conducted through this way. This kind of questionnaires was close-ended. The questionnaire can be seen in Appendix 4.
The second kind of questionnaires was distributed to the English teachers of SMA 9 Yogyakarta and some lecturers of the English Language Education
Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. This kind of questionnaires was distributed to obtain feedback and suggestions to improve the designed set of the
materials. The data gathered were then used as the basis to revise the designed set of the materials. There were two sections in the second questionnaires. The first
section of the questionnaires was close-ended and consisted of 13 statements to investigate respondents’ opinions on the designed set of the materials. In the first
section of the questionnaires, the response to each statement was expressed in a likert scale on a scale of 1 to 5. The respondents completed the first section of the
questionnaires by choosing one of five alternatives provided. Meanwhile, the second section of the questionnaires was open-ended and consisted of some
questions to elicit respondents’ personal opinions and suggestions to improve the designed materials