THE STUDENTS’ PRESENCE LIST DURING CONDUCTING THE RESEARCH AT THE EIGHTH GRADE (CONTROL GROUP) OF SMP NEGERI 5 NAMOHALU ESIWA IN 2015/2016

THE STUDENTS’ PRESENCE LIST DURING CONDUCTING THE RESEARCH AT THE EIGHTH GRADE (CONTROL GROUP) OF SMP NEGERI 5 NAMOHALU ESIWA IN 2015/2016

Signature NO

Meeting I

Meeting II

1. Agrina Gea

2. Agus Nirman Putri Harefa

3. Amperlin Gea

4. Atanasius Berkat Gea

5. Ayu Putri Harefa

6. Astriani Harefa

7. Beli Finto Zalukhu

8. Berkat Iman Jaya Gea

9. Berkat Nobuala Gea

10. Boby Martinus Gea

11. Dedi Krisman Gea

12. Elman Gea

13. Iwan Setiawan Gea

14. Jernih Putri Harefa

15. Kristian Gea

16. Noverius Gea

17. Nud Mei Elfitri Gea

18. Putri Damai Agusniat Gea

19. Sariani Harefa

20. Setia Nova Putra Gea

21. Siska Adventi Gea

22. Syukur Irawan Gea

23. Terima Gea

24. Teti Warni Gea

25. Victor Julius Gea

26. Yakini Gea

27. Yarmanata Gea

28. Meni Benia Zalukhu

29. Restui Harefa

30. Yasrizal Zalukhu

Approved by: The Teacher-Collaborator,

The researcher,

AGUSMIN TELAUMBANUA, S.Pd SEFRI ROSNIAT LASE

NIP. -

NIM. 112108084

Appendix 9

Table 10

THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Pre Test for Experimental Group)

Achievement The Students' Level of the NO

Aspect of Scoring

Students' Names

Content Organization Vocabulary Language Mechanic

Score

Mark

Students' Ability

1 Celsis Sokhiyani Gea 20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Adequate Level 2 Darni Murni Yanti Gea

25 10 15 10 4 64 64 Adequate Level 3 Dewi Putri Lase

15 15 10 15 2 57 57 Adequate Level 4 Dingkar Likeme Harefa

25 15 15 15 5 75 75 Good Level 5 Doli Hartono Gea

15 10 10 10 2 47 47 Less Level 6 Ernita Gea

20 10 15 10 3 58 58 Adequate Level 7 Fenni Indiani Ziliwu

20 15 10 15 4 64 64 Adequate Level 8 Fibi Putri Sari Gea

15 10 15 15 3 58 58 Adequate Level 9 Idarwati Gea

15 15 10 10 2 52 52 Less Level 10 Ingatmasa Gea

20 10 15 10 3 58 58 Adequate Level 11 Irwanto Putra Gea

15 5 5 10 2 37 37 Fail Level 12 Julius Gea

20 15 15 10 4 64 64 Adequate Level 13 Kasmarniat Lahagu

15 5 10 15 2 47 47 Less Level 14 Kristin Tri Putri Gea

20 5 15 10 1 51 51 Less Level 15 Kriswanto Gea

20 15 10 5 2 52 52 Less Level 16 Leo Hidayat Fatalan Gea

25 20 15 10 4 74 74 Good Level 17 Marthin Kusman Zendrato

20 15 15 15 3 68 68 Adequate Level 18 Mawar Putri Yani Gea

20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Adequate Level 19 Noni Putri Sari Harefa

15 10 15 10 2 52 52 Less Level 20 Paskalena Gea

15 15 10 10 3 53 53 Less Level 21 Rida Yanti Gea

15 5 5 10 2 37 37 Fail Level 22 Riniwati Gea

20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Adequate Level 23 Serlina Gea

15 5 5 10 1 36 36 Fail Level 24 Sri Juwita Gea

20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Adequate Level

25 Tetiari Lase 15 10 10 15 2 52 52 Less Level 26 Tri Love Putrawan Gea

15 15 10 10 3 53 53 Less Level 27 Wibi Berkat Tiani Gea

15 5 10 10 1 41 41 Less Level 28 Yani Wati Gea

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level 29 Yefi Kristiani Gea

20 15 10 10 3 58 58 Adequate Level 30 Yuyun Nasrani Gea

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level

mean ( X̅)

54.8 Less Level

Explanation: a.

