The Technique of Data Collecting The Technique of Data Analysis

Components of writing Scores Indicators Fluency style and ease of communication 5 Occasionally lack of consistency in choice of structures and vocabulary, which does not, however, impair overall ease of communication. 4 ‘Patchy’, with some structures and vocabulary items noticeably inappropriate to general style. 3 Structures and vocabulary items sometimes not only inappropriate but also misuse; little sense of ease of communication. 2 Communication often impaired by completely inappropriate or misused structures and vocabulary. 1 A ‘hot-potch’ of half-learned misused structures and vocabulary items rendering communication almost impossible. Form Organization 6 Highly organized; clear progression of idea well linked; like educated native writer. 5 Material well organized; links could occasionally be clearer but communication not impaired. 4 Some lack organization; re-reading required for clarification of ideas. 3 Little or no attempt at connectivity, though reader can deduce some organization. 2 Individual may be clear, but very difficult to deduce connection between them. 1 Lack of organization so severe that communication is seriously impaired. Nilai = � � ℎ � � � � 30 x 100 The writer uses T-test formula as a technique of data analysis in this research. It used to seek the significance differences of students’ scores by using the different method. The formula is as follows 5 : � � = � − � �� � −� The process of T-test is as follows: 1. Determining mean of gained score of experiment group, with the formula: � 1 = 1 2. Determining mean of gained score of controlled group, with the formula: � 2 = 2 3. Determining the Standard Deviation of the experiment group, with the formula: SD 1 = 2 1 4. Determining the Standard Deviation of controlled group, with the formula: SD 2 = 2 2 5. Determining the Standard Error Mean of experiment group, with the formula: � 1 = � 1 1 −1 6. Determining the Standard Error Mean of controlled group, with the formula: � 2 = � 2 2 −1 7. Determining the difference of standard Error between Mean of experiment group and control group, uses formula as follow: � 1 − 2 = � 1 2 + � 2 2 5 Sudijono, Anas, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada, 1997, p. 296 – 299. 8. Determining � � : � � = 1 − 2 � 1− 2 9. Determining t-table in significance level of 5 with degree of freedom df: �� = 1 + 2 − 2 Note: Variable X: Descriptive writing by using Mind Mapping technique Variable Y: Descriptive writing without Mind Mapping technique M 1 : Mean of the gained score of variable X M 2 : Mean of the gained score of variable Y SD 1 : Standard Deviation of variable X SD 2 : Standard Deviation of variable Y SE 1 : Standard Error of Mean variable X SE 2 : Standard Error of Mean variable Y N : Total of the students df : degree of freedom

G. Statistical Hypotheses

H : µ 1= µ 2 : The alternative hypothesis H a is rejected and the null hypothesis H is accepted. H a : µ 1 ≠ µ 2 : The alternative hypothesis H a is accepted and the null hypothesis H is rejected. Note: µ 1 : Mean of experimental class µ 2 : Mean of controlled class 28

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND INTERPRETATION

A. Research Finding

1. Data Description

The Data description shows or describes the collected data – those are students’ scores in pretest and posttest. There are tables of the score differences of pretest and posttest of both classes to get the gained scores before doing further calculation. Table 4.1 Student Score Experiment Class Student N Pre test Post test Gained score S1 47 66 +19 S2 23 66 +43 S3 47 93 +46 S4 27 76 +49 S5 24 83 +60 S6 47 63 +16 S7 43 80 +37 S8 33 76 +43 S9 23 63 +40 S10 40 73 +33 S11 33 67 +34 S12 50 90 +40 S13 23 73 +50 S14 40 66 +20 S15 30 83 +50 S16 23 90 +67 S17 37 97 +60 Student N Pre test Post test Gained score S18 27 76 +49 S19 27 60 +33 S20 23 80 +47 S21 37 80 +43 S22 43 73 +30 S23 40 73 +30 S24 53 76 +23 S25 23 70 +47 N=25 863 1893 1009 M= 34.52 M= 75.72 40.36 Table 4.2 Student Score Control Class Student N Pre test Post test Gained score S1 20 63 +40 S2 30 66 +33 S3 23 40 +17 S4 37 70 +33 S5 33 50 +17 S6 36 73 +37 S7 40 73 +33 S8 33 63 +30 S9 37 60 +23 S10 33 73 +40 S11 33 63 +30 S12 20 50 +30 S13 43 73 +30 S14 27 60 +33 S15 40 66 +26 Student N Pre test Post test Gained score S16 30 53 +23 S17 30 66 +36 S18 33 63 +30 S19 20 60 +40 S20 27 50 +23 S21 23 66 +43 S22 27 66 +39 S23 23 40 +17 S24 20 60 +40 S25 30 43 +33 N= 25 748 1510 776 M= 29.92 M= 60.64 31.04

2. Data Analysis

Based on the pre-test and post-test result scores of both experimental and controlled classes, the writer used some formulations to know the “t” value by using the degree of significant level 5 and to know the significant effect of using mind mapping technique on students’ writing of descriptive text. First of all, the writer determined the mean of X or experimental class and Y or controlled class. To determine the mean of X by using this formula: M 1 = 1 = 1009 25 = 40.36 Meanwhile, the writer also determined the mean of Y or controlled class by using the following formula: M 2 = 2 = 776 25 = 31.04 To make clearer, the writer provided the table 4.3 to show the result of mean of experimental and controlled classes as following: