Conceptual of Framework THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Y 2 = Posttest of both experimental and control class X = Implementation of Jigsaw Technique 1

C. The Population and Sample

1. Population The population of this study is the second grade student of SMPN 3 Tanggerang Selatan. This school has ten classes for second grade with 4 English teacher. Because only one teacher who permitted the classes to used as sample, the researcher took 2 classes for this research. 2. Samples The sample are 60 students from two classes; VIII.8 and VIII.9. The writer was implemented jigsaw technique in the first class and jigsaw technique was not implemented in the second class. Before the writer conduct the research, he made sure that both of classes have the similar characteristic or achievment by doing an oral test. It was found that the students from both classes have the same characteristic and achievment in oral test. The sample of this study was a class VIII.8 as an experimental class and VIII.9 as control class which each class consistted of 30 students.

D. The Research Instrument

The Instrument of the research was test. Oral test was tested to get sistematic data. Retell narative story was an oral test which was planed by researcher. Telling narative story was used as an Instrument of a pre-test and a post-test. The result of oral test was spared in the oral test criteria consist of 5 criteria which was designed validity. The researcher used content validity to attain students the evidence of valid instrument. The researcher made the school English syllabus as the main achievement. The oral test was held to get 1 Larry Christensen, Experimental Methodology, USA: University of South Alabama, 2007, p. 332. the students speaking skill in comprehensibility, fluency, grammar, vocabulary, and accuracy. Table 3.2 Five Components of Grading Speaking Scale : Components of Speaking Rating Scores Indicators Ac cur ac y 6 80-100 Pronunciation is only very slightly influenced by the mother tongue. Two or three minor grammatical and lexical error. 5 70 –79 Pronunciation is slightly influenced by the mother-tongue. A few minor grammatical and lexical errors but most utterances are correct. 4 60 –69 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother- tongue but no serious phonological errors. A few grammatical and lexical errors but only one or two major errors causing confusion 3 50 –59 Pronunciation is influenced by the mother-tongue but only a few serious phonological and lexical errors, some of which causes confusion. 2 40 –49 Pronunciation seriously influenced by the mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown in communication. Many ‘basic’ grammatical and lexical errors