43 the result of the try-out, there were 18 invalid items on the prototype of the test.
Number 4, 13, 14, 17, 20, 21, 26, 27, 28, 35, 39, 47, 48 were unacceptable because the item discrimination were below 0.3. Meanwhile, there were other
items like number 8, 16, 31, 32, 41 were not valid because the item facility were below 0.3 or above 0.7. The researcher removed those invalid items and also other
2 items so that there were 30 items for each test.
G. Validity and Reliability
The researcher used validity and reliability to ensure the quality of the research. Creswell 2008:169 proposes that validity refers to the meaningfulness,
appropriateness of an instrument that enables a researcher draw a correct conclusion from the sample she is studying. Creswell 2008:169 also add that
reliability refers to the consistency of scores from an instrument even when the researcher administers the instrument multiple times at different time.
To enhance the trustworthiness of this research, the researcher used five criterions of validity proposed by Anderson, Herr and Nihlen. According to
Anderson et al. in Burns 1999:161-162, the five criterions of validity are democratic validity, outcome validity, process validity, catalytic validity, dialogic
validity. They are as explained as follows: a.
Democratic validity is related to the perspectives, opinions, ideas and comments from various stake holders teacher, students, and researcher about the
application of the action research. This criterion ensures that the research was done collaboratively. Thus, the researcher involved the English teacher in a
44 collaborative effort in this research. The researcher held discussion with the
English teacher in the 4 stages of this research: planning, action, observation, and reflecting. The researcher also took the opinions, ideas, comments, suggestions
from the students of class VIII A regarding to the application of the technique. The perspective from multiple voices helped the researcher designing the action
that can create an effective teaching and learning process. b.
Outcome validity is related to the result of this study. In this study, the outcome is the improvement of the students’ reading comprehension in English teaching
and learning process. This research can also be considered valid if the achievement of this research can appear new questions in the subsequent research
cycle. c.
Process validity is related to the “dependability” and the “competencies” of the research. To gain this criterion, the researcher collected the data by observing the
teaching and learning process and noted down everything that happened in the teaching and learning process. The observation was not only done by the
researcher, but also the English teacher and a student of English Department of Yogyakarta State University as a collaborator.
d. Catalytic validity is related to the changes of the stake holder and their
response towards the changes. This criterion was assessed by identifying the changes that occured during and after the action was done. The researcher
observed the implementation of the action to see the changes of the students. The researcher also held pre-test and post-test to know whether there are changes in
