43
rely on one another. They knew that their contribution means a lot to their group and so did other member‟s contribution.
B. Individual Accountability
In the first cycle, the students did all of five components in Student Team Achievement Division in two meetings. One of the components is teams or study
group. In the teams or study group, the students did several tasks given about narrative text. The tasks given were to arrange the paragraph of the story, find the
meaning of the difficult words, and answer several questions based on the story. The students did these tasks in group with the help of other members. By doing
these tasks, the students would also have the chance to learn from each other about this material.
All of them tried to understand the material by understanding the story, recognizing the difficult words and its meaning and also understanding the
possible answer for the questions given. Their individual and group knowledge about the material would be very beneficial for their group in the next component
of Student Team Achievement Division, which was the individual quiz. Regarding to this, all of the students were starting to become more responsible in
doing all the tasks and mastering the material so that they would acquire better score in their individual quiz.
When the students did not understand some words, they would ask to their friends. Their friends then explained it to them. The researcher only controlled the
process happened, but when the students found some difficulties which themselves could not answer, they asked about it to the researcher. It was proven
44
in the questionnaire in which 27.78 of the students strongly agreed and 58.33 agreed that they became more active to ask questions to the teacher. All of this
was the sign that the students were starting to have the sense of individual accountability in their learning process. They were trying to comprehend the
material as many as possible. As explained in the previous element, the researcher had assigned different
roles to the group members. One of the roles is the group process monitor. The group process monitor would monitor the group members‟ understanding about
the material given and make sure that each member participated in the team deliberation. Based on the researcher‟s notes, most of the students, not only the
group process monitor, were trying to help their friends in understanding the material and doing the tasks given. Based on the questionnaire given to the
students, 16.67 strongly agreed and 80.56 agreed that they were willing to help other group members in understanding material and doing the task and also
getting help from other members. This was also strengthened by the observer‟s opinion in the field notes that the students had been helping each other for the
success of the group. Each of the members of the group also participated in doing the tasks. As reported on the questionnaire; 22.22 of students strongly agreed
and 69.44 agreed that all of their group member participate actively in doing every task given.
The researcher could see that the result of the students‟ well performance in their group work really influence the students‟ performance result in the
individual quiz. Their individual accountability had leaded a good improvement in
45
their participation and contribution in the individual quiz. Based on the questionnaire, 41.67 of the students strongly agreed and 55.56 agreed that
they can do the task given well. 16.67 of the students also strongly agreed and 80.56 agreed that they did their individual quiz seriously. From this data, the
researcher could conclude that each student had tried their best and be responsible for the group‟s success. It can also be seen from the result of the questionnaire
that 47.22 of the students strongly agreed and 50.00 agreed that they contributed and tried to make their group the best group among others. The
students did the quiz individually without any help from the teacher or their friends. However, the result of their quiz was still quite excellent. The students
could reach the classroom average score for 8.34 in the individual quiz in the first cycle.
In the second cycle, the researcher could see that the students‟ individual accountability was also improved. In their group work, the students were really
trying hard to understand the material well because in this cycle, the material given was more difficult than before. The text was longer and also contained more
difficult words. However, the researcher found that all of the students could cooperate well in their group work; all of them did their job and helped each other
to understand and do the task. Even though the material was more difficult, the students could achieved better classroom average score in this cycle. From 8.34
the students had improved their classroom average score to 8.54. Based on the explanation above, the researcher could conclude that in the
first cycle, the researcher had found the sign of the individual accountability in the
46
students. In the second cycle, there was an improvement on their individual accountability, because even though the material became more difficult, the
students did not give up and still tried to do their best to help each other and comprehend the material so that they could get better score in the individual quiz.
Then, the students‟ hard work and effort resulted in their individual quiz score. Their classroom average score had improved from 8.34 to 8.54 see Appendix 14.
C. Face-to-face Promotive Interaction
In the observation, the researcher found that there were some face-to-face interactions in the VIIB English extracurricular class; when the students were
engaged in activities such as group work and pairs. However, promotive interaction in which the students providing one another with feedback, helping,
sharing and encouraging their friends to produce something had not happened yet. The students were working in group or pair but they only did the task given
without explaining or teaching what they know to their group members. They might discuss about the task but their focus was only to complete the task and not
to encourage or support one another to understand more. In cycle one, the researcher conducted the lesson in ways that ensure that
all students could promote or encourage their group members to succeed while working face-to-face in their group. As the result, the students of VIIB who had
understood that they needed to rely on one another positive interdependence and had the responsibility to master the material in order to achieve their group‟s goals
individual accountability, already had the willingness to help or to be helped by their group members. On the student‟s questionnaire, the researcher found that
47
16.67 of the students strongly agreed and 80.56 agreed that they helped their group member in understanding the material. This showed that the students had
face-to-face promotive interaction in their teams or study group because their learning activity required helping, supporting, encouraging and applauding each
other‟s effort in achieving their mutual goals. Based on the researcher‟s note, the students encouraged and supported
their friends through the group discussion and sharing. They were also exchanging knowledge in order to solve the task. The researcher once emphasized that
individual mastery of the material was really important for their individual quiz and group‟s score, therefore the students were also checking each other‟s
understanding to the material. The group work became more meaningful than a mere face to face interaction without deep personal support. These processes were
quite fun, because as the teacher, the researcher could see how active and excited the students in doing their task.
The teacher circulated the classroom and checked whether the students had completed the task and understood the material. In this chance, the students could
ask the teacher about their difficulties when their group could not solve it. However, the group should work harder to solve it before asking to the teacher.
Based on the observer‟s observation checklist, the students could work together in group and actively participate in the group discussion. In the observer‟s
explanation of that point, written that the students really enjoyed their learning process. They did not carelessly do the task but seriously worked on it so that their
group considered superior. I n the students‟ questionnaire it was also written that
