The Technique of Data Analysis

P : percentage of the answer F : total amount of the answer N : number of statements

I. The Trustworthiness of Study

To get the valid data the writer uses triangulation technique. As Anne Burns said in her book that triangulation is one of the most commonly used and best known ways of checking for validity. The aim of triangulation technique is to gather multiple perspectives on the situation being studied. 14 Besides, Anne Burns also added the definition of triangulation in her book from other experts, such as: R.B. Burns 1994:272 states that triangulation is a way of arguing that “if different methods of investigation produce the same result then the data are likely to be valid”. Silverman 1993:156 defines triangulation as: Comparing different kinds of data e.g. quantitative and qualitative and different methods e.g. observation and interviews to see whether they corroborate one another.... This form of comparison, called triangulation, derives from navigation, where different bearings give the correct position of an object.” In this case, the writer tries to gather the data of the interview, questionnaire and tests. Afterward he compares those data, whether it is relevant or not. Besides, the writer also examines the tests which are used as the instrument of the study to get its validity. To analyze the examined test items, the writer implements the 14 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers, New York: Cambridge University press, 1999, p.163 F P = ── X 100 N trustworthiness of the test. It is used as the evidence of the truth of this research. Furthermore, there are some phases including: 1 Item Difficulty The item difficulty or it can be also called item facility analysis concerns with the proportion of comparing students who answer correctly with all of students who follow the test. Item facility is how easy or difficult an item is from the viewpoint of the group of students or examinees taking the test of which that item is a part. 15 According to Kathleen M. Bailey, item facility is an index of how easy an individual item was for the people who took it. I.F is a number, typically printed as a decimal, ranging from 0.0 to 1.0. It represents the proportion of people who got the item right out of all the people who took the test. 16 To analyze it, the writer uses formula as follow: 17 B P = ── JS In which, P : Index of difficulty B : The total number of students who selected the correct answer JS : The total number of students including upper and lower group 15 John W. Oller, Language Test at School, London: Longman Group Limited, 1979, p. 246. 16 Kathleen M. Bailey, Learning about Language Assessment: Dilemmas, Decisions, and Direction, London: Heinle Heinle Publisher, 1998, p. 132. 17 Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan; revised edition, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009, p. 213 and 218. In addition, the writer uses criterion scale of Item Difficulty as follow: Table 4.1 Item Difficulty Scale ID REMARK 0.0 – 0.30 High 0.30 – 0.70 Medium 0.70 – 1.00 Low 2 Discriminating Power The analysis of discriminating power of test items is aimed to know the performance of the test through distinguishing students who have high score and low score. Discriminating power provides a more detailed analysis of the test items than item difficulty does, because it shows how the top scores and lower scores performed on each item. 18 To compute discriminating power the writer uses formula as follow: 19 D = Ba – Bb Ja Jb In which, D : The index of discriminating power Ba : The number of pupils in the upper group who answered the item correctly Bb : The number of pupils in the lower group who answered the item correctly Ja : Number of pupils in the upper group Jb : Number of pupils in the lower group 18 Kathleen M. Bailey, Learning about Language Assessment: Dillemas, Decisions, and Direction, London: Heinle Heinle Publisher, 1998, p. 135. 19 Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan; revised edition, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009, p. 209. Furthermore, it uses the discriminating power scale as follow: Table 4.2 Discriminating Power Scale DP REMARK 0.70 - 1.00 Excellent 0.40 - 0.70 Good 0.20 - 0.40 Satisfactory 0.00 - 0.20 Poor Negative Discarded

J. The Criteria of the Action Success

Classroom Action Research can be called successful when it exceeds the criteria which have been determined, on the other hand it will be called failed when the result cannot achieve the determined criteria. Classroom Action Research CAR is able to be called successful if it can achieve the criteria which have been determined, and unsuccessful if it is cannot achieve the criteria which have been determined. In this study, the research will be success when there are 75 number of students can achieve some improvement scores from the pre-test until the second post-test in cycle two andor they can pass the target score of the minimal mastery level criterion. 20 Based on the agreement between the writer and the real English teacher, this research will be called successful when there are at least 75 of students gaining the 20 Syaiful Bahri Djamarah and Aswan Zain, Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta, 2006 p. 108. minimal mastery level criterion of English subject. In addition, the score of minimal mastery level criterion of English subject in this school is 70. If the criteria mentioned above are achieved, the next cycle of the research will be stopped. But if it doesn’t reach yet, the next alternative cycle will be done. 40

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS

This chapter presents the data which have been collected by the writer during the Classroom Action Research. And it is divided into three main parts, they are: Before Implementing the Classroom Action Research, The Implementation of the Classroom Action Research and The Discussion of Data After Classroom Action Research. The complete explanation of those three main parts of this chapter will be discussed as follows:

A. Before Implementing the Classroom Action Research

The writer had done the survey before implementing this research, and it was conducted in order to know detailed information about the class condition which would be researched. There were three ways used to gain its data, namely: pre interview, pre observation and pre test. The three ways above will be completely explained as follow: 1. The Result of Pre Interview Pre interview in this research was done on Friday, 18 th of March 2011. As it is stated in chapter III that in the semi-structured interview before Classroom Action Research the writer asked the English teacher some questions which were divided into three categories. Those were related to the general condition in English class primarily on students’ grammatical achievement and performance, the strategy or technique implemented by the teacher previously before Classroom Action Research and the teacher’s opinion toward the writer’s technique which would be implemented in Classroom Action Research; it was substitution drills technique. First category was about the general condition in English class primarily on students’ achievement and performance in class. The teacher said that most of students at the first class of X accountancy still gained low achievement in English grammar especially in Degrees of Comparison, because their understanding in forming Comparative and Superlative degree was still low, and they didn’t know either how to make a sentence in Degrees of Comparison. Besides, their performance or participation in English lesson were also minimum, it might be caused by the teacher explanation that made them bored; they were only asked to listen to his explanation without having chance to give their own opinion or even to ask the question. Finally, most of them were hardly able to pass the minimal mastery level criterion, or in bahasa it was called KKM which had been agreed by the teacher. The second category was about the strategy or technique implemented by the teacher previously before Classroom Action Research. The teacher explained that he used to explain English grammar deductively. It meant that he gave the formula of the material that was being taught; here the formula of Degrees of Comparison, and then he made some sentences based on the formula given before. Afterward, he asked the students to do the exercise stated in their book. The writer thought that this technique was less effective because it made the students bored and most of them didn’t listen to the teacher’s explanation. As the result, most of them didn’t understand the material well and they got the low score in the exams. The third category is about the teacher’s opinion toward the writer’s technique which would be implemented in Classroom Action Research; it was Substitution Drills technique. The teacher agreed to this technique, he said that it