1. Home
  2. Lainnya

Technique of Data Collection Techniques of Data Analysis

12 Student 12 70 75 75 70 70 72 13 Student 13 70 75 75 70 70 72 14 Student 14 70 75 75 70 70 72 15 Student 15 80 80 70 75 75 76 16 Student 16 80 80 70 75 75 76 17 Student 17 70 75 75 70 70 72 18 Student 18 75 75 75 75 75 75 19 Student 19 75 75 75 75 75 75 20 Student 20 75 75 75 75 75 75 21 Student 21 75 75 75 75 75 75 22 Student 22 80 80 80 85 80 81 23 Student 23 80 80 80 75 75 78 24 Student 24 60 70 70 70 60 66 25 Student 25 80 80 75 75 70 76 26 Student 26 80 80 75 75 70 76 27 Student 27 70 70 70 70 60 68 28 Student 28 70 70 70 60 60 66 29 Student 29 70 60 70 70 60 66 30 Student 30 80 80 80 80 75 79 Total 2219 Mean 73.96666667 Table 4.2 The Students’ Pretest Scores of Control Group XI MIPA 3 No Name Criteria Mean Score P r o n u n c ia tio n G r a m m a r Vo c a b u la r y F lu e n c y Co m p r e h e n sio n 1 Student 1 70 75 75 70 70 72 2 Student 2 70 75 75 70 70 72 3 Student 3 70 75 75 70 70 72 4 Student 4 70 75 75 70 70 72 5 Student 5 75 75 75 75 75 75 6 Student 6 75 75 75 75 75 75 7 Student 7 70 75 75 70 70 72 8 Student 8 75 75 75 75 75 75 9 Student 9 80 75 75 70 70 74 10 Student 10 75 75 75 75 75 75 11 Student 11 80 80 75 75 70 76 12 Student 12 80 80 75 75 70 76 13 Student 13 80 80 80 75 75 78 14 Student 14 69 69 69 69 69 69 15 Student 15 80 80 75 75 70 76 16 Student 16 80 80 80 85 80 81 17 Student 17 80 80 80 75 75 78 18 Student 18 70 60 70 70 60 66 19 Student 19 80 80 75 75 70 76 20 Student 20 80 80 75 75 70 76 21 Student 21 70 70 70 70 60 68 22 Student 22 70 70 70 70 60 68 23 Student 23 70 70 70 70 60 68 24 Student 24 80 80 80 80 80 80 25 Student 25 80 80 75 75 70 76 26 Student 26 80 80 75 75 70 76 27 Student 27 70 70 70 70 60 76 28 Student 28 80 80 75 75 70 76 29 Student 29 70 75 75 70 70 72 30 Student 30 75 75 75 75 75 75 Total 2221 Mean 74.03333333 As mentioned of scores in pre-test in the tables, it can be clarified that the mean score of pre-test in experimental class was 73.96666667, while the mean score of pre-test in control group was 74.03333333. And from the scores of both classes, it means that there was a difference between the students’ achievement of scores in pre-test experimental class and control group. Here, the control group got the higher mean score than the experimental class.