Maximum Score = 100 b. The level of the students' ability in writing narrative text:

85 - 100 : Very good level 75 - 84 : Good level 60 - 74 : Adequate level 40 - 59 : Less level

0 - 39 : Fail level

Appendix 10

Table 11

THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Pre Test for Control Group)

Achievement The Students' Level of the NO

Aspect of Scoring

Students' Names

Content OrganizationVocabulary Language Mechanic

Score

Mark Students'

1 Agrina Gea 15 10 5 15 2 47 47 Less Level 2 Agus Nirman Putri Harefa

20 10 15 5 2 52 52 Less Level 3 Amperlin Gea

15 5 10 15 2 47 47 Less Level 4 Atanasius Berkat Gea

20 15 15 15 1 66 66 Adequate Level 5 Ayu Putri Harefa

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level 6 Astriani Harefa

20 10 15 10 3 58 58 Less Level 7 Beli Finto Zalukhu

15 10 5 10 3 43 43 Less Level 8 Berkat Iman Jaya Gea

20 10 10 15 3 58 58 Less Level 9 Berkat Nobuala Gea

15 10 15 5 2 47 47 Less Level 10 Boby Martinus Gea

15 15 10 5 3 48 48 Less Level 11 Dedi Krisman Gea

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level 12 Elman Gea

15 5 5 5 1 31 31 Fail Level 13 Iwan Setiawan Gea

15 10 5 10 1 41 41 Less Level 14 Jernih Putri Harefa

15 5 10 15 2 47 47 Less Level 15 Meni Benia Zalukhu

15 10 5 10 3 43 43 Less Level 16 Kristian Gea

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level 17 Noverius Gea

15 10 5 10 2 42 42 Less Level 18 Nud Mei Elfitri Gea

15 5 10 15 1 46 46 Less Level 19 Restui Harefa

15 5 15 15 2 52 52 Less Level 20 Putri Damai Agusniat Gea

15 20 10 10 2 57 57 Less Level 21 Sariani Harefa

15 5 15 10 3 48 48 Less Level 22 Setia Nova Putra Gea

15 10 5 15 1 46 46 Less Level 23 Siska Adventi Gea

20 10 10 10 2 52 52 Less Level 24 Syukur Irawan Gea

15 5 15 10 3 48 48 Less Level

25 Terima Gea 15 10 5 15 2 47 47 Less Level 26 Teti Warni Gea

15 5 5 5 2 32 32 Fail Level 27 Victor Julius Gea

15 5 10 10 2 42 42 Less Level 28 Yakini Gea

20 10 5 10 2 47 47 Less Level 29 Yarmanata Gea

15 5 10 10 1 41 41 Less Level 30 Yasrizal Zalukhu

15 5 5 15 2 42 42 Less Level

mean ( X̅)

46.53 Less Level

Explanation: a.

Maximum Score = 100 b. The level of the students' ability in writing narrative text:

85 - 100 : Very good level 75 - 84 : Good level 60 - 74 : Adequate level 40 - 59 : Less level

0 - 39 : Fail level

Appendix 11

Table 12

THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Post Test for Experimental Group)

Achievement The Students' Level of the NO

Aspect of Scoring

Students' Names

Content Organization Vocabulary Language Mechanic

Score

Mark

Students' Ability

1 Celsis Sokhiyani Gea 25 20 15 20 4 84 84 Good Level 2 Darni Murni Yanti Gea

20 20 20 15 5 80 80 Good Level 3 Dewi Putri Lase

20 15 20 15 3 73 73 Adequate Level 4 Dingkar Likeme Harefa

30 20 20 20 4 94 94 Very Good Level 5 Doli Hartono Gea

15 15 15 20 3 68 68 Adequate Level 6 Ernita Gea

20 10 15 20 3 68 68 Adequate Level 7 Fenni Indiani Ziliwu

25 15 15 20 4 79 79 Good Level 8 Fibi Putri Sari Gea

20 15 15 15 2 67 67 Adequate Level 9 Idarwati Gea

20 10 15 15 1 61 61 Adequate Level 10 Ingatmasa Gea

20 15 10 20 1 66 66 Adequate Level 11 Irwanto Putra Gea

20 10 20 15 3 68 68 Adequate Level 12 Julius Gea

25 20 20 15 2 82 82 Good Level 13 Kasmarniat Lahagu

20 15 15 15 2 67 67 Adequate Level 14 Kristin Tri Putri Gea

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Adequate Level 15 Kriswanto Gea

