These results were consulted with the value of �
value 1.94 with df=36 and α=5. Since the value of �
1
and �
2
were lower than the �
value, it can be said that the data were homogeneous. The detailed computation of homogeneity can be seen in appendix 11 and 18.
4.3 Result of the Test
In conducting the research, I used two kinds of tests, i.e. pretest and posttest. The tests were given to both groups, experimental and control groups. In doing the
tests, both students of the experimental and control groups had to describe orally an animal of their choice as the topic in front of the class. The scores of pretest
and posttest were obtained from four components of speaking consisting of pronunciation, fluency, grammarvocabulary and content. The range of each
component score was 1- 5. The students‟ score was converted from the total score
of these four components multiplied by 5. The students‟ score of the control and
the experimental groups can be seen in appendix 10.
4.3.1 Pretest Findings
Pretest was given to find out the students‟ basic ability before the stage of treatments. In this case, the purpose of giving the pretest was to investigate the
students‟ ability in speaking descriptive text. The pretest was conducted on Thursday 24 February 2011 for class X 3 as the experimental group, and on
Saturday 25 February 2011for class X 5 as the control group each of these two classes consisted of 37 students.
The result of data analysis showed that the average score of the control group was 50.40 and that of the experimental group was 49.60. It showed that the
achievement of the control group was relatively the same as the experimental group. The result of pretests for both control and experimental groups can be seen
in appendix 6 and 7. Below is the chart of the students‟ total score which covers four
components of speaking:
Chart 1 The Total Scores Result of the Pretest
The total number of subjects of the control and experimental group were 74 with the degree of freedom df = 72, that was Nx + Ny
– 2. The z table was 1.96 at the 5 0.05 alpha level of significance. The calculated result of z-value
was 0.63, so the z-value was lower than z-table. It indicates that there was no significant difference between the two means. The detailed computation can be
seen in appendix 12.
80 82
84 86
88 90
92 94
96 98
100
Control Group Experimental Group
4.3.2 Posttest Findings
The posttest was conducted on Friday, 11 March 2011 for the class X3 as the experimental group and on Saturday, 12 March 2011 for the class X5 as the
control group. The posttest was intended to know the students‟ ability after the
treatments. I calculated the obtained data of the post-test to find out the average
scores of both classes. The posttest average score of the control group was 65.54 and that of the experimental group was 74.32. It was clear that the achievement of
the experimental group was higher than the control group. The result of posttest for both the control and experimental groups can be seen in appendix 13 and 14.
Below is the chart of the students‟ total score which covers four components of speaking:
Chart 2 The Total Scores Result of the Posttest
The total number of subjects of the control and experimental group was 74 with the degree of freedom df = 72, which was Nx + Ny
– 2. The z table was
20 40
60 80
100 120
140 160
Control Experimental
1.96 at the 5 0.05 alpha level of significance. The calculated result of z-value was 6.57, so the z-value was higher than z-table. The result showed that there was
a significant difference in achievement of the post-test between the control and experimental groups. The detailed computation can be seen in appendix 19.
4.4 Level of Students’ Achievement