2. Post-test Score

Table 4.3 The Students’ Post-test Scores of Experimental Class XI MIPA 5 No Name Criteria Mean Score P r o n u n c ia tio n G r a m m a r Vo c a b u la r y F lu e n c y Co m p r e h e n sio n 1 Student 1 75 75 75 75 75 75 2 Student 2 80 80 80 80 80 80 3 Student 3 80 80 80 80 80 80 4 Student 4 84 84 84 84 84 84 5 Student 5 75 75 75 75 75 75 6 Student 6 80 80 80 80 80 80 7 Student 7 80 80 80 85 80 81 8 Student 8 80 80 80 85 80 81 9 Student 9 80 75 75 70 70 74 10 Student 10 75 75 75 75 75 75 11 Student 11 80 80 80 75 75 78 12 Student 12 80 80 80 85 80 81 13 Student 13 80 80 80 75 75 78 14 Student 14 70 70 70 70 70 70 15 Student 15 80 80 80 80 80 80 16 Student 16 80 80 80 85 80 81 17 Student 17 80 80 80 75 75 78 18 Student 18 80 80 80 85 80 81 19 Student 19 80 80 75 75 70 76 20 Student 20 80 80 75 75 70 76 21 Student 21 80 80 80 85 80 81 22 Student 22 80 80 75 75 70 76 23 Student 23 75 75 75 75 75 75 24 Student 24 80 80 80 80 80 80 25 Student 25 80 80 80 80 80 80 26 Student 26 80 80 80 75 75 78 27 Student 27 80 80 80 85 80 81 28 Student 28 80 80 75 75 70 76 29 Student 29 80 80 80 80 80 80 30 Student 30 80 80 80 75 75 78 Total 2349 Mean 78.3 Table 4.4 The Students’ Post-test Scores of Control Group XI MIPA 3 No Name Criteria Mean Score P r o n u n c ia tio n G r a m m a r Vo c a b u la r y F lu e n c y Co m p r e h e n sio n 1 Student 1 80 80 70 75 75 76 2 Student 2 80 80 70 75 75 76 3 Student 3 70 75 75 70 70 72 4 Student 4 75 75 75 75 75 75 5 Student 5 80 80 80 80 80 80 6 Student 6 75 75 75 75 75 75 7 Student 7 80 80 70 75 75 76 8 Student 8 80 80 70 75 75 76 9 Student 9 75 75 75 75 75 75 10 Student 10 75 75 75 75 75 75 11 Student 11 80 80 70 75 75 76 12 Student 12 80 80 70 75 75 76 13 Student 13 75 75 75 75 75 75 14 Student 14 75 75 75 75 75 75 15 Student 15 80 80 75 75 70 76 16 Student 16 80 80 80 85 80 81 17 Student 17 80 80 75 75 70 76 18 Student 18 80 75 75 70 70 74 19 Student 19 70 75 75 70 70 72 20 Student 20 70 75 75 70 70 72 21 Student 21 80 75 75 70 70 74 22 Student 22 80 75 75 70 70 74 23 Student 23 80 75 75 70 70 74 24 Student 24 70 75 75 70 70 72 25 Student 25 80 80 75 75 70 76 26 Student 26 70 75 75 70 70 72 27 Student 27 80 80 75 75 70 76 28 Student 28 80 80 75 75 70 76 29 Student 29 70 75 75 70 70 72 30 Student 30 70 75 75 70 70 72 Total 2247 Mean 74.9 The table 4.3 and table 4.4 above inform that the mean score of post-test in experimental class was 78.3 , and the mean score of post-test in control group was 74.9 . It is means that there was a significant score of experimental class and control group in post-test, control group was increased in post-test session than in pre-test. But, for this session, the experimental class got the higher score than the control group. It proves that using storytelling technique is effective to enhance students’ speaking skill.

3. Gained Score

After showing the comparison of students’ pre -test and post-test scores, the table shows the gained score among those two classes the gained score can be seen from the increasing score of students’ pre -test scores compared with students’ post -test scores.

Dokumen yang terkait

The Effect of Using Herringbone Technique on the Eleventh Grade Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement at SMAN 1 Pesanggaran

1 9 10

The Effect of Using Roundtable Technique on the Eighth Grade Students' Writing Achievement at SMPN 1 Wuluhan Jember in the 2014/2015 Academic Year

0 4 4

The Effectiveness of Using Storyboard Technique on Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Tenth Grade of MAN 1 Tangerang Selatan)

3 41 145

The Effectiveness of Information-Gap Toward Students' Speaking Skill (A Quasi Experimental Research at the Second Grade Students of MTs Khazanah Kebajikan Pondok Cabe Ilir)

16 106 107

The Effectiveness of Using Jigsaw Technique to Develop Students’ Reading Comprehension on Narrative Text; A Quasi Experimental Study at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Negeri 63 Jakarta Selatan

0 6 139

The Effectiveness of Using Card Games Technique in Teaching Vocabulary (A Quasi Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade of SMP Negeri 18 Tangerang)

1 4 125

The Effectiveness of Jigsaw Technique in Teacihing Reading Conprehension : An Experimental Study at the Second Grade of MAN 2 Bekasi

0 6 61

The Effect of Using Drama Technique on Students’ Speaking Ability (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade Students of SMPN 6 South Tangerang).

0 9 0

An Error Analysis in Using Verb-ing Forms (A Case Study at the Eleventh Year Students of SMA Darul Muttaqin)

6 37 101

The Effectiveness of Using Clustering Technique in Teaching Writing Recount Text (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Second Grade ofMts Negeri 3 Jakarta)

1 11 109