Research Design Place and Time of the Research Instrument of the Research

27

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design

This research used quantitative method. It called quantitative method because it is related to the calculation and analysis of numerical data. The researcher used quasi-experimental research design to identify the effectiveness of using clustering technique on students’ writing recount text. Here, the researcher gave pre-test and post-test in two classes; experimental and controlled class. Pre-test was used to get the beginning score from the experimental and controlled class before treatment. Post-test was used to measure the score after treatment. Then the result was compared after and before the treatment to get the effectiveness of clustering technique. There was a different treatment between experimental and controlled class. In experimental class, the researcher gave a treatment by using clustering technique for training students in writing recount text, whereas the students in controlled class were taught without using clustering technique.

B. Place and Time of the Research

This research was conducted in the first grade of the first semester at SMA Al- Hasra Depok which is located on Jl. Raya Parung km 24, Bojongsari, Depok. This research was carried out only for a month in August 2015. This research was held in six meetings each class; pre-test, treatment in four times, and post-test.

C. The Population and Sampling Technique of the Research

1. Research Population The population of the study consisted of all Tenth Grade students of the first year in SMA Al-Hasra Depok. There were four classes, X.1, X.2, X.3, and X.4 in SMA Al-Hasra Depok. The total of the tenth grade students was about 120 students.

2. Sampling Technique

The samples of this research were; class X.1 as the experimental class and X.2 as the controlled class. In this study, the researcher used Purposive Sampling. According to McMillan, “purposeful sampling sometimes called purposive, judgment, or judgmental sampling, the researcher selects particular elements from the population that will be informative about the topic of interest”. 1 It means that the researcher took the sample from the judgment that was representative of the population or includes subjects with needed characteristics. In this study, the researcher took the sample by interviewing the English teacher in order to know which classes that have the same ability in English lesson, had same facilities, on the same level and by asking permission to her to conduct the research in two different classes.

D. Instrument of the Research

The instrument that the researcher used was test; pre-test and post-test. The pre-test was given before the treatment and the post-test was given after the treatment. Here, the researcher gave the instruction of the tests based on Basic Competency-Kompetensi Dasar KD that the first year students of Senior High School are expected to be able to express meaningful ideas in term of functional text and simple short essay in the form of recount, narrative, and procedure to interact with people in their nearest environment. The given topic was about recount story, such as “My holiday”. The students were asked to write their personal experience about their holiday in three short paragraphs. Then for the scoring, the researcher used analytic score that was created by Jacobs, et al .’s to make the scoring of students’ writing becomes more reliable. 2 1 James H. McMillan, Sally Schumacher, Research in Education Evidence-Based Inquiry 6 th Edition, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2006, p.126. 2 Sara Cushing Weigle, Assessing Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002, p.116. Table 3.1 Analytic Score in Writing Scoring Element Scale Quality Description Content 30-27 Excellent to very good Knowledgeable – substantive – thorough – development of thesis – relevant to assigned topic 26-22 Good to average Some knowledge of subject – adequate range – limited development of thesis – mostly relevant to topic, but lacks detail 21-17 Fair to poor Limited knowledge of subject – little substance – inadequate development of topic 16-13 Very poor Does not show knowledge of subject – non-substantive – not pertinent – or not enough to evaluate Organization 20-18 Excellent to very good Fluent expression – ideas clearly statedsupported – succinct – well- organized – logical sequencing – cohesive 17-14 Good to average Somewhat choppy – loosely organized but main idea stand out – limited support – logical but incomplete sequencing 13-10 Fair to poor Non-fluent – ideas confused or disconnected – lacks logical sequencing and development 9-7 Very poor Does not communicate – no organization – or not enough to evaluate Vocabulary 20-18 Excellent to very good Sophisticated range – effective wordidiom choice and usage – word form mastery – appropriate register 17-14 Good to average Adequate range – frequent errors of wordidiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured 13-10 Fair to poor Limited range – frequent errors of wordidiom form, choice, usage – meaning confused or obscured 9-7 Very poor Essentially translation – little knowledge of English vocabulary, idioms, word form – or not enough to evaluate Language use 25-22 Excellent to very good Effective complex constructions – few errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions 21-18 Good to average Effective but simple constructions – minor problems in complex constructions – several errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions but meaning seldom obscured 17-11 Fair to poor Major problems in simplecomplex constructions – frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions, andor fragments, run-ons, deletions – meaning confused or obscured 10-5 Very poor Virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules – dominated by errors – does not communicate – or not enough to evaluate Mechanics 5 Excellent to very good Demonstrates mastery of conventions – few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing 4 Good to average Occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, but meaning not obscured 3 Fair to poor Frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing – poor handwriting – meaning confused or obscured 2 Very poor No mastery conventions – dominant by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing – handwriting illegible – or not enough to evaluate From the analytical score table above, here is the formula to get the students’ writing recount text total score: TOTAL SCORE = Content + Organization + Vocabulary + Language Use + Mechanics

E. Technique of Data Collecting