Research Findings
c. Item Facility Analysis
Item facility analysis is used to find out the difficulty, and easiness of items. Based on the calculation shown in Appendix 12a (Table 18) and Appendix 12b (Table 19), in the pretest and posttest are dominated by 7 items of the medium items and 9 items of the difficult items. So, it can be concluded that the items of the tests were in both of medium and difficult items.
d. Item Discrimination Analysis d. Item Discrimination Analysis
2. Data Analysis
a) The Pretest and Posttest Analysis
In examining the pretest’ normality and homogeneity, the researcher gave the pretest to both groups. The students’ score of the pretest was shown in Appendix 14a (Table 22) and Appendix 16a (Table 26). The students’ score of the posttest was shown in Appendix 14b (Table 23) and Appendix 16b (Table 27). Based on the appendices, the researcher counted the mean score, the standard deviation, and the variance.
1) The Mean
The mean mark of the pre-test for the experimental class is 64. 7 (Appendix
22) classified less; while in the post test was 81,61 (Appendix 23) classified good. And then, the mean mark of the pre-test for the control class was 69.70 (Appendix
23) classified less while in the post-test was 75 (Appendix 23) classified less. For more comprehending, table below will show it.
1) The Standard Deviation
The standard deviation of the pre-test for the experimental class was 90,40 (Appendix 22), while in the post-test was 14.15 (Appendix 26). And then, the standard deviation of the pre-test for the control class was 8.91 (Appendix 23) while in the post-test was 11.76 (Appendix 25).
For more comprehending, table bellow will show it.
Table 6
THE LOWEST and HIGHEST of STANDAR DEVIATION of PRE TEST and POST TEST in CONTROL and EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
HIGHEST SCORE GROUP
LOWEST
SCORE OF PRE OF POST TEST TEST
Standar Deviation Standar Deviation Control Group
34 8.19 11.76 Experimental Group
2) The Variants
The variants of the pre-test for the experimental class is 85.55 (appendix 22), while in the post-test was 200.14 (Appendix 23). And then, the variants of pre-test for
Table 7
THE LOWEST and HIGHEST of VARIANCE of PRE TEST and POST TEST in CONTROL and EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
LOWEST SCORE HIGHEST SCORE GROUP
OF PRE TEST
OF POST TEST
Variance Control Group
Variance
34 79.47 138.22 Experimental Group
3) The Normality
The data of the pre-test for the experimental class is L count 0.1047 (Appendix 27a, Table 33) with L table = 0.161, while in the post-test is L count (0.1113) (Appendix 27c, Table 34) lower than L table (0.161). It concludes that both of the result of the pre- test and post-test for the experimental class are stated normal distribution. Furthermore, the date of the pre-test for the control class is L count 0.1179 (Appendix 27b, Table 33) was lower than L table (0.161), while in the post-test is L count 0.1258 (Appendix 27d, Table 35). It concludes that both of the result of the pre-test and post- test for the control class is stated normal distribution.
Table 8
THE LOWEST and HIGHEST of NORMALITY of PRE TEST and POST TEST in CONTROL and EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
NORMALITY GROUP
NORMALITY
OF PRE TEST
OF POST TEST
L table L count L table L count Control Group
0.161 0.1258 Experimental Group
4) The Homogenity
Based on Appendix 27a, it is shown that the result of the homogeneity ofthe pre test computations indicated F table = 1.859, is consulted to the score F count. to dk=n 1 -
1, n 2 -1 at the significant level 5% is gotten F count = 1.077. Since F table (1.859) >F count
(1.077),it can be concluded that both groups of the pre test is stated Homogenous. Based on Appendix 27b, it is shown that the result of the homogeneity of the post test computations indicated F table = 1.859, consulted to the score F count. to dk=n 1 -1,
n 2 -1 at the significant level 5% is gotten F count = 1.448. Since F table (1.859) >F count
(1.448),it can be concluded that both groups ofthe post test is stated Homogenous. For more comprehending, table bellow will show it.
6. The Hypothesis testing (t-test)
The testing hypotheses in Appendix 30, the table value of t-table dk = 2(n-2) = 2(30-2) = 58 and the significance level is 5% (
), so, t table =t 1/2 (dk) =t 0.025 x
58 = 2.002. Since t count ( )>t table (2.002) it can be concluded that H a is accepted and H o is rejected.
Table 10
THE RESULT of EXAMINING HYPOTHESIS
Hypothesis Examining Criteria of
t count t table
Hypothesis Ha Ho
H a is accepted if t table <t count
Rejecte
and the others
H o is unacceptable if
t table <t count (2.002 < 2.828)
There is significant effect of Sight Word Strategy on
the Student’s Ability in Mastering Vocabulary at the Eighth Grade Students of SMP Negeri 1
Conclusion Conclusion
was proved that there is the different students’ learning outcome. When taking the pre-test namely the students’ ability tests to both classes are stated low. And then, the
researcher gives the treatment to the experimental class by implementing Sight Word Strategy. By applying Sight Word Strategy in teaching the students especially in descriptive text, the students have shown their ability in reading. After doing the treatment, the researcher gave the post- test namely the students’ ability in mastering vocabulary test of both classes. The researcher stated that the students’ post-test score was higher than the students’ pre-test score. Then, when comparing to the post-test result of the control class without the treatment, it is shown that the result of the experimental class is higher than the control class. In other words there is a significant effect on t he students’ ability in reading comprehension after implementing Sight Word Strategy. In the conventional teaching strategy didn’t