RESEARCH HYPOTHESES TESTING Test ANAVA 2 Direction

C. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES TESTING Test ANAVA 2 Direction

Table 4.10 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Student’s speaking skill

Type III

Df F Sig.

Squares

Square

Corrected Model a 72.875

3.497 .025 Intercept

1 8970.025 1.291E3 .000 Teaching Method

4.408 .043 Teaching Method *

Corrected Total

R Squared = .226 (Adjusted R Squared = .161) Based on the data above can be concluded:

1) Testing Hypothesis 1:

Ho: There is no effect teaching method upon student’s speaking skill

The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient. If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected Of the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method 0.025 <

0.05 can thus be concluded there is an effect teaching method upon student's speaking skills.

2) Testing Hypothesis 2:

Ho : Thre is no effect the emotional intelligence upon student’s speaking skill Hi : Thre is effect emotional intelligence upon student’s speaking skill The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient. If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected Of the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method 0.043 < 0.05 can thus be concluded there is an effect emotional intelligence upon student's speaking skills.

3) Testing Hypothesis 3:

Ho : There is no effect interaction between teaching method and emotional intelligence upon student’s speaking skill. Hi : There is effect interaction between teaching method and emotional intelligence upon student’s speaking skill. The hypothesis was tested by looking at a significant coefficient.

If the sig score > 0.05, then Ho accepted and the Hi rejected If the sig score < 0.05; then Hi accepted and Ho rejected From the test with spss 18 above obtained sig for teaching method and emotional intelligence 0.044 < 0.05 can be concluded that there are effects between teaching method and emotional intelligence upon student’s speaking skill. Based on the result, the further test is needed. Further test

Multiple Comparisons Student’s speaking skill

Tukey HSD Mean

95% Confidence Interval (I)

(J) Difference Std. Lower Upper Class Class

Bound Bound

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level

Based on the further test above can be concluded that:

a) Class 1 with class 2: seen that the mean difference of (1.1), it means the difference between the average grades 1 and 2 of (1.1). This value can be proven with a significance score, was sig = 0.04 < 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between class 1 and class 2.

b) Grade 1 to Grade 3: seen that the mean difference of (3.455), meaning that the average difference between grade 1 and 3 of (1.3). This score can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.00 < 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 1 and grade 3.

c) Class 2 to grade 4: shows that the mean difference of (2.6), meaning that the average difference between grade 2 and 4 of (2.6). This value can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.00 < 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 2 and grade 4

d) Grade 3 to Grade 4: shows that the mean difference of (2.4), meaning that the average difference between grade 3 and 4 of (2.4). This value can be proven with a significance value, was sig = 0.06 < 0.05; or it can be said to have a significant effect between grade 3 and grade 4