65 On the other hand, for the practice of the iconic model, closed-open type
of questionnaires was distributed to tenth grade students of Putratama Vocational High School 20142015 academic year. Besides, interview was conducted for
tenth grade students of Putratama Vocational High School 20142015 academic year. The data gathered was used to answer to the research question proposed in
research questions in Chapter I.
E. DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
In this data analysis technique, there were two main focuses. The first focus was the data analysis technique for the concept of the iconic model. The
second focus was the data analysis technique for the practice of the iconic model.
1. Data Analysis Technique for the Concept of the Iconic Model
For need analysis, the percentage of each response was counted by dividing the number of students who chose certain answer with the total number
of the students, then multiplied by 100. It can be showed as follows. n
N
Note: n = total number of students who chose certain answer
N = total number of students X 100
66 The data of need analysis was gained from questionnaires that were
distributed to the participants. The data was counted using that formula above. Then, the data was interpreted in form of writing. Besides, interpretation was used
for answer the open type of questionnaire.
2. Data Analysis Technique for the Practice of the Iconic Model
For experts ’ validation, the data from evaluation was divided into two
categories of data analysis technique. The first category was about participants’ response, gathered through closed questions and the second was about comment
and suggestions, collected through open questions. a.
Opinion of evaluation participants for conceptual model through closed questions used Likert scale. The researcher used five point scales which were
Strongly Agree SA, Agree A, Doubt D, Disagree DA, and Strongly Disagree SDA. Choosing strongly agree SA had point of agreement which was
5. Choosing agree A had 4 as the point of agreement. Choosing doubt D would get 3 as the point of agreement and choosing disagree DA would get 2 as the
point of agreement. Besides, choosing strongly disagree SDA would get 1 point. The five point scale can be described as follows.
Table 3.5 Score and criteria of the likert scale Best, 2006
No Criteria
Score 1.
Strongly Agree 5
2. Agree
4
3.
Doubt 3
4. Disagree
2
5. Strongly Disagree
1
67 In calculating the score to describe the results, finding the mean was
needed. The formula to get mean can be presented as follows. M =
∑x N
Note: M : Mean indicators of central tendency of the set of sources
N : Number of cases the number of respondents
Mean of each item was categorized into certain criteria. In order to categorize the mean criteria, the ideal mean Mi and ideal standard deviation
SDi should be obtained. The formulas to determine the ideal mean Mi and ideal standard deviation SDi based on Munadi 2014 are presented as follows:
Mi Ideal Mean = highest score + lowest score
= 5+1 = 3
SDi Ideal Standard Deviation = highest score
– lowest score =
5-1 = 0.6
In addition, this research modified
quantitative data conversion
formulas as stated by Sudijono 2011: 329. The formulas are described in the following figure.
Figure 3.1 Mean criteria formula Sudijono, 2011
68 Those formulas aimed to classify the mean criteria which were very high,
high, fair, low, and poor. The mean criteria are described in table 3.6.
Table.3.6 Meaning of score criteria
Formula Score Range
Criteria
Mi + 1.5 SDi = 3 + 1.5 x 0.6= 3.9 Mi + 0.5 SDi = 3 + 0.5 x 0.6= 3.3
Mi
– 0.5 SDi = 3 – 0.5 x 0.6= 2.7 Mi
– 1.5 SDi = 3 – 1.5 x 0.6= 2.1 4
Very HighVery Good 3.4
– 3.9 HighGood
2.8 – 3.3
Fair 2.2
– 2.7 Low
. Poor
Mean as indicators of central tendency of each indicator and each aspects of required information aimed to decide what the researcher should do with the
designed product. Mean specified certain meaning of interpretation. The interpretation of point of agreement is presented as follows.
Table 3.7 Interpretation of the degree of agreement
Range Interpretation
0.0 – 2.7
Replace the rejected part of the designed model 2.8
– 3.3 Add more part or modify part of the designed model based on the lack on the
statement 3.4
– 3.9 Conduct more exploration on the existing part of the designed model based on
the statement ≥ 4
No Revision
The interpretation was
modified from
quantitative data conversion by Sudijono 2011 and percentage of questionnaire responses by Best and Kahn
2006. Best and Kahn state if the response rate is 70 out of total maximum point, it means very good. Sudijono 2001 assumes that the mean score which is
≥ 4 is categorized as very high. Therefore, if the mean score refers to ≥ 4, it means
69 there is no revision. If the response rate is 60 out of the total maximum point, it
needs to conduct more exploration on the existing part of the designed model based on the statement. It means that the range score 3.4
– 3.9 was good but need more exploration. The designed model is considered adequate if the response rate
is 50 out of the total maximum. It means that some part of the designed model needs to be modified if the range score is 2.8
– 3.3. Replacing certain part of designed product is needed if the mean is in the range of 0.0
– 2.7. It means that the designed model belongs to a poor product. It is necessary to replace some
rejected part since the response rate is below 50 out of the maximum point. b.
Comment and suggestions of experts’ validation through open questions used interpretation.
For the practice of the iconic model, the data was analyzed through two main ways. The first was for closed type of questionnaire and the second was for
open type of questionnaire and interview. a.
Opinion of the iconic model through closed type of questionnaire used Likert scale. The formula to get mean can be presented as follows.
M = ∑x
N Note: M
: Mean indicators of central tendency of the set of sources N
: Number of cases the number of respondents After obtaining the score, the score could be interpreted using the
meaning of score criteria. The meaning of the score is presented in table 3.8.
70
Table.3.8 Meaning of score criteria for the practice of the iconic model
Formula Score Range
Criteria
Mi + 1.5 SDi = 3 + 1.5 x 0.6= 3.9 Mi + 0.5 SDi = 3 + 0.5 x 0.6= 3.3
Mi – 0.5 SDi = 3 – 0.5 x 0.6= 2.7
Mi – 1.5 SDi = 3 – 1.5 x 0.6= 2.1
4 Very HighVery Good
3.4 – 3.9
HighGood 2.8
– 3.3 Fair
2.2 – 2.7
Low .
Poor
b. Comment and suggestions of the practice of the iconic model through open
type of questionnaire and interview used interpretation in analyzing.
F. RESEARCH PROCEDURES