25 15 20 15 3 78 78 Good Level 16 Leo Hidayat Fatalan Gea

30 20 20 25 3 98 98 Very Good Level 17 Marthin Kusman Zendrato

25 20 20 20 3 88 88 Very Good Level 18 Mawar Putri Yani Gea

25 15 20 20 3 83 83 Good Level 19 Noni Putri Sari Harefa

20 15 15 15 3 68 68 Adequate Level 20 Paskalena Gea

20 15 15 20 2 72 72 Adequate Level 21 Rida Yanti Gea

15 20 15 20 2 72 72 Adequate Level 22 Riniwati Gea

25 15 15 20 3 78 78 Good Level 23 Serlina Gea

20 15 20 10 2 67 67 Adequate Level 24 Sri Juwita Gea

20 15 20 15 3 73 73 Adequate Level

25 Tetiari Lase 15 20 15 15 2 67 67 Adequate Level 26 Tri Love Putrawan Gea

20 15 15 10 3 63 63 Adequate Level 27 Wibi Berkat Tiani Gea

20 15 15 15 2 67 67 Adequate Level 28 Yani Wati Gea

20 15 10 20 2 67 67 Adequate Level 29 Yefi Kristiani Gea

25 20 15 15 4 79 79 Good Level 30 Yuyun Nasrani Gea

25 15 15 20 3 78 78 Good Level

mean ( X̅)

74.1 Adequate Level

Explanation: a.

Maximum Score = 100 b. The level of the students' ability in writing narrative text:

85 - 100 : Very good level 75 - 84 : Good level 60 - 74 : Adequate level 40 - 59 : Less level

0 - 39 : Fail level

Appendix 12

Table 13

THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Post Test for Control Group)

Achievement The Students' Level of the NO

Aspect of Scoring

Students' Names

Content OrganizationVocabulary Language Mechanic

Score

Mark Students'

1 Agrina Gea 20 15 15 20 2 72 72 Adequate Level 2 Agus Nirman Putri Harefa

20 15 15 15 2 67 67 Less Level 3 Amperlin Gea

20 15 15 10 2 62 62 Less Level 4 Atanasius Berkat Gea

25 15 20 25 4 89 89 Good Level 5 Ayu Putri Harefa

20 15 15 15 0 65 65 Less Level 6 Astriani Harefa

20 15 15 10 5 65 65 Less Level 7 Beli Finto Zalukhu

20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Adequate Level 8 Berkat Iman Jaya Gea

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Less Level 9 Berkat Nobuala Gea

20 15 20 10 0 65 65 Less Level 10 Boby Martinus Gea

25 20 20 15 4 84 84 Less Level 11 Dedi Krisman Gea

20 20 20 15 0 75 75 Good Level 12 Elman Gea

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Adequate Level 13 Iwan Setiawan Gea

20 10 20 15 2 67 67 Less Level 14 Jernih Putri Harefa

25 20 20 15 2 82 82 Less Level 15 Meni Benia Zalukhu

25 15 20 15 0 75 75 Less Level 16 Kristian Gea

25 15 20 15 3 79 79 Adequate Level 17 Noverius Gea

25 20 20 15 4 84 84 Good Level 18 Nud Mei Elfitri Gea

25 15 20 15 5 80 80 Good Level 19 Restui Harefa

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Less Level 20 Putri Damai Agusniat Gea

20 15 15 15 4 69 69 Less Level 21 Sariani Harefa

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Fail Level 22 Setia Nova Putra Gea

20 15 20 10 3 62 62 Adequate Level 23 Siska Adventi Gea

20 15 20 10 3 66 66 Fail Level 24 Syukur Irawan Gea

20 15 15 10 2 62 62 Adequate Level

25 Terima Gea 25 20 20 15 2 82 82 Less Level 26 Teti Warni Gea

20 10 20 15 2 67 67 Fail Level 27 Victor Julius Gea

20 15 10 15 3 63 63 Less Level 28 Yakini Gea

20 15 15 10 5 65 65 Less Level 29 Yarmanata Gea

20 10 20 15 2 67 67 Less Level 30 Yasrizal Zalukhu

20 15 20 10 3 68 68 Less Level

mean ( X̅)

70.57 Adequate Level

Explanation: a.

