33 The data from the observation sheets and field notes were confirmed by the
discussion with the peer-observers. Then the researcher also analyzed students’ Venn diagrams to see whether they had understood how to use it.
The researcher then assessed the tests and compared the results. 4.
Reflecting This stage enabled the researcher to see what went well and what did
not go well during the activities. In this stage, the researcher summarized everything that had happened and tried to find the problems. After that, the
researcher tried to solve the problems by proposing new ideas or changes based on supporting theories. The researcher then consulted the plans to the
advisor and English teacher.
B. Research Setting
The research was conducted in XI IS 1 of SMA Stella Duce 1 Yogyakarta. The researcher had previously done the observation there to
figure out what problem the teacher and students faced in the English class. After conducting a preliminary study, the research was conducted in two
cycles. Cycle one was on Friday, April 8, 2016. The researcher then found some problems during the first cycle and did some reflection. The solutions to
the problems were implemented in cycle two, which was done on Friday, April 15, 2016.
34
C. Research Participants
The participants of this study were thirty-one 31 students of XI IS 1 of SMA Stella Duce 1 Yogyakarta. The other participants were the English
teacher from the school, the researcher, who was teaching while doing the research, and three 3 peer-observers who were also the students of semester
eight of English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Techniques
In gathering the data, Mills 2003 categorizes into “three E’s:
experiencing, enquiring, and examining ” pp. 74-86. In the experiencing step,
the researcher collected the data through observation to the teacher and students. In the enquiring step, the researcher obtained the data from stud
ents’ work to see if students had understood how to use Venn diagrams. Then, to
examine the effectiveness of the method, the researcher used tests which indicated students’ improvement in reading comprehension. The forms of the
tests were multiple-choice and short essay items. Based on the data gathering strategies above, the instruments used were observation sheets, field notes,
students’ work Venn diagram and test sheets.
1. Observation
One way to collect data in CAR is through observation. Observation is one of the teacher’s activities that cannot be separated from daily’s teaching.
Observation is claimed to be the most important part of CAR because it gives PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
35 teachers chances
to “document and reflect” what is going on in the classroom Burns, 1999, p. 80. In this observation, the researcher used observation
sheets and field notes as the instruments. The researcher was helped by three 3 peer-observers. The observers
used the observation sheets to record all activities in the class. The researcher adapted the format of the observation sheets proposed by Leedy and Ormrod
2005. Five
columns described
the time,
the activities,
attitudebehaviorresponse, and observer’s comments OCs respectively. In the second column, the order of the activities had been provided. Thus the
observers filled in the attitudebehaviorresponse of the students and the teacher. The observers wrote any detailed descriptions of instructions,
interactionsconversation, direct quotes, and verbal and non-verbal communication from the students and the teacher. The last column was
observer’s comments OCs. It was to record the observer’s interpretation toward the activities happened Bogdan Biklen, 2007. The benefit of using
this format was that the researcher would have a sequential plot and complete events since the format was like a timetable. Sometimes, the issue of
subjectivity also appeared in observation; whether the notes were pure events or the observer’s viewpoint. Adding OCs was then considered crucial so that
the observer and researcher could distinguish the “actual activities from what
the observer thought ” Mertler, 2009, p. 108.
Besides, the researcher conducted direct observation and recorded what she had done. Since the researcher taught in the class, researcher did not have
