45 context of the research, outlined the findings and provided data samples to support
them, interpreted how the findings related to the context and suggested how the project could lead to other areas for research.
The quantitative data were collected from the score of the pre-test and post-test. The researcher analyzed using Excel program to know the comparison
of the students’ mean scores before and after the actions conducted.
G. Research Validity and Reliability
The data gained in the research have to be valid and reliable. According to Anderson et al. 1994 in Burns 1999 there are five validity criteria that
should be fulfilled to get the valid data in action research. They are democratic validity, outcome validity, process validity, catalytic validity, and dialogic
validity. 1.
Democratic validity Democratic validity was gained by having discussion with the
collaborators. The discussions were done during the research. The collaborators were given chances to give their ideas, opinions, comments, and suggestions
toward the research. Some discussions were also held at the end of every cycle to evaluate the actions implemented and to plan the actions in the next cycle.
2. Outcome validity
Outcome validity was related to the notion of actions leading to outcomes that were successful within the research context. To fulfill this validity, the
46 researcher formulated some indicators that measure the improvement of the
students ’ writing ability. The data gotten by the researcher were obtained from
assessing the students’ work and also interviewing the students and the
collaborators related to the actions implemented. 3.
Process validity Process validity was related to the criterion to make the action research
believable. To gain this validity, the researcher collected the data by obeserving and taking notes during the research. The collaborators, as the observers, collected
the data by observing, recording the video of the teaching and learning process, taking photographs and completing the observation checklists during the research.
4. Catalytic Validity
Catalytic validity is related to the extent to which the researcher allows the participant to deepen their understanding of the social realities of the context
and how they can make change with it. During the research, she had chances to learn more about the realities in the teaching and learning process. It also included
the English teacher and collaborators as the people who monitored the research. 5.
Dialogic Validity Dialogic validity is the process of peer review that is commonly used in
the academic research. It was gained by discussing the research findings with the collaborators. The members of the discussion had the same opportunity to give
comments, opinions, and suggestions for the research.
47 The researcher also used two kinds of triangulations to obtain the
trustworthiness Burns: 1999. They are: 1.
Time triangulation The data were collected over a period of time in order to identify factors
that were involved in the actions. The researcher interviewed the students at the beginning, middle and end of the course. To get the data about the improvement
of the students’ writing skills, she conducted a pre-test and a post-test. 2.
Investigator triangulation Investigator triangulation was fulfilled by involving another party in the
research. The researcher used more than one observer in the same research setting. She conducted discussions with the collaborators to avoid biased interpretation.
Meanwhile, in order to ensure the reliability, the researcher took the scores
of the students’ writing. She also analysed the data in the form of interview transcripts and vignettes. To obtain the data about the teaching and learning
process, she interviewed the collaborators and the students after the class.
H. Research Procedures
The researcher used the procedure of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart 1988: 11-14 in Burns 2010: 8 with some
modification. They are reconnaissance, planning, action and observation, and reflection.
