49
Table 3.1 Description on Points of Agreement
Point of Agreement Meaning
1 Strongly Disagree
2 Disagree
3 Agree
4 Strongly Agree
The option that showed neither agree nor disagree was omitted because the option usually causes ambiguity and difficulty in administering the result. The
data from the scaled question were analyzed using central tendency mean
symbolized as M. The mean was calculated using a formulation as followed.
Note:
M : the average point
∑x
: the sum of the score
n : the number of evaluators
The result of the post-design questionnaires will be presented in table 3.2.
Table 3.2 The Description of Experts’ Opinion on the Designed Materials
No Statements
N Point of Agreement
Central Tendency
Mn 1
2 3
4
Note:
N : number of participants
50 The classification to determine whether the designed materials were good
and acceptable or not was presented in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3 The Classification of Experts’ Opinion on the Designed Materials The Average Point
of Central Tendencies Classification
– 1 The designed materials are poorly designed
1.1 – 2
The designed materials are fairly designed 2.1
– 3 The designed materials are good and acceptable but need
some revisions 3.1
– 4 The designed materials are well-designed and acceptable
Further, the researcher also provided open-ended questions which were aimed to gain feedback opinions, comments and suggestions for consideration to
the researcher to improve the designed materials.
F. Research Procedure
In conducting the study, the researcher took some following procedures:
1. Research Information and Collecting
First, the researcher conducted a classroom observation after getting permission from the vice person of the History Department of Sanata Dharma
University. The identification of the students‟ characteristics and learning style were gained on the lecturer‟ and students‟ activities during the classroom
observation. Next, the researcher interviewed the vise chairperson and the head of the curriculum of the History Department to get broad information about the goals
of the course given, the curriculum, the syllabus, the suitable materials, and the
51 students‟ needs. Furthermore, the pre-design questionnaires were distributed to
gain more data in identifying the students‟ needs.
2. Planning
The data gathered were analyzed to determine the approach and the activities reading and writing into one framework followed by formulating goals
and topics based on students‟ needs and the goals of the English course. Finally, the researcher specified the learning objectives based on the formulated goals and
topics.
3. Preliminary Form of Product Development
The materials designed were selected and organized from various sources which had been adjusted to the English syllabus of the History Department. The
researcher chose the reading texts, exercises and the writing contexts based on the learning objectives on each unit of the materials.
4. Preliminary Field Testing
The researcher distributed the evaluation questionnaires to the experts then analyzed the result, the scores and the feedback opinions, comments and
suggestion.
5. Main Product Revision
The materials were revised based on the evaluation questionnaires‟ result and the feedback given to improve the materials which are suitable for the first
semester students of the History Department.