Maximum Score = 100 b. The level of the students' ability in writing narrative text:

85 - 100 : Very good level 75 - 84 : Good level 60 - 74 : Adequate level 40 - 59 : Less level

0 - 39 : Fail level

Appendix 13

Table 15

THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Pre Test for Experimental Group)

NO Students' Names X X²

1 Celsis Sokhiyani Gea 63 3969 2 Darni Murni Yanti Gea

64 4096 3 Dewi Putri Lase

57 3249 4 Dingkar Likeme Harefa

75 5625 5 Doli Hartono Gea

47 2209 6 Ernita Gea

58 3364 7 Fenni Indiani Ziliwu

64 4096 8 Fibi Putri Sari Gea

58 3364 9 Idarwati Gea

52 2704 10 Ingatmasa Gea

58 3364 11 Irwanto Putra Gea

37 1369 12 Julius Gea

64 4096 13 Kasmarniat Lahagu

47 2209 14 Kristin Tri Putri Gea

51 2601 15 Kriswanto Gea

52 2704 16 Leo Hidayat Fatalan Gea

74 5476 17 Marthin Kusman Zendrato

68 4624 18 Mawar Putri Yani Gea

63 3969 19 Noni Putri Sari Harefa

52 2704 20 Paskalena Gea

53 2809 21 Rida Yanti Gea

37 1369 22 Riniwati Gea

63 3969 23 Serlina Gea

36 1296 24 Sri Juwita Gea

63 3969 25 Tetiari Lase

52 2704 26 Tri Love Putrawan Gea

53 2809 27 Wibi Berkat Tiani Gea

41 1681 28 Yani Wati Gea

42 1764 29 Yefi Kristiani Gea

58 3364 30 Yuyun Nasrani Gea

1644 93290 n = 30 Standard Deviation (S)

Sum (∑)

Based on the table in the previous page, Where:

∑ = 1644 ∑X 2 = 93290

n = 30

The standard deviation (s) of Pre Test for Experimental Group = 10.50

Based on the table in the previous page, Where:

The standard deviation (s) of Pre Test for Control Group = 7.22

Based on the table in the previous page, Where:

∑ = 2223 ∑X 2 = 167113

n = 30

The standard deviation (s) of Post Test for Experimental Group = 9.08

Based on the table in the previous page, Where:

∑ = 2117 ∑X 2 = 151119

n = 30

The standard deviation (s) of Post Test for Control Group = 7.72

Appendix 14

Table 15

THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING

(Pre Test for Control Group)

NO Students' Names X X²

1 Agrina Gea 47 2209 2 Agus Nirman Putri Harefa

52 2704 3 Amperlin Gea

47 2209 4 Atanasius Berkat Gea

66 4356 5 Ayu Putri Harefa

42 1764 6 Astriani Harefa

58 3364 7 Beli Finto Zalukhu

43 1849 8 Berkat Iman Jaya Gea

58 3364 9 Berkat Nobuala Gea

47 2209 10 Boby Martinus Gea

48 2304 11 Dedi Krisman Gea

42 1764 12 Elman Gea

31 961 13 Iwan Setiawan Gea

41 1681 14 Jernih Putri Harefa

47 2209 15 Meni Benia Zalukhu

43 1849 16 Kristian Gea

42 1764 17 Noverius Gea

42 1764 18 Nud Mei Elfitri Gea

46 2116 19 Restui Harefa

52 2704 20 Putri Damai Agusniat Gea

57 3249 21 Sariani Harefa

48 2304 22 Setia Nova Putra Gea

46 2116 23 Siska Adventi Gea

52 2704 24 Syukur Irawan Gea

48 2304 25 Terima Gea

47 2209 26 Teti Warni Gea

32 1024 27 Victor Julius Gea

42 1764 28 Yakini Gea

47 2209 29 Yarmanata Gea

41 1681 30 Yasrizal B. Zalukhu

66472 n = 30 Standard Deviation (S)

