30 about the research. Then, the researcher would analyze the research based on the
feedback and evaluation.
E. Data Gathering Technique
This study used document as the source of data. Since the documents which were gathered by the researcher were already in the form of written text,
the researcher did not have to convert the data anymore. The data would be gathered from workbooks. The workbook was Canggih Bahasa Inggris for 7
th
grade of Junior High School. It was published by CV. Gema Nusa and to be used in SMP N 2 Mlati, Yogyakarta for supplementary book in teaching English. The
researcher would analyze the workbook based on the criteria for book evaluation and checked it by comparing with the school curriculum to get the data.
F. Data Analysis Technique
This study used qualitative content analysis as methodology. According to Hsieh and Shannon 2005, qualitative content analysis as a research method for
the subjective interpretation of the content of the text data through systematic classification process of coding and identifying themes or patterns. Then, in order
to gather the data and gain information, the researcher used rubric. Then from those research instruments data, the researcher tried to read the raw data
repeatedly to organize the data. After the data were gathered and the results of the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
31 research were also analyzed, the researcher summarized to draw a conclusion after
the data collection. In order to simplify the study, the researcher made some tables of rubric. It
represents the requirement and criteria of the workbook. In the rubric of workbook evaluation, it consisted of some columns which are fulfilled evaluation aspects,
score, and indicators. Then, the evaluation aspects in the rubric were general appearance, language skills, language content, and workbook content. Then, the
researcher gave score from 4 until 1. The score were given based on the indicator itself. It meant that every score had different indicators.
Based on General Appearance aspect, there were some indicators related to the aspect. The indicators for score 4 there were interesting cover, readable
font, informative orientation, detailed table of content, appropriate title in every lesson, and complete bibliography. Then, the indicators for score 3 there were
interesting cover, informative orientation, detailed table of content, complete bibliography, but it had not appropriate title in every lesson and had unreadable
font. Next, the indicators for score 2 there were interesting cover, unreadable font, detailed table of content, and complete bibliography, but it had not appropriate
title in every lesson and the orientation was not clear enough. The last was the indicators for score 1. This score was the worst score because the cover was not
interesting enough, it had unreadable font, the orientation was not clear enough, the table of content was not detailed, it had appropriate title in every lesson but the
bibliography was not complete. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
32 Then for the Language Skill aspect, it also consisted of some indicators.
For the highest score which was 4, the indicators were the workbook covered four language skills. They were listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. Every
skill had complete and appropriate exercises. Then the indicators for score 3, the workbook covered listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. The speaking,
reading, and writing skills had complete and appropriate exercises but the listening skill had not appropriate recorded. Next was the indicators for score 2.
The workbook covered four language skills. It had complete and appropriate speaking and writing exercises but the listening and reading exercises were not
sufficient with the materials. The last was the indicators for score 1. The workbook covered four language skills. However, it only had one complete
exercise which was writing exercises. For the listening, speaking, and reading skills were not complete and appropriate with the materials.
Next is Language Content and for the indicators. The first was the indicators for score 4, there were correct and appropriate grammar, it used
appropriate word choices and correct sentence structure, it provided sufficient materials for teaching vocabulary and pronunciation. Then the indicators for score
3, the workbook used appropriate and correct grammar. Sometimes, there were some inappropriate word choices. It used clear and correct sentence structure but
there were not sufficient materials for teaching vocabulary and pronunciation. Next was the indicators for score 2. There were some grammatical mistakes and
inappropriate word choices. The sentence structure did not clear and correct enough but there were some exercises for teaching vocabulary and pronunciation.
33 The last was the indicators for the worst score which was score 1. There were
some grammatical mistakes and inappropriate word choices. The sentence structure was not clear and correct and there were not complete examples for
teaching vocabulary and pronunciation. The last was the Topic Content aspect. The indicators for score 4 were the
workbook fulfilled the general objectives of teaching English language, the lesson materials appropriate with competency standard SK and basic competency KD,
the indicator studies could be achieved through the exercises provided, and it also provided chance to build good communication between the teachers and the
students. Then the indicators for score 3, the workbook fulfilled the general objectives of teaching English language, the lesson materials were inappropriate
with competency standard SK and basic competency KD, however the indicator studies could be achieved through the exercises provided, and it also
provided chance to build good communication between the teachers and the students. Next was the indicators for score 2. The workbook still fulfilled the
general objectives of teaching English language but the lesson materials were not sufficient with competency standard SK and basic competency KD. The
indicator studies could not be achieved nut it still provided chance to build good communication between the teachers and the students. The last was the indicators
for score 1. Although the workbook still fulfilled the general objectives of teaching English language but the lesson materials were not sufficient with
competency standard SK and basic competency KD. Besides, the indicator studies could not be achieved and it did not provide chance to build good
