found that the experimental group got much higher score than that of the control group. The teacher talk in the experimental class combined new vocabulary with previous vocabulary when talking in the target language. Hence, the students were reminded about the vocabulary items and they would automatically recall what they have learned. This evidence proved that in the Natural Method the students were encouraged to repeat unconsciously what they have learned.