Sum (∑)

Appendix 15

Table 16

THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Post Test for Experimental Group)

NO Students' Names X X²

1 Celsis Sokhiyani Gea 84 7056 2 Darni Murni Yanti Gea

80 6400 3 Dewi Putri Lase

73 5329 4 Dingkar Likeme Harefa

94 8836 5 Doli Hartono Gea

68 4624 6 Ernita Gea

68 4624 7 Fenni Indiani Ziliwu

79 6241 8 Fibi Putri Sari Gea

67 4489 9 Idarwati Gea

61 3721 10 Ingatmasa Gea

66 4356 11 Irwanto Putra Gea

68 4624 12 Julius Gea

82 6724 13 Kasmarniat Lahagu

67 4489 14 Kristin Tri Putri Gea

68 4624 15 Kriswanto Gea

78 6084 16 Leo Hidayat Fatalan Gea

98 9604 17 Marthin Kusman Zendrato

88 74 18 Mawar Putri Yani Gea

83 6889 19 Noni Putri Sari Harefa

68 4624 20 Paskalena Gea

72 5184 21 Rida Yanti Gea

72 5184 22 Riniwati Gea

78 6084 23 Serlina Gea

67 4489 24 Sri Juwita Gea

73 5329 25 Tetiari Lase

67 4489 26 Tri Love Putrawan Gea

63 3969 27 Wibi Berkat Tiani Gea

67 4489 28 Yani Wati Gea

67 4489 29 Yefi Kristiani Gea

79 6241 30 Yuyun Nasrani Gea

2223 167113 n = 30 Standard Deviation (S)

Sum (∑)

Appendix 16

Table 17

THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN

(Post Test for Control Group)

NO Students' Names X X²

1 Agrina Gea 72 5184 2 Agus Nirman Putri Harefa

67 4489 3 Amperlin Gea

62 3844 4 Atanasius Berkat Gea

89 7921 5 Ayu Putri Harefa

65 4225 6 Astriani Harefa

65 4225 7 Beli Finto Zalukhu

63 3969 8 Berkat Iman Jaya Gea

68 4624 9 Berkat Nobuala Gea

65 4225 10 Boby Martinus Gea

84 7056 11 Dedi Krisman Gea

75 5625 12 Elman Gea

68 4624 13 Iwan Setiawan Gea

67 4489 14 Jernih Putri Harefa

82 6724 15 Meni Benia Zalukhu

75 5625 16 Kristian Gea

79 6241 17 Noverius Gea

84 7056 18 Nud Mei Elfitri Gea

80 6400 19 Restui Harefa

68 4624 20 Putri Damai Agusniat Gea

69 4761 21 Sariani Harefa

68 4624 22 Setia Nova Putra Gea

62 3844 23 Siska Adventi Gea

66 4356 24 Syukur Irawan Gea

62 3844 25 Terima Gea

82 6724 26 Teti Warni Gea

67 4489 27 Victor Julius Gea

63 3969 28 Yakini Gea

65 4225 29 Yarmanata Gea

67 4489 30 Yasrizal B. Zalukhu

Sum (∑) 2117 151119 n = 30 Standard Deviation (S)

Appendix 17

Table 18

THE NORMALITY OF THE SAMPLE DATA OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Pre Test for Experimental Group)

S(Zi)

[F(Z i ) - S(Z i ) ]

L count = L o

L table = L 0.05 (30)

0,161 NORMAL

Conclusion (Normal = L count ≤ Ltable

DISTRIBUTION

To get L table for x=0.05 n=30 can be done as follows:

L table = √

= 0, 161

Because of L count (-0,0894) ≤ L table (0,61), so the data of pre test for Experimental Group are stated having NORMAL DISTRIBUTION.

To get L table for x=0.05 n=30 can be done as follows:

L table = √

= 0, 161

Because of L count (-0.1874) ≤L table (0,61), so the data of pre test for Control Group were stated having NORMAL DISTRIBUTION.

To get L table for x=0.05 n=30 can be done as follows:

L table = √

= 0, 161

Because of L count (-0,2153) ≤ L table (0,61), so the data of post test for Experimental Group were stated having NORMAL DISTRIBUTION.

