R E V I S I O N 2.
Guiding students‟ work in group intensively. 3. Get them to bring a dictionary.
4.
Don‟t push the student to finish their work soon.
5. Giving brief explanation about the semantic mapping
steps slowly but with clarity. C
Y C
L E
2 PLANNING
1. Made the new lesson plan with same media and topic. 2. Prepared a dictionary.
3. The teacher gives more motivation to be more active. 4.
Guiding students‟ work intensively both in group and individual
5.
Don‟t push the student to finish their work soon 6. Give them reward.
7. Giving brief explanation about the semantic mapping
steps slowly but with clarity. 8. Prepared observational notes
9. Compiled the post-test 2 ACTING
First Meeting Thursday, November 18
th
2010 at 07.00am-08.20pm
1. Implementing the new lesson plan 2. Students make semantic mapping based on the picture
facilitated by the dictionary individually and in a group. 3. Teacher revised and praised their works
Second Meeting Monday, November 22
nd
2010 at 11.10am-12.20pm
1. Using moving class to get the new atmosphere. 2. Motivated the student.
3. Student developed their mapping through a group of four 4. Student presented their works to the other group
5. Teacher watched their process in making semantic
mapping 6. Teacher praised their group works.
Third Meeting Thursday, November 25
th
2010 at 07.00am-08.20pm
Asked if there still any difficulties, posttest 2 OBSERVING
1. Collected the data for posttest 2 22 students or 78.6 passed Minimum Mastery Criterion, Mean 72.6
2. Observed teaching learning process it had done better.
REFLECTING 1. Discussing the result of the action
2. Students‟ activity has already followed the step to make
semantic mapping well.
4.
Findings After Implementing the Action
The writer carried out the interview to the English teacher who acted as collaborator and observer after conducting classroom action research, to know
her response about implementation the action and gave questionnaire to the students to know their response about the implementation of Semantic Mapping
in teaching vocabulary.
a. The Result of Post Interview
Post interview conducted in this study was the unstructured interview. It was held on Saturday, November 27
th
2010 for the English teacher, started at 12.20 pm and finished at 13.00 pm at the resting time. The writer asked to the
teacher some questions which divided into three categories. The first category was the general condition in English class during implementing the action. It was
found that the stude nts‟ condition were better than before. In this sense, they
looked enthusiast in making Semantic Mapping and of course, they felt easier to remember their previous-word, the given-words, and the new words. The
students‟ participation was good because the activity in the classroom involved the students mostly.
106
Then, the obstacle and the solution in implementing semantic mapping during the action. It was observed that most of the students difficult in correlating
the target word in Semantic Mapping because they have not use this strategy before and hard to find the new word in English which is different with the target
word or the word that the teacher had ever given. So, it was suggested for the students to bring dictionary and using the moving class to get the new
atmosphere.
107
Last, asking about the English teacher argument of Semantic Mapping strategy. The teacher said that Semantic Mapping was a good strategy in teaching
vocabulary. It could be an effective way to help the students‟ vocabulary mastery. Beside it might be able to improve the students‟ way of learning to remember both
the given-word and the new word; also enriching their vocabulary because from making this map the student are tried to find the new word, it makes them easy to
transfer the new word in their long-term memory. Then, it could be a fresh strategy which can attract the student interest in learning English, so they are not
learning under pressure and could motivate the English teacher to use it.
108
106
See Appendix 2 Items number 1, 2, and 3 of Interview after CAR, pp.74-77.
107
See Appendix 2,Items number 4 and 5,... pp.74-77.
108
See Appendix 2,item number 6-10,... pp.74-77.
From the summarized of the interview above, it could be conclude that the teacher gave a positive response toward the implementation of Semantic Mapping
in teaching-learning vocabulary. In addition, Semantic Mapping gave a good impact for improvement of the students‟ ability in vocabulary enrichment.
109
b. The Result of Post Questionnaire
The students‟ response after learning vocabulary through Semantic Mapping can be seen from the post-questionnaire. The questionnaire used in this
study was closed questionnaire. The questionnaire was given to the students in X Electro B class on Thursday, November 25
th
2010. This questionnaire has four
categories. Each of categories is descript of below: 1
The students’ response toward teaching-learning process
The items that include in this category are item number 1, 3 and 17. For the first there are 24 students or 85.7 were interested in the teaching-learning
process through semantic mapping. Next, item number three, there are 22 students or 78.6 of the students were motivated learning vocabulary through semantic
mapping. Last, there are 19 students or 67.9 could learn vocabulary better
through semantic mapping than the usual learning. The conclusion can be drawn from these items that most of the students were given their best response toward
teaching-learning process of learning vocabulary through Semantic Mapping.
2 The result of the students’ vocabulary learning activity
Items number 7, 8, 11, 16 1nd 18 are included in this category. The first item number 7, most of the students 26 or 92.9 helped in enriching their
vocabularies through semantic mapping. Then, for number 8 there are 60.7 or 17 students who felt that semantic mapping can solve their vocabulary problems.
After that, for the item number 11, there are about 21 students, 75 of the students said that they could do the vocabulary task easily by using semantic
mapping
.
Next, there are 17 students or 60.7 students who their score was increased after learning vocabulary through semantic mapping. Last, there are 18
students who said that their vocabulary was enriched by semantic mapping ; it‟s
109
See Appendix 2, pp.74-77.
about 64.3 of the whole students. From this summary, it can be understand that the learning activity can give the better result in their vocabulary mastery.
3 The solution of the problems in vocabulary
To know the solution when student had difficulty during the teaching- learning process, the writer asked them through item number 12 and 13. For
number 12, there are 23 students or 82.1 of the students who answer that their teacher gives then opportunity to ask their problems. Then, 53.6 or 15 students
were used this opportunity to ask. So, there were more student who asked than who didn‟t, it can be implied that the teacher knew about their problem during
teaching-learning process which can make the teacher more aware about their problem and guided them to overcome it, also revise her way of teaching.
4 Students’ Response toward Semantic Mapping Technique
There were 6 items that deliver to know the students‟ response toward semantic mapping; they are item number 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10. There were more than
80 or of the student who give the best response toward semantic mapping. They are enthusiastic to learn vocabulary through semantic mapping. Besides, there
were just 7 students who felt that semantic mapping pursued their vocabulary learning. It more proof that Semantic Mapping could be the alternative way in
learning vocabulary, make them remember the word easily, and can help them to find the new words to enrich their vocabulary.
110
B. Interpretation of the Data
