32
4. Evaluating the Design
In  evaluating  the  design,  the  researcher  distributed  questionnaires  as formative  evaluation.  The  researcher  evaluated  the  design  with  the  help  from
evaluators‟  group.  They  were  two  English  teachers  of  SMP  Pangudi  Luhur  1 Yogyakarta  and  two  English  lecturers  of  English  Language  Education  Study
Program  of  Sanata  Dharma  University.  The  evaluation  had  fifteen  close-ended questions  and  five  open-ended  questions  covering  the  evaluation  stages.  The  list
of questions can be seen in appendix B.
B. Research Setting
First,  the  researcher  started  this  research  by  gathering  data  interview  in SMP  Pangudi  Luhur  1  Yogyakarta  at  Jalan  Timoho  II  No.  29.  The  researcher
conducted the interview on April 2014. Second, the distribution of questionnaires for students
‟ group held on April-May 2014 in SMP Pangudi Luhur 1 Yogyakarta. And  the  last,  the  distribution  of  evaluation  questionnaires  for  evaluators
‟  group conducted  at  different  places  and  different  time  periods.  In  June  2014,  the  first
evaluation conducted at school and in July 2014, the second evaluation conducted at Sanata Dharma University.
C. Research Participants
This  section  elaborates  on  the  participants  of  the  research  as  well  as  in research  and  development  methodology.  The  researcher  divided  the  participants
into three groups. They were:
33
1. Teacher Group
The  first group called teachers‟ group. Two English teachers participated
in  this  interview  as  interviewees.  Both  two  English  teachers  taught  in  SMP Pangudi  Luhur  1  Yogyakarta  for  seventh  grade  students.  The  researcher
interviewed  them  with  eight  open-ended  questions.  Indeed  as  data  analyses,  the researcher took data interview results from the interviewees.
2. Student Group
The second group called as students ‟ group. The seventh grade students of
SMP  Pangudi  Luhur  1  Yogyakarta  became  the  participants  in  answering  the questionnaires. They were from three different classes, e.g., 7 B, E, and  G. Each
class  consisted  of  approximately  forty  students  and  the  total  amount  of  students was  one  hundred  and  twenty  seven  students  as  the  research  participants.
Therefore, the researcher took data questionnaire results to find the need analysis.
3. Evaluator Group
The  third  group  called  as  evaluators ‟  group.  They  were  two  English
teachers  of  SMP  Pangudi  Luhur  1  Yogyakarta  and  two  lecturers  of  English Language  Education  Study  Program  of  Sanata  Dharma  University.  They
evaluated the  students‟  exercises  design.  Finally,  the  researcher  considered    the
result  of  evaluation  as  data  revision  to  improve  the  design  as  final  product revision.
34
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique
In order to acquire the data, the researcher implemented survey technique in  this  research  within  three  instruments.  They  were  conducting  interview,
distributing the questionnaires and evaluation questionnaires. The description and example of those three instruments discussed as follows:
1. Interview
In  the  interview  process,  the  researcher  asked  in  Indonesian  language  to get  more  detail  information.  The  interview  consisted  of  eight  open-ended
questions covering the need analysis in this research. The example of interview‟s
questions as in appendix B the English version: 1
Does reading skill in curriculum 2013 become a dominant skill besides other skills, e.g. speaking, listening, and writing?
2 What are your ways in designing materials for reading which relevant
to the four main competencies of curriculum 2013? In  April  2014,  the  researcher  conducted  the  interview  for  two  English
teachers  of  SMP  Pangudi  Luhur  1  Yogyakarta.  The  result  of  the  interview analyzed in a form of narrative description.
2. Questionnaire
In  questionnaire,  the  researcher  applied  Indonesian  language  as  the questionsstatements.  The  purpose  is  that  the  students  may  get  better
understanding  in  each  statement.  The  example  of  intervie w‟s  questions  as  in
appendix B:
35
Table 6. Questionnaire No.
Pernyataan Poin Persetujuan
1 2
4 5
1. Kegiatan membaca akan lebih menarik apabila
latihan soal yang diberikan berupa teks yang berkaitan dengan mata pelajaran lainnya, seperti
ilmu pengetahuan alam dan sosial, sejarah, dan lain sebagainya.
1 2
4 5
2. Saya sangat membutuhkan latihan kosa-kata
sebelum kegiatan membaca sehingga saya mampu memahami bacaan yang diberikan.
1 2
4 5
Ary, Jacobs,   Sorenses 2010  define  a  Likert scale or summated rating scale uses
to assess students‟ attitudes related to the topic in the research which is going  to  be  asked  in  the  questionnaire.  Again,  Best  1970  states
that  “the instrument  yields  a  total  score  for  each  respondent,  and  a  discussion  of  each
individual item, while possible, is not necessary” p. 175.  In scoring the Likert scale, the researcher cited from
Ary et.al 2010, “strongly agree is scored 5, agree is  scored  4,  undecided  is  scored  3,  disagree  is  scored  2,  and  strongly  disagree  is
scored 1” p. 210. The agreement points in this research can be seen in Table 7
below.
Table 7. The Meaning of Agreement Points Point’s
Agreement Response Category
Abbreviation
1 Strongly disagree
SD 2
Disagree D
4 Agree
A 5
Strongly agree SA
Therefore, the purpose of agreement points is to arrange the students who chose in agree part and disagree part.
36
3. Evaluation
The  researcher  conducted  the  evaluation  which  was  divided  into  three parts.  The  first  part  had  ten  close-ended-statements  about  the  look  of  reading
exercises. The second part had five close-ended statements about the Hot-Potatoes program  works  in  the  website.  Both  parts  adopted  Likert  scale  in  measuring  the
evaluation and the agreement points as the same as in Table 7 above. The last part was  the  evaluator
‟s  feedback  which  had  five  open-ended  questions.  The evaluators  wrote  feedback,  opinion,  and  suggestion  as  the  design  improvement.
The meaning of agreement points can be seen in Table 8 below.
Table 8. The Meaning of Agreement Points Point’s
Agreement Response Category
Abbreviation
1 Strongly disagree
SD 2
Disagree D
3 Agree
A 4
Strongly agree SA
Therefore, the purpose of agreement points was to arrange the students who chose in agree part and disagree part.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The  researcher  divided  this  part  into  three.  They  were  data  interview, questionnaire and evaluation.
1. Interview
In analysing the data interview, the researcher translated and summarized the data in narrative description using English. The response of interviewees  can
be  seen  in  appendix  C.  Firstly,  the  researcher  transcribed  the  results  of  the  data