After completing coding the data, the patterns or categories were compared to see whether they say the same thing or not.
4. Building meanings and interpretations
In this step, the data were interpreted through reflecting beyond the immediate surface details to make an explanation about the meanings
of the research.
5. Reporting the outcomes
The last step of the analysis was considering how the result of the research would be organized in the presentation.
D. Validity and Reliability
There are five validity criteria that can ensure data validity of this action research. The five validity criteria are democratic validity, outcome
validity, process validity, catalytic validity, and dialogic validity Burns 1999:161.
1. Democratic validity
The research can be said as valid if the research includes the participants to give their opinions, ideas and comments about the
implication of the research. It was obtained from the interviews done by the researcher and the participants. The participants included the
students and the collaborators of the research. The democratic validity in this research was obtained from the interviews done between the
researcher and the participants. The participants share their opinion and their perspective about the implementation of the action.
2. Outcome validity
It is related to the outcomes achieved in the research. Outcome validity is related to the results of the actions. The research could be said as
having outcome validity if the research was successful. It means that the outcomes of the research match the intended purposes of the
research. The outcome validity in this research deals with the improvements of the writing skill of the students by using Thinking
Maps.
3. Process validity
The process validity means that the actions done in the research are believable. During the implementation of the actions, the researcher
with the help of the collaborators monitored the teaching and learning process. In addition, there were some evidences to support the data
such as photographs and notes.
4. Catalytic validity
The catalytic validity concerns the ability of the research to transform the participants, to deepen the understanding of the participants in
order that the participants have better understanding and make changes of the social realities of the context. The catalytic validity of this
research was the positive changes after the implementation of the actions.
5. Dialogic validity
The dialogic validity is related to the process of peer reviews in the action research. In this research, the dialogic validity was obtained
from the discussion between the researcher and the collaborator about the findings of the research.
To enhance the trustworthiness of the data and to avoid the subjectivity in analyzing them, the researcher used triangulation. Burns 2010:97
proposed four forms of triangulation. They are time triangulation, space triangulation, investigator triangulation, and theoretical triangulation.
However, the researcher only used the two of them in this research.
1. Time triangulation
