g. Determine the Standard Error of Difference with formula:
��
�
�
− ��
�
�
= ���
�
�
2
+ ��
�
�
2
= �1.732
2
+ 1,832
2
= √3.0 + 3.359
= √6.359
= 2.522
h. Determine t with formula:
� =
�
�
− �
�
��
�
�
− ��
�
�
� =
4.74 − 4.23
2.522 �
= 0.51
2.522 �
= 0.203
i. Determine the degree of freedom
��
with formula:
�� = �
1
+ �
2
– 2 ��
= 39 + 39– 2 ��
= 78 − 2
�� = 76
From the result of statistical calculation above, it can be seen that the value of t
or t
test
is 0.203 and the degree of freedom
��
was 76. The value of t in the degree of freedom
of 76 and at the degree of significance 1 or t
table
of df 75 with ɑ=0.01 is 2.376.
Subsequently, after the manual calculation was done, the calculation was verified by employing independent samples t
test
in IBM SPSS Statistics 20. Here are the results:
Table 4.9 Group Statistics
Group N
Mean Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean GainScore
EXP 39
4.74 10.818
1.732 CONTROL
39 4.23
11.444 1.833
Table 4.9 is the result of group statistics calculation of the analysis using IBM SPSS Statistics 20. The table shows that the experimental class’ mean of gain
score
�
�
was 4.74, meanwhile the control class’ mean gain score
�
�
was 4.23. On the other hand, the table also shows that the experimental class’ gain score
standard deviation
��
�
was 10.818 and the control class’ gain score standard deviation
��
�
was 11.444. The table also shows that the experimental class’ gain score standard error mean
��
�
�
was 1.732 and the control class’ gain score standard error mean
��
�
�
was 1.833.
Table 4.10 Independent Samples Test
Levenes Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig.
T df
Sig. 2-
taile d
Mean Differe
nce Std.
Error Differen
ce 95 Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Gain Score
Equal variances
assumed .112
.739 .203 76 .839
.513 2.522 -4.510
5.535 Equal
variances not
assumed .203 75.761 .839
.513 2.522 -4.510
5.536
Table 4.10 is the result of the independent samples test analysis using IBM SPSS Statistics 20. The table shows that the result was significantly different at
the significance level of 0.839, which means that the accuracy is nearly 100. The table also shows that the t
test
score was recorded at the amount of 0.203 and the degree of freedom
��
is 76
B. Testing of the Hypotheses
The research was held to answer the question whether Jigsaw technique has any effect on students’ ability in reading exposition text on second grade
students of SMAN 34 Jakarta. In order to provide answer for the question above, the Alternative Hypothesis Ha and Null Hypothesis Ho were proposed as
follows: a. Ho Null Hypothesis: Jigsaw technique has no significant effectiveness in
learning reading of exposition text. b. Ha Alternative Hypothesis: Jigsaw technique has significant effectiveness in
learning reading of exposition text To prove the hypothesis, the obtained data from experimental class and
control class were calculated by using t
test
formula with assumption as follows: a. If t
≤ t
table
, in significant degree of 1, the Null Hypothesis Ho is accepted and the Hypothesis Alternative Ha is rejected. It means that there is no
significant effect of Jigsaw technique on students’ reading exposition text ability.
b. If t ≥ t
table
, in significant degree of 1, the Null Hypothesis Ho is rejected and the Hypothesis Alternative Ha is accepted. It means that there is a
significant effect of Jigsaw technique on students’ reading exposition text ability.
According to the statistical calculation above, the value of t is 0.203, and
the degree of freedom is 76 with 1 degree of significance is used by the writer. Based on the significance, it can be seen that on degree of freedom of 76, and in 1
degree of significance the value of t
table
2.376. By comparing the result of t
table
and t
, in the degree of significance of 1, it can be seen that t t
table
0.203 2.376. According to those results, a conclusion can be drawn that the Ho was accepted
meanwhile the Ha was rejected.
C. Interpretation
The research findings above shows that both in the pre-test and post test, students from experimental class perform better than students from control class.
This interpretation is based on the comparison of experimental class and control class students’ average score, median, and mode.
Afterward, the experimental class and control class students’ gain score illustrates that the average gain score for experimental class students is higher
than the average gain score for control class students. Then, from the data testing we can infer that both the pre-test and post-test
have normal distribution as shown by the normality test that was done by the use of SPSS calculation. It is also confirmed that both experimental class and control
class are classified as homogenous group according to the SPSS calculation. Last of all, based on the result of analysis data, the value of t
table
in the degree of significance of 1 was 2.376. Then the value of t
was 0.203. It means that the Null Hypothesis Ho was accepted and the Alternative Hypothesis was
rejected. Therefore, it can be inferred that Jigsaw technique has effectiveness in learning reading of exposition text as shown by 0.203 value of t
which was higher than 0 zero. The t-observation t
= 0.203 which is lower than t-table t
table
=2.376 shows that the effectiveness of Jigsaw Technique in learning reading exposition text has limited significance compared to the use of other
technique that currently used by the teacher on SMAN 34 Jakarta. The effectiveness of Jigsaw Technique in learning reading exposition text can be seen
from experimental class students’ active involvement in the learning process and experimental class students average gain score which was recorded at 4.74.
46
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
According to the statistical calculation which was analyzed in the previous chapter, a conclusion can be sum up that Jigsaw technique has effectiveness in
learning reading of exposition text. This conclusion was supported by the analysis of the students’ score using t
test
formula. The calculation showed that the t
observe
t is 0.203 and the t
table
at the degree of significance 1 is 2.376. The score of 0.203 shows that Jigsaw
technique has effectiveness in learning reading of exposition text, though not a significant one, in learning reading of exposition text as shown by the t
observe
score which is above 0 zero. This small effect is due to the students’ high score in the pre-test resulting in the students’ low gain scores. To sum up, Jigsaw
technique had effectiveness when it was used and applied, although not significant one, in learning reading exposition text.
B. Suggestion
At the end of this skripsi, the researcher would like to give some suggestions in relations to the writer conclusion. The researcher also hopes that
this skripsi can give benefit to anyone who read it. Here are some suggestions that
may help teacher, students, or other researcher that intend to conduct further research.
Firstly, by applying various techniques, such as Jigsaw technique, as alternative techniques in teaching English, teacher can help students to increase
their ability in learning English skills, especially reading. Jigsaw technique can be used in order to make the students more interested and more active in reading
exposition text so that they may not be bored in learning reading in English. Additionally, in learning English students need to realize that the learning
is not a one way process. To accomplish the goal of learning, students should involve themselves in the classroom activity built by the teacher. By taking part in
the activity, students can also improve their ability in English and also their social skills. Students’ proficiency in English is not solely teacher’s responsibility; it
depends also on students’ active role in learning English. Finally, this research can also become a contribution to the research in
education which is intended to find out the effectiveness of certain technique, in this case the Jigsaw technique. This research may also be a relevant previous
study that can be used by other researchers to conduct a further research relating to the implementation of Jigsaw technique.