To get L table for x=0.05 n=30 can be done as follows:

L table = √

Because of L count (-0,1960) ≤L table (0,61), so the data of post test for Control Group were stated having NORMAL DISTRIBUTION.

Appendix 18

Table 19

THE NORMALITY OF THE SAMPLE DATA OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Pre Test for Control Group)

S(Zi)

[F(Z i ) - S(Z i ) ]

L count = L o

L table = L 0.05 (30)

0,161 NORMAL

Conclusion (Normal = L count ≤ Ltable

DISTRIBUTION

Table 20

THE NORMALITY OF THE SAMPLE DATA OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Post Test for Experimental Group)

S(Zi)

[F(Z i ) - S(Z i ) ]

L count = L o

-0,2153

L table = L 0.05 (30)

0,161 NORMAL

Conclusion (Normal = L count ≤ Ltable

DISTRIBUTION

128

Table 21

THE NORMALITY OF THE SAMPLE DATA OF THE STUDENTS' ABILITY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT

(Post Test for Control Group)

S(Zi)=

[F(Z i ) - S(Z i ) ]

L count = L o

L table = L 0.05 (30)

0,161 NORMAL

Conclusion (Normal = L count ≤ Ltable

DISTRIBUTION

Appendix 21 THE HOMOGENEITY OF THE SAMPLE IN PRE TEST

To examine the homogeneity of the sample in pre test, the researcher uses Harley Test as follows:

1. Determining the greatest variance and smallest variance.

a. Based on Table 12 (13) is known: ∑

= 1644 ∑X 2 = 93290

n = 30

2 = S 110.3

b. Based on Table 13 (14) is known: ∑

= 1396 ∑X 2 = 66472

2 = S 52.1

Based on the computation above, so: The greatest variance = 110.3 The smallest variance = 52.1

2. Determining F count by using the formula as follows:

F count =

3. Determining F table as follows:

F table = F a (n the greatest variant- 1.n the smallest variant -1)

F table =F 0.05(30-1, 30-1)

F table =F

F table = 1.846

4. Taking conclusion Because of F count (2.1) < F table (1.846), so the research sample is stated

HOMOGENEOUS.

Appendix 22 THE HOMOGENEITY OF THE SAMPLE IN POST TEST

To examine the homogeneity of the sample in post test, the researcher uses Harley Test as follows:

1. Determining the greatest variance and smallest variance.

a. Based on Table 14 (15) is known: ∑

= 2223 ∑X 2 = 167113

n = 30

2 = S 82.4

b. Based on Table 15 (16) is known: ∑

= 2117 ∑X 2 = 151119

2 = S 59.63

Based on the computation above, so: The greatest variance = 82.4 The smallest variance = 59.63

2. Determining F count by using the formula as follows:

F count =

3. Determining F table as follows:

F table = F a (n the greatest variant- 1.n the smallest variant -1)

F table =F 0.05(30-1, 30-1)

F table =F

F table = 1.846

4. Taking conclusion Because of F count (1.38) < F table (1.846), so the research sample is stated

HOMOGENEOUS.

Appendix 23 EXAMINING THE HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis in the research as follows: Ha : There is a significant effect of Summary Pyramid Strategy on the

Students’ Ability in Writing Narrative Text at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 5 Namohalu Esiwa.

Ho : There is no a significant effect of Summary Pyramid Strategy on the Students’ Ability in Writing Narrative Text at the eighth grade of SMP

Negeri 5 Namohalu Esiwa in 2015/2016. And the formulation of hypothesis that is examined by using t- Test independent as follows: Ho : µ 1 = µ 2

H a :µ 1 ≠µ 2

The score of t table was gotten by:

dk = 2 (n-1) = 2 (30-1) = 58

And the significance level is 5% (α= 0.05), so t table = t 1/2α(dk) =t 1/2 (0.05) (58) = 1.45. So, the statistics of testing hypothesis by using t-Test Independen as follows:

136

t count = 1.62 Based on the computation from the previous page, we got t table =

1.45 and t

count

= 1.62. Because of t count = 1.62 is not exist between the interval -1.45 to 1.45 (-

1.45 ≤ t ≤ 1.45), so Ha is acceptable and H 0 is unacceptable.

Appendix 24a