4.5.2 The Analysis of Reliability Coefficient The researcher had applied split half odd-even technique using the
computation of Microsoft Excel to estimate the value of reliability coefficient of a half test. According to Sudijono 1998:219, the correlation of the two halves was
continued to be analyzed by using Spearman-Brown Formula. The result of estimation see appendix C was the half test of reliability coefficient 0.375.
From the calculation see Appendix D the result of the test reliability was 0.54. Saukah 1997:210 states that the standard reliability coefficient of teacher-
made-test is 0.50. It means that a teacher-made-test was reliable if the reliability coefficient is at least 0.50. The reliability coefficient of this test was 0.54 so it
means that the test was reliable. Therefore, the researcher did not make any changes of the test items. The test items of the try out test were administered in
the post test.
4.5.3 The Analysis of Difficulty Index The researcher used Difficulty Index formula in order to analyze the
difficulty level score. Then, the result was consulted to the criteria of difficulty index. The result of the difficulty index analysis can be seen in Appendix E.
According to the table of difficulty index analysis see Appendix E, it was known that the range difficulty index was from 0.60 up to 0.68. The researcher
did not need to revise the test items because the test items were categorized as fair. In addition, the students did not have any problems with the time allocation
of the try out test. In conclusion, it was not necessary for the researcher to revise the instructions and the time available for doing the test since they were clearly
understood by the students and all of them could finish the test in time.
4.6 The Result of the Post Test
The result of the primary data was the result of the post test. It was administered to obtain the data of reading comprehension and to describe about
the significant difference between the two groups that were experimental group and control group.
The post test was conducted on Thursday, 09 April 2015, to both groups after each group received teaching learning twice. The experimental group was
taught reading comprehension by using SQ3R Strategy, while the control group was taught reading comprehension by Question-Answer strategy. The post test
was in the form of reading comprehension test consisting of 20 test items of multiple choice tests.
The post test was administered for 60 minutes. The total number of the respondents of the experimental group was 25 students and the
control group was 26 students. The result of post test scores was presented in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 The Scores of Post Test
No. Experimental Group VIII A
Control Group VIII B Name
Score Name
Score
1 ARR
75 AG
70 2
AD 75
AR 70
3 AM
80 AIA
70 4
APM 60
AA 65
5 AH
70 AF
70 6
AH 70
FN 60
7 BH
60 GS
80 8
DB 70
HM 70
9 DS
65 IB
55 10
FNF 75
MH 70
11 IH
65 MA
60 12
KM 80
MS 60
13 KA
60 NS
75 14
MJ 80
PM 70
15 MZF
55 RB
55 16
MH 75
RR 65
17 RCD
75 RS
65 18
RFA 75
RM 55
19 RADJ
60 RW
60 20
RMI 80
SH 60
21 RWT
80 SNA
75 22
SM 75
SB 70
23 SF
80 YR
55 24
SSN 80
YN 80
25 TR
80 YLS
70 26
ZE 60
Total 1800
Total 1715
4.6.1 The Analysis of Post Test Scores The post test scores were analyzed statistically by using t-test formula to
know whether the mean difference between the experimental group and the control group.
Based on the table of the post test score analysis see Appendix F the computation of t-
test on the students’ reading comprehension achievement was in Appendix G.
Then, t-table at significant level of 5 with Df 49 was 2.01. It
indicated that the value of t-test was higher than that of t-table 2.77 2.01.
4.6.2 The Result of Affective Aspects The students showed affective aspects in the class such as the student’s
eagerness while reading the recount text, the studen ts’ confidence while
identifying words, sentences, paragraphs, and whole text of recount text, and the students’ hard effort in doing the task.
4.7 Hypothesis Verification
