C. The Subject of the Research
The subjects of the research were the seventh grade students of Class D of SMPN 2 Playen in the academic year of 20132014 which consisted of
32 students. There were 20 girls and 12 boys to take part in this research. They were chosen as the subjects of the research based on a consideration that
they had lower score in English lesson than the other classes. It was also caused by the fact that the school divided the students into four classes A, B,
C, and D based on the rank and Class D attained the lowest score. Based on
result of the observation during teaching practice, the students had problems dealing with their writing skills.
D. Time of the Research
This research was conducted in the second semester of the academic year of 20132014. The action was carried out by following the schedule on
Wednesday, 07.00-08.20 and Friday, 07.40-09.00.
E. Data Collection 1. Types of Data
The types of data were both qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative data were presented in the form of description and the quantitative
data were presented in numerical form.
2. Data Collection Technique and Instrument
The data were collected in every step. They are qualitative and quantitative in nature. The qualitative data were gathered through several
techniques. The first technique was observation. Observation guideline was as a guideline to observe the English teaching learning process in the classroom.
The form of the data was field note. The second technique was interview. The interview was conducted by interviewing the English teacher and the students
of class D of grade VII based on the interview guideline. The data were in the form of interview transcript.
In addition, the quantitative data were gathered through writing tests. The results were in the form of scores and were used to find the
improvement of the students’ writing skill. To assess the students’ writing performance, the researcher used the scoring rubric of writing. The data were
presented in the form of score transcript.
3. Data Analysis Technique
The data were qualitative and quantitative. Therefore, they were analyzed in two ways, qualitatively and quantitatively. The data from the
observation and interview were analyzed by making qualitative descriptions while the data from the pre- and post-tests were analyzed by comparing the
mean score of the students’ writing scores.
F. Research Validity and Reliability
According to Anderson and Burns 1999 there are five validity criteria that should be fulfilled to get the valid data in action research. They are
democratic validity, outcome validity, process validity, catalytic validity, and dialogic validity.
The democratic validity was fulfilled by having discussions with the collaborators. The discussion was always conducted during the research. The
collaborator was given abundant chances to give ideas, comments, and suggestions toward the research. Through some discussions, the progress of
the research could be found. At the end of every cycle, some discussions were held to evaluate the actions which had done that day or that cycle and to plan
the actions in the next meeting or cycle. Outcome validity is related to the notion of actions leading to the result
that are successful within the research context. To fulfill the outcome validity, some indicators that show the improvement of the students’ writing skill were
formulated. The catalytic validity is related to the extent to which the research
allows the participants to deepen their understanding to the social realities of the context and how they can make change within it. Within the process in this
research, the researcher had chances to learn more about the realities in English teaching learning process. The research also involved the collaborator
as a person who could monitor the research process.
The process validity is related to the criterion to make the action research believable. To gain process validity, the research collected the data
by observing and making some notes during the research. Anything that happened in the teaching learning process had been noted.
The dialogic validity is the process of peer review that is commonly used in the academic research. This validity was fulfilled by discussing the
research findings with the collaborators and some students of English education department at UNY. The members of the discussion gave their
opinions and their criticisms about the research report. To enhance the trustworthiness of the data and to reduce the
subjectivity in analyzing the data, the researcher used methods triangulation. Burns 2010 states 4 types of triangulations.
Time triangulation. Data were collected at different points in time. The researcher interviewed students at the beginning, middle and end of the
course. Space triangulation. Data were collected with different subgroups of
people. The researcher collected data in more than one group so that she can compare across two different groups.
Research triangulation. Data were collected by more than one researcher. The researcher asked the teacher and the students to collect data to
compare with her own. Theory triangulation. Data were analyzed from more than theoretical
perspective. The researcher consulted documents related to learner autonomy
but also develops theoretical ideas from her own and others’ observations and reflections.
Moreover, in order to ensure the reliability, the researcher used the score of the students’ writing, interview transcripts, vignettes to get the same
results. To obtain the data about the teaching learning process, the researcher observed the teaching learning process and interviewed the teachers and also
the students.
G. Procedure of the Research
Kategori