40
Table 4.3 Students’ Scores in Cycle Two Pre-Implementation Post-Implementation Student
Pre-Implementation Post-Implementation
Words Meaning
Average Words
Meaning Average
1 14
20 17
12 18
15 2
4 20
12 15
11 13
3 4
17 10.5
9 16
12.5 4
4 3
3.5 5
12 8.5
5 5
19 12
12 2
7 6
13 6.5
16 9
12.5 7
4 8
6 14
12 13
8 5
8 6.5
6 12
9 9
6 18
12 10
16 13
10 9
19 14
10 16
13 11
11 17
14 13
16 14.5
12 5
18 11.5
11 15
13 13
11 20
15.5 8
12 10
14 5
17 11
15 14
14.5 15
10 11
10.5 15
14 14.5
16 9
16 12.5
13 18
15.5 17
3 18
10.5 8
17 12.5
18 9
9 9
12 16
14 19
8 17
12.5 15
14 14.5
20 3
5 4
7 5
6 21
9 19
14 11
16 13.5
22 6
16 11
13 6.5
23 6
8 7
14 15
14.5 24
14 20
17 14
14 14
25 13
15 14
17 14
15.5 26
8 15
11.5 8
16 12
27 5
20 12.5
10 17
13.5 28
6 8
7 16
6 11
29 8
15 11.5
4 2
30 12
13 12.5
12 16
14 31
7 8
7.5 9
4.5
Average 7.6
14.1 10.9
11.4 12.2
11.8
41
Reflecting from the field notes written by the observer, the researcher found that the time of the implementation affected the students’ responses and behavior.
Some of the students were not able to concentrate because they wanted to go home earlier. However, they still did their best in working together to do the game activity
and fill in the vocabulary list. As a result, the researcher as made to reconsider the amount of time spent to fill in the vocabulary list as well as the classroom situation.
In conclusion, due to the low score the students achieved, the researcher decided to conduct another meeting to confirm whether or not the students’ vocabulary mastery
improved through the implementation of the games.
3. The Implementation of Word Games in Cycle Three
Based on the reflection in Cycle Two, the researcher planned a game which required the students’ more active participation. The third meeting was conducted on
May 14
th
, 2012. Similar to the previous meetings, the students were initially asked to fill in their vocabulary list. However, they were given the situation in which the
words were already provided according to the game that would be used in the meeting. They only needed to provide both the meanings and the parts of speech. The
words in the list were randomly taken from John Bauman and Brent Culligan’s version of General Service List “The General Service List”, 1995, which was
originally developed by West in 1953. The General Service List created by Bauman and Culligan includes 2284 words consisting of headwords and their derived forms.
The words used in the game were randomly chosen, but the parts of speech were
