Technique of Data Collection

population. 41 The writer took 40 students from one class with the total population are 88 students from two classes for this research.

D. Research Instrument

In this research, the writer used test as an instrument of the research. The test is devided into two: grammar test and writing test. In the gremmar test, the writer asked the students to answer 30 multiple choice questions with 4 alternatives answer about past tense. In the writing test, the writer asked the students to construct at least 3 paragraphs about their activities yesterday.

E. Technique of Data Collection

1. Students‘ understanding of past tense test. To know the students‘ understanding of past tense, the writer collected the data from the students by test in simple past tense. The quality of the data whether it is good or bad, is based on the instrument to collect the data. A good instrument must fulfill two important qualifications, those are validity and reliability. To test the validity and reability of the questions, the writer firstly asked other students from another class to do some test in understanding past tense. After getting the result, the formula that used to test the validity of the questions is: √ Description: R pbis = biserial correlation coefficient Mp = scores in subjects who responded well Mt = Mean total scor eachieved by the test participants SDt = standard Deviation of the total score p = proportion of test takers who answered correct q = proportion of test takers who answered incorrectly 41 Donald Ary, Introduction to Research Education, New York: CBS College Publishing, 1985, p. 145 If r r table then the items were valid, but if r r table then the items were not valid But in this test, the writer used Anates software to know the validity of the questions. Based on the calculation of test validity, from 40 questions with 4 alternatives answers, the significant questions are only 30 questions which used in making the instrument of the test. Those are the questions number 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40. The formula to test the reliability of the questions is Kuder Richardo or KR-20 formula as follows: 42 ∑ Description: rii = Reliability using the equation KR-20 n = The number of questions s = The standard deviation of the test akarvarians p = proportion of test takers who answered correct q = proportion of test takers who answered incorrectly The criterion of the test is: rii = 0.90 – 1.00 = very high rii = 0.70 – 0.90 = high rii = 0.40 – 0.70 = medium rii = 0.20 – 0.40 = low rii = 0.00 – 0.20 = very low The resercher here used Anates software to find out the reliability of the questions and the reability of the questions is 0.79 it means that the reability of the question is high. 42 SuharsimiArikunto, Dasar-dasarEvaluasiPendidikan, Jakarta: BumiAksara, 2012, Ed. Rev.,Cet. 3H, h. 100. From the result of the validity and reliability of the test above, the writer asked the students to answer 30 questions in multiple choices with 4 alternative answers about past tense to know students‘ understanding of past tense. The following figure is the items used in making the instrument. Figure 3.1 The Specification Table of Grammar Test Kompetensi Dasar Indikator No. Butir Soal Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar dalam teks berbentuk recount Melengkapi rumpang teks fungsional pendek dan meyusun kata menjadi teks fungsional yang bermaknauntuk simple past tense berbentuk regular dengan menambahkan –ed 1, 6 dengan menghilangkan –y, dan menambahkan -ied 10, 12 dengan menggandakan huruf konsonan dan menambahkan -ed 17 kalimat berbentuk negative dan interrogative 20, 26 Melengkapi rumpang teks fungsional pendek untuk simple past tense berbentuk irregular kata kerjanya tidak berubah 4, 7 kata kerja mengubah huruf vokalnya 3, 24 kata kerja berubah seluruhnya 13, 15, 19 kalimat berbentuk negative dan interrogative 22 Melengkapi rumpang teks fungsional pendek dan menyusun kata menjadi teks fungsional yang bermakna untuk past continuous tense dengan to be ‗was‘ 8, 9, 11, 16, 21, 27 dengan to be ‗were‘ 2, 5, 14, 25, 29 pada kalimat berbentuk negative dan interrogative 18, 23, 28, 30 In classifying the score, the writer used the measurement of student‘s achievement suggested by Harris. 43 As seen in the figure below: Figure 3.2 Student’s Achievement Classification Student’s Achievement Test Score Class Performance 91 – 100 Excellent 81 – 90 Very good 71 – 80 Good 61 – 70 Fair 51 – 60 Poor 50 Very poor 2. Students‘ skill in writing recount text To know their writing ability in writing recount text, the writer asked the students to construct at least 3 paragraphs about their last holiday or their activities yesterday. In scoring students‘ writing test, the writer used Hughes analytic scores as mentioned in the following figure. Figure 3.3 Hughes Analytic Scores 44 Score Level Criteria C O N T E N T 30 - 27 26 – 22 21 – 17 16 – 13 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: knowledgeable – substantive – thorough development of thesis – relevant to assigned topic GOOD TO AVERAGE: some knowledge of subject – adequate range – limited development of thesis – mostly relevant to topic, but lacks detail FAIR TO POOR: limited knowledge of subject – little substance – inadequate development of topic VERY POOR: does not show knowledge of subject - non- 43 David P. Harris, Testing English as a Second Language, New York: McGraw Hill Book Company Inc., 1969, p. 134. 44 Arthur Hughes, Testing for Language Teachers, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 104. substantive – not pertinent – OR not enough to evaluate O R G A N I Z A T I O N 20 – 18 17 – 14 13 – 10 9 – 7 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: fluent expression – ideas clearly statedsupported – succinct – well organized – logical sequencing – cohesive GOOD TO AVERAGE: somewhat choppy – loosely organized but main ideas stand out – limited support – logical but incomplete sequencing FAIR TO POOR: non-fluent – ideas confused or disconnected – lacks logical sequencing and development VERY POOR: does not communicate – no organization – OR not enough to evaluate V O C A B U L A R Y 20 – 18 17 – 14 13 – 10 9 – 7 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: sophisticated range – effective wordidiom choice and usage – word form mastery – appropriate register GOOD TO AVERAGE: adequate range – occasional errors of wordidiom form – choice – usage but meaning not obscured FAIR TO POOR: limited range – frequent errors of wordidiom form, choice usage – meaning confused or obscured VERY POOR: essentially translation – little knowledge about English vocabulary, idioms, word form – OR not enough to evaluate L A N G U A G E U S E 25 – 22 21 – 18 17 – 11 10 – 5 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: effective complex constructions- few errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple construction – minor problems in complex constructions – several errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions but meaning seldom obscured FAIR TO POOR: major problems in simplecomplex constructions – frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions andor fragments, run-ons, deletion, meaning confused or obscured VERY POOR: virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules – dominated by errors – does not communicated – OR not enough to evaluate M E C H A N I C S 5 4 3 2 EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: demonstrates mastery of conventions – few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing but meaning not obscured FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing – poor handwriting – meaning confused or obscured VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions – dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, handwriting illegible, OR not enough to evaluate

F. Technique of Data Analysis