40 they can: 1 remind of the location and what was happening in the location; 2
capture a specific teaching moment; 3 track sequence of events or behaviors; 4 record non-verbal aspects such as physical expressions and body positions; 5
capture facial expression that might reflect aspects of people’s attitudes, thinking, and ideas; 6 identify who places themselves where in the classroom.
F. Data Collection Techniques
The data were collected in all of the stages in the research. First, in the beginning of the planning stage, the researcher collected
students’ writing scores through pre-test to see the general level of students writing skill. The researcher
was able to collaborate with the English teacher to assess students’ writing ability. The researcher also collected the data in the form of field notes and interview
transcripts after observing the teaching and learning process and interviewing the students and the teacher.
Second, in action and observation stage the researcher collected the data in the form of field notes and interview transcript again. By using observation guide
the collaborator observe the action carried by the researcher. Then, after the implementation of the action, the researcher interviewed the teacher and the
students to get the description about the students’ responses and behaviors, and another research team member’s responses about the implementation of the
action. The photographic data, especially collected in the action stage, was used to record the process in the implementation of the action in the classroom such as,
the students’ activities and involvement in the teaching and learning process.
41 The last data were obtained from the students’ post-test to see the gap or
the difference of the students’ writing scores between the pre-test and the post- test. After collecting all of the data, the researcher analyzed the data to find the
result of the actions and makes the conclusion of the research.
G. Data Analysis Techniques
There were two kinds of data used in this research. The first one was qualitative data in the form of field notes, interview transcripts and photographs.
The second one was quantitative data in the form of students’ writing score. In analyzing qualitative data, the researcher used three steps of qualitative data
analyzing proposed by Miles and Huberman 1994. Those steps are: data reduction, data display and drawing and verifying conclusion.
After the researcher collected the data through classroom observations and interviews, those data were selected, processed and transformed into field notes
and interview transcripts. In the data display step, the data were presented and reported based on the requirement. Finally the researcher and the collaborator
analyzed the data and discussed to get conclusion. The quantitative data was gained from students’ writing performance
before and after the action. Students’ writing performance were transformed into score based on scoring rubric of writing proposed by Jacobs et al. in Weigle
2002: 116. Then, the result of students’ pre-test and post-tests was analyzed by using Microsoft Excel program to find the mean score and compare the score in
each test.
42
H. Validity and Reliability
All of the data used in this research had to be valid and reliable. The validity of the data gained by the researcher by fulfilling five validity criteria
suggested by Anderson et al. 1994 in Burns 1999: 161-162. Those are follows:
1. Democratic validity
This criterion relates to the extent to which the research is truly collaborative and allows for the involvement of multiple voices. The researcher
gained this criterion by allowing another research member to give their suggestions and comments in this research.
2. Outcome validity
This criterion relates to the notion of actions leading to outcomes that are „successful’ within the research context. The researcher gained this criterion by
involving another research member to give some suggestions about the implementation of the use of picture series in writing teaching and learning
process.
3. Process validity
This criterion raises questions about the „dependability’ and „competency’ of the research. The researcher gained this criterion by following four steps stated
by Kemmis and McTaggart 1988 in conducting action research. Those steps are planning, action, observation, and reflection.
4. Catalytic validity
This criterion relates to the extent to which the research allows participants to deepen their understanding of the social realities of the context and how they
43 can make changes within it. The researcher gained this criterion by giving chance
to the another research team member to deepen their understanding on the use of picture series in writing teaching and learning process through monitoring the
res earcher’s action and discussion.
5. Dialogic validity
This criterion connects the processes of peer review that is commonly used in academic research. The researcher gained this criterion by doing dialogues and
interviews with the English teacher and the students to evaluate the previous actions and determine the next actions.
To avoid subjectivity and get trustworthiness the researcher used Triangulation suggested by Denzin 1978 in Burns 1999. Triangulation is used
to get multiple perspective of the situation being studied. In this research the researcher used two kinds of triangulation. The first one was time triangulation
where the data collection was done at different points at time. In this research the data were collected at the beginning, middle and the end of the action. The second
one was researcher triangulation which the data were collected by another research team member. The result of the data from the teacher and students were
compared with the researcher own data to avoid the subjectivity in this research.
I. Procedure of the Research
The researcher applied action research procedures suggested by Kemmis and McTaggart 1988 in Burns 2010: 8 which has four important stages:
planning, action, observation, and reflection. Their concept can be seen in Figure 4.
