The Analysis and Interpretation of the Research Findings

2) The Analysis and Interpretation of the Research Findings

At the first meeting of Cycle I, the researcher taught the students about the material, the technique, and exposed the purpose of the material that should be achieved by the students. Based on the analysis of observation and the students' achievement, there were 22 students (73.33W who have done the activities. There were 8 students (26.67%) who did not do the activities.

At the second meeting of Cycle I, the researcher gave a test for the students to know the students ability in speaking. In conducting the test, the researcher asked the students to make a short conversation by using expression of asking and giving opinion. Based on the analysis of observation and the students' achievement, there were 24 students (80%) who have done activities and there were 6 students (20%) who did not do the activities. However, the result of this test was unsatisfied because

most of the students got the lower value than Minimum Competence Criterion (MCC) that has been specified. In which there were 5 students (16.67%) in "very good" level, 5 students (16.67%) in "good" level, 10 students (33.337o) in "enough" level, 8 students (26.67%) in "less" level, and 2 students (6.67%) in "fail" level. The average of the students' value was 59.7. In addition, the highest value was 93 and the lowest value was 35.

Because the result of the observation and evaluation sheet in Cycle I was unsuccessful, the researcher continued the research in cycle II. At the First meeting of Cycle II, the researcher explained more the material and the technique. Based on the Because the result of the observation and evaluation sheet in Cycle I was unsuccessful, the researcher continued the research in cycle II. At the First meeting of Cycle II, the researcher explained more the material and the technique. Based on the

Furthermore, the researcher continued the research in the second meeting. In the second meeting of Cycle II, the researcher did a test to know the students ability in speaking skill. The item test was same to the test in Cycle I. Based on the result of the observation sheet and the students achievement, there were 28 students (9333YA who have done the activities and there were 2 students (6.67%) who did not do the activities. From the result of the students achievement, there were 12 students (40%) in "very good” level, 9 students (30%) in "good" level, there were 9 students (30%) in "enough" level and there were no one students in "less" and "fail" level. The highest value was 98 and the lowest value was 65. In addition, the average of the students' value was 80.07. In this meeting, the entire students got value > Minimum Competence Criterion (MCC) 60 that has been specified. So, the researcher concluded that the students' ability in speaking skill through Chain Drill Technique was successful.

Based on the description from the previous page, it can be implied that using Chain Drill Technique made the students more active and able to speak. Furthermore, the problems of t{re research are caused by some factors, such as the students are not able to responds a question of asking and giving opinion, the students are not able to conduct the conversation, the students are not able to ask a question because of their limited vocabulary, and the students are not able to convense the dialogue.

Based on the factors of the problems in the research, the researcher applied Chain Drill Technique to the students. This strategy is solve their problems in Speaking. Because Chain Drill Technique is encourage students to share their idea orally, asks question and take notes.