Data Presentation and Discussion on the Preliminary Study

31

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Chapter four presents the data presentation and discussion of each cycle, the elaboration of the results from the data and other findings in order to answer the research problem of this research. They were taken from students‟ draft analysis, teacher‟s field note, questionnaire analysis, and also focus group analysis. In this study, the research problem that would like to be answered by the researcher is to what extent the use of direct written corrective feedback improved the eighth grade students‟ spelling accuracy. In order to answer this research problem, the researcher provided the improvement of the students‟ spelling accuracy in a percentage form. Besides that, the researcher also presented the improvement by showing the analysis of the students‟ behavior during the implementation based on the purposes of the written corrective feedback. The description of the data presentation and discussion of each cycle, the elaboration of the results from the data and other findings would be explained as follows.

A. Data Presentation and Discussion on the Preliminary Study

The preliminary study was done by the researcher on January 19, 2016 in VIII-H class SMPN 15 Yogyakarta. The researcher conducted the preliminary study in order to make sure the problem which was faced by the students. There were 32 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 32 students who joined the class since two students were sick and did not come to school. The researcher taught them as a teacher. While the researcher was teaching, the researcher also observed the students and made a field note about anything that was happened during the preliminary study. Based on the field note, the students were so active during the preliminary study. Most of them asked the researcher about anything that was presented in the slide of PowerPoint. The teaching material was about a descriptive text. The researcher explained to the students about the way how to describe a person into a text. The students paid attention to the researcher and many of them were excited to read aloud some examples of a descriptive text about someone given by the researcher. While the students read the descriptive text aloud, the researcher listened to them then helped them to correct the pronunciation by drilling the words. In the preliminary study, the researcher asked the students to write a description about a girl that they wanted to describe. However, there was no limit in writing the words so that the students could explore their creativity in writing the description. When the students were writing, many of them asked the researcher about the correct spelling of the words that they wanted to write. In the field note, the researcher wrote: “Most of the students asked about the English translation of some words in Bahasa Indonesia such as „hidung pesek‟ flat nose, „rambut bergelombang‟ wavy hair , and „mata sipit‟ slanted eyes. They also asked, “Miss, tulisannya yang benar gimana miss? ” “How is the correct spelling, miss?”. When I spelled the words by 33 using English alphabets, they said “Pakai bahasa Indonesia aja miss ngejanya.” “Please spell in Indonesian, miss.”. The field note of the preliminary study, see appendix 3 This showed that the students had low level of language proficiency since they could not remember the alphabet in English. Perhaps, this could be the reason why they did not know the correct spelling of certain words. Then, when the students had finished writing the description, the students‟ writing products were submitted to the researcher in the end of the class. After that, the researcher analyzed the students‟ writing products at home. The researcher c hecked the students‟ writing products by giving direct written corrective feedback. The researcher crossed the misspelled words that were made by the students and gave corrections below or above the misspelled words. The students‟ writing products that have been given direct written corrective feedback by the researcher were returned to the students in the next cycle. After giving corrections to the students‟ drafts, the researcher counted the total of words that were written by the students and also the total of misspelled words that were made by the students in their writing products. The percentage of error in the students‟ writing drafts was calculated by using the formula below: Note: X = The error percentage of the misspelled words Y = The number of errors that were made by the students 34 Z = The number of words that were written by the students The result of the students‟ writing products in the preliminary study was shown in the appendix. It could be seen from the table 4.2 in the appendix 14 that all of the students made errors in their spelling accuracy. However, the total of words that were written by each student varied from 25 to 41. Since the students wrote different number of words, the researcher divided the number of errors and the number of words then multiplied the result by 100 in order to make the percentage of errors. From the result of the students‟ writing products that could be seen in the appendix 14 , the average of the students‟ errors in the spelling accuracy was 38,5 . In the appendix 10, the researcher provided the sample of students‟ writing products in the preliminary study and below are the examples of the stude nts‟ sentence in their writing products that contained errors in spelling. 1. I have one yanger sister. Student 21 2. She has siort wifi broun hare. Student 31 3. Shi hes brown skin. Student 12 4. She hes flad nous. Student 16 5. Sis tol. Student 6 6. Evrywan like her bikaus she is frendly. Student 15 It could be seen from the examples of students‟ sentences above that many students had problem in their writing, especially in their spelling accuracy. Some students might also have problem in their grammar, but the most common problem 35 which happened to all of the students was spelling. Other examples of the students‟ errors in their spelling accuracy that were found by the researcher in the students writing products would be presented as follows. Table 4.1 The Examples of Students’ Errors in the Preliminary Study No. Correct Spelling [in American English] Erroneous Spelling written by the students 1. Wavy waifi student 5 wefy student 15 wifi student 13, 17, 18, 31 weavy student 11, 19 weave student 1, 26 2. Has hes student 12, 17 3. Hair her student 21 hare student 15, 31 4. Friendly frenly student 21 frendly student 12, 15, 17, 19, 20 frendle student 16 franlly student 29 freindly student 5 5. Short siort student 15, 31 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 36 6. Tall tol student 6,13 7. Younger yanger student 21 youngger student 3, 20 8. Flat fled student 17 flad student 2, 15, 16 fleit student 21 fleat student 31 9. Nose nous student 15, 16 noos student 21 nouse student 23, 25, 31 10. Because bikaus student 15 becaus student 13 bicause student 6, 17 bicaush student 31 bekos student 18 It could be seen from the examples above that each student could write different incorrect spelling for the same words. In the first example, the students wrote the word „wavy‟ into many incorrect spelling such as ‘wifi’, wefy’, ‘waifi’, ‘weavy’, and ‘weave’. These errors could make a different meaning or no meaning in 37 English. This also happened to the example number 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10 with different words. Then, they also wrote the spelling of the word as what they pronounce the word. In the first example, two students wrote the word ‘hes’ instead of „has‟. They wrote it since they pronounce the word „has‟ into [hes] instead of [hæz]. This happened because the vowel sound of æ is unknown in Bahasa Indonesia. As said by Pallawa 2013, this phoneme æ is almost the same as [e] where the mouth is slender more open than for e where the quality of the phoneme æ is close to cardinal vowel ɛ than to cardinal [a] that equals to [ɛ]. That is why the students pronounce the æ sound into e and wrote the spelling equals to what they pronounce. It also happened to the other examples where the students wrote the spelling of the word equals to what they pronounce the word such as in the word „wavy‟ into ‘waifi’, „hair‟ into ‘her’, „friendly‟ into ‘frenly’, „short‟ ínto ‘siort’, „tall‟ into ‘tol’, „younger‟ into ‘yanger’, „flat‟ into ‘fled’, „nose‟ into ‘nous’, and also „because‟ into ‘bikaus’. As noted by Kumar 2013, the difference in pronunciation of words is also a cause of spelling error s. As spelling is known to have influence on learners‟ pronunciation, pronunciation can also similarly affect the way learners spell words. The effect is more likely in the context where learners don‟t look up the spelling of the word and completely rely on the verbal input from the environment. 38 The given examples show that the students really had problem in their spelling accuracy. This problem was still the same problem which the students faced when the researcher did the Internship Program Program Pengalaman Lapangan. When the researcher observed the English teacher of SMPN 15 Yogyakarta, the researcher found out that sometimes the teacher gave indirect written corrective feedback to the students by circling on the errors that the students made without giving the correct form of the errors. Thus, many students still got problem in their spelling accuracy as they did not know the correct form of the errors.

B. Data Presentation and Discussion on the First Cycle