Result of Adjective and Writing Ability Test

2. Result of Writing Ability of Descriptive Text

The instrument of the test used the writing form. The writer asked the students to make descriptive text based on the topics given by the writer. The test was aimed to measure the students’ ability in writing. The writer measured their score based on Tribble’s assessment see Page 41. The result of writing ability of descriptive text can be seen on Table 12. Table 12 The Score of Students’ Writing Ability of Descriptive Text No Name Yi 1 Ahmad Fauzan 62 2 Al Himny Rusdy 65 3 Ani Saputri Oktaviani 55 4 Annisa Oktaviani 65 5 Annisa Satari Putri 55 6 Boby Pratama Jaya 82 7 Dianida Anggraini 74 8 Dwi Ari Santoso 56 9 Dyah Fitri Inayati 69 10 Faris Suci Senaila 73 11 Firnando Pratama 65 12 Ika Aryanti 59 13 Itmamul Wafa 65 14 Khoirotul M S 62 15 Kurnia Wati 70 16 M Arizon Brata 50 17 Makhrupul Karhi 74 18 Nanda Puspita Sari 77 19 Nurul Rahmadani 52 20 Qintari Henni S 59 21 Rafly Wirananda 72 22 Raihan Putra Ramadhan 62 23 Rama Ramadhan 58 24 Rani Yulistiani 65 25 Siti Husnul Khotimah 52 26 Sri Nanda Utami 65 27 Syabila Sukma A 68 28 Tri Ocsa Yulanda 77 29 Vaula Oktavia 62 30 Wulan Hapriparsyah P 74 31 Yeni Wulandari 58 32 Yulistina 66 33 Yulistio Aprianto 76 34 Yuni Saputri 60 ∑ 2184 Mean 64.23529412 Median 65 Mode 65 The data was counted by using Microsoft Excel formula, it showed that the mean of writing ability of descriptive text was 64.23 with formula =AVERAGE ‘ƩXn’. Furthermore, the median was 65 with formula =MEDIAN‘all of score X’, and the mode was 65 with formula =MODE‘all of score X’. The highest score was 82, and the lowest one was 50.

C. Result of Data Analysis 1. Fulfillment of the assumption

a. Result of Normality of the Data

The data are normal distributed if L observed L critical . H O : The data are normally distributed H a : The data are not normally distributed The criteria are as follows: Accept H if L observed ≤ L critical Refuse H if L observed L critical The result of normality from adjective ability was 0.13 appendix 23, and the data was consulted to Liliefors table Appendix 22. For 34 students, the score of L critical is 0.15. Finally, if L observed is ≤ L critical , so the respondents were considered normal because 0.13 0.15. It means that Ho is accepted because L observed is lower than L critical , and the data has normal distribution. While the result of normality test of writing ability of descriptive text is marked by L observed from the data gained. The result showed that L observed was 0.10 appendix 24, and the data was consulted to Liliefors table. For 34 students, the score of L critical is 0.15 see also Appendix 22. Finally, if L observed is ≤ L critical , so the respondents were considered normal because 0.10 0.15. It means that Ho is accepted because L observed is lower than L critical , and the data has normal distribution.

b. Result of Linearity Test

Before analyzing the data by using Pearson’s product moment formula, the writer checked out whether the data obtained were linear or not because this was one of requirements to be able to use the Pearson’ product moment formula such in the explanation in chapter three. The writer used SPSS to check it in order to make the writer easy because this program could make a clear graph of linearity. Based on the table, the data were linear see Appendix 25, for the significance level was lower than significant level α 0.00 0.05.

2. Result of Hypothetical Test

If the sample has normal distribution, it means Ho hypothesis is accepted. After obtaining the result of the tests, the writer drew the result of data correlation by using scatterplot. Based on the scatterplot, it seemed that there is correlation between students’ adjective and writing descriptive text ability see Appendix 26. Then the writer continued to count the correlation between students’ adjective and writing ability. The data Appendix 27 was analyzed by using Pearson’s product moment formula as follows in order to know the correlation of two variables. r= ∑ ∑ ∑ √ ∑ ∑ √ ∑ ∑ N : 34 ∑ : 2160 ∑ : 2184 ∑ : 140846 ∑ : 142410 ∑ : 141099 r= √{ } { } r= √{ } { }

Dokumen yang terkait

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN USING PUNCTUATIONS AND CAPITALIZATION IN THE RECOUNT TEXT AT SMPN 1 PAKUSARI IN THE 2014/2015 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 6 15

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXT WRITING ABILITY AT MTsN TLASIH IN THE 2010/2011 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 9 13

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE TEXT WRITING ABILITY AT MTsN TLASIH IN THE 2010/2011 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 7 13

AN ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN USING PUNCTUATION IN DESCRIPTIVE PARAGRAPH WRITING AT THE FIRST SEMESTER OF THE EIGHTH GRADE OF SMPN 2 PARDASUKA IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2016 2017

0 1 83

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE MASTERY AND THEIR ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT AT THE FIRST SEMESTER OF THE EIGHTH GRADE OF SMPN 1 KARYA PENGGAWA PESISIR BARAT IN 20162017 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 8 157

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE MASTERY OF NOUN PHRASE AND THE WRITING ABILITY OF DESCRIPTIVE TEXT OF THE TENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF MAN 2 KUDUS IN ACADEMIC YEAR 20112012

0 0 17

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE MASTERY OF PRESENT TENSE AND THE ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT OF THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP N WELAHAN JEPARA IN ACADEMIC YEAR 20132014 By DWI YENI ERFIYANI

0 0 19

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS' VOCABULARY MASTERY AND THEIR ABILITY IN WRITING ANALYTICAL EXPOSITION TEXT AT THE SECOND SEMESTER OF THE ELEVENTH GRADE AT SMA KARYA MATARAM SOUTH LAMPUNG IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2016/2017 - Raden Intan Repository

2 4 88

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND THEIR RECOUNT TEXT WRITING ABILITY AT THE SECOND SEMESTER OF THE EIGHTH GRADE AT SMPN 2 TERUSAN NUNYAI LAMPUNG TENGAH IN 2017/2018 ACADEMIC YEAR - Raden Intan Repository

0 0 90

AN ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN USING PUNCTUATION IN DESCRIPTIVE PARAGRAPH WRITING AT THE FIRST SEMESTER OF THE EIGHTH GRADE OF SMPN 2 PARDASUKA IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2016/2017 - Raden Intan Repository

0 3 82