The Member of the Research

1. Assembling the data The researcher collected the data from the observations, the interviews, the pre-test and the post-test, including the reflections that were made after conducting the actions. In this step, broad patterns and ideas were needed. 2. Coding the data The broad descriptions that had been developed in the first step were refined into the more specific categories. Then, the researcher divided the data that could be decoded qualitatively i.e. the field notes and the interview transcripts, and quantitatively i.e. the pre- test and the post-test scores. 3. Comparing the data After the data had been categorized, the researcher needed to compare the data from different sources of data, for example the interviews compared with the observations and the pre-test and the post-test scores. This aimed to see whether the data showed the same conclusion or the contrasts. 4. Building meanings and interpretation The researcher needed to think deeply about the data and explored for more detailed aspects from the data. It was necessary to develop questions, making connection, and making further explanation of the data. Then, the researcher refined her own “personal theories” about the findings of the research. 5. Reporting the outcomes The last step was reporting the main process and the outcomes of the research that were well supported by the data. Meanwhile, the quantitative data the students’ reading scores were analyzed by calculating the mean scores of the pre-test and the post-test. The mean scores of each test were compared. The increase of the mean scores indicated that the students’ reading skills were improved. The improvement of students’ reading skills became one of the indicators for the improvement of the teaching process.

G. Validity and Reliability of the Data

The data obtained must be valid and reliable. Heaton 1988: 159 in Johnson 2008: 310-311 defines validity as “the extent to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure”. So if the researcher wants to test students’ reading skill, then she must conduct a reading test. To obtain the research validity, the researcher applied the criteria of validity proposed by Anderson et al. in Burns 1999: 160. The criteria were democratic validity, process validity, outcome validity, catalytic validity and dialogic validity. 1. Democratic validity Democratic validity is related to the extent in which the research is truly conducted collaboratively and includes multiple choice. To gain the democratic validity the researcher conducted the interviews with the research members i.e. the students of VII J of SMPN 15 Yogyakarta, the English teacher, and the collaborator. This was aimed to know their comments or opinions about the research. 2. Outcome validity Outcome validity is related to the notions of actions leading to outcomes which are successful within the context. This was obtained from the reflections in every meeting and the students’ scores of reading pre-test and post-test. Besides, it concerns with the result of the research whether the researcher is satisfied with the result of the research or not, whether the purposed teaching technique improves the students reading skill or not