Technique of collecting data

5. Field notes

During the process teaching and learning, the researcher also acts as the observer who observes classroom interaction. In this case, the researcher used field notes in taping and describing the process of learning during CAR. 38 Besides those four instruments for collecting the data, the researcher also used the photographs 39 as the tool for documenting the activities during cycle 1 and cycle 2.

I. Data Analysis

In this classroom action research, the data analysis is divided into two kinds there are quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis.

1. Quantitative analysis

Quantitative analysis is done for analyzing the result of pre-test and post test, the result of questioners, and the result of structured observation sheet. a. Pre-test and Post-test In analyzing the result of pre-test and post test, the researcher did some steps to know t he improvement of students‟ achievement of the present perfect tense after using the game find someone who as the strategy of teaching First, the researcher tried to get the average of students‟ present perfect score per action within one cycle. It is to know how well students‟ score as a whole on present perfect achievement. It uses the formula: 40 38 Wijaya Kusumah Dedi Dwitagama, Mengenal Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, Jakarta: PT. Indeks, 2009 p. 52 39 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P 101 40 Anas Sudijino, Pengantar statistik Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2008p. 81 � : Mean �: Individual score N : number of students Second, the researcher tried to get the class percentage which passes the KKM 60 Sixty. It uses the formula 41 : P: The class percentage F: Total percentage score N: Number of students Next, the researcher tried to analyze the result of pre-test up to post- test score in cycle 1 and 2 to know whether or not there is the improvement score on students‟ achievement of the present perfect tense. In calculating it, the researcher uses the formula based on David E. Meltzer 2008 in Rella Agustina 2010: 36 42 : P : Percentage of students ‟ improvement y : pre-test result 1 : Post-test result1 41 Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2008p. 43 42 Rella Agustina, Develoving students’ Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text by Using Story Mapping ,FITK UIN Jakarta, 2010 p. 36 unpublished skripsi � = � P = � × 100 P = 1 − x 100 P : Percentage of students‟ improvement y : pre-test result 2 : Post-test result 2 b. Questionnaires To analyze the result of questionnaires, the researcher used Gutmann scale by calculating students‟ answer of yes and no for each item. Then, she calculated the percentage of it. 43 c. Structured Observation sheet In analyzing the result of the observation sheet, the researcher used the quantitative analysis by calculating the item of each category that has been marked by the observer. 2. Qualitative analysis Qualitative analysis is used to describe the data by using non numerical explanation but in form of narrative explanation. The information that has been taken from the informants will be analyzed in three steps. In this case, the researcher analyzed the result of interview and the result of field notes by using four stages, There are; assembling the data, coding the data, comparing the data, and building the interpretation. 44 Stage 1: Assembling the Data On this step, the researcher will assemble the data that have collected over the period of research; field notes, interview and so on. Stage 2: coding the data 43 Sugiono, Metode Penelitian Bisnis: Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan RD, Bandung: Alfabeta, 2009 p. 129 44 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P 157 P = 2 − x 100 After assembling the data, the researcher categories the data that have been collected more specifically Stage 3: comparing the data Once the data have been categorized in some way, comparisons can be made to see whether themes or patterns are repeated or developed across different data gathering techniques. You may notice hierarchies or sequences the data or identify relationships and connections between different sources of data. 45 On other word, the researcher compares and identifies the data that have been categorized. Stage 4: building the interpretations The researcher takes and draws the conclusion of the research. In drawing this conclusion, the researcher is helped by the collaborator in order to get the good conclusion. J. Validity of data Validity is important element in research, it uses in judging whether the measurement instrument of research measures what is supposed to measure. As Wilmar Tinambunan said in his book Evaluation of Student Achievement that, “Validity refers to the extent to which the results of an evaluation procedure serve the particular uses for which they are intended. Thus, the validity of a test is the extent to which the test measures what is intended to measure. 46 Regarding the validity in action research, the researcher uses three criteria of validity that includes of outcome validity, process validity, and dialogic validity that suggested by Anderson. “Outcome validity relates to the notion of actions leading to outcomes that are „successful‟ within the research context” 47 45 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P. 158 46 Wilmar Tinambunan, Evaluation of Students Achievement, Jakarta: Depdiknas 1998 p. 11 47 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P. 161 Based on that statement, it can be said that outcome validity can be seen from the result of the test. When the result of the test both cycle 1 and cycle 2 is better than the result of pre test, then the actions is successful. Next, the process validity, this criterion raises questions about the „dependability‟ and „competency‟ of the research. Are events or behaviors viewed from different perspectives and thorough different data sources in order to guard against simplistic or biased interpretations? 48 In this case, the researcher used different data sources which includes interview, questionnaires, field notes and structured observation sheet. Then, dialogic validity, this criterion parallels the process of peer review. Peer review in action research would mean dialogue with practitioner peers, either through collaborative enquiry or reflective dialogue with „critical friends‟. 49 In this study, the researcher makes reflective dialogue with the English teacher. Besides those three criteria, In this case, the researcher uses the formula below to measure the validity of the test that has been given to students. 50 � : Correlation between item score and total score : Sum of multiplication between x and y 2 : Quadrate of x 2 : Quadrate of y 48 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P. 162 49 Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teacher, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. P. 162 50 Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara, 2010 p. 70 r xy = 2 2 K. Trustworthiness of Study 1. Item difficulty The difficulty of item analysis can tell us if an item was too difficult or too easy. The most widely used interpretation of the difficulty of a test item is that it is indicated by the proportion of subject who gets the item right. 51 The formula for computing item difficulty is as follows 52 : P : The percentage who answered the item correctly R : The number who answered the item correctly T : The total number who tried the item

2. Discriminating power

The discriminating power of a test item is the difference between the number of correct and incorrect discriminations expressed as a percentage of the maximum possible correct discriminations. In other words, the discriminating power of a test item is its ability to differentiate between pupils who have achieved well the upper group and those who have achieved poorly the lower group. 53 The formula for computing item discriminating power is as follows: 51 Wilmar Tinambunan, Evaluation of Students Achievement, Jakarta: Depdiknas 1998 p. 137 52 Wilmar Tinambunan, Evaluation of Students Achievement, Jakarta: Depdiknas 1998 p. 138 53 Wilmar Tinambunan, Evaluation of Students Achievement, Jakarta: Depdiknas 1998 p. 139 P = � X 100 D : The index item discriminating power U : The number of pupils in the upper group who Answered the item correctly L : The number of pupils in the lower group who Answered the item correctly N : Number pupils in each of the groups. Here is the scale for discriminating power DP 54 : -1,00 0,00 1, 00 DP is negative DP is low DP is high positive

L. Indicator of the Action Success

This classroom action research CAR can be called success, if 75 of students can achieve the target score of KKM 60 sixty of the pre-test up to post test in cycle 2. And there would not be continued to the next cycle. Then, the CAR is stopped. 54 Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara, 2010 p. 211 D = − CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION

A. Description of research finding

1. Description of preliminary study

The data of this research finding is taken from the field notes, result of observation, interview, and test and questionnaires sheet. Observation and interview is done before and after implementing CAR. Based on observation conducted by the researcher before implementing CAR, it was found that students at class 8.2 of Mts Soebono Mantofani were not really interested in learning English. Almost 70 of students especially male students who didn‟t pay attention fully to the teacher explanation. Some of them were seen talked and joked with their friends, and the others were seen read and wrote something but not about English material. Only about eight or nine who paid attention full to the teacher. Besides that, when teacher gave them the task 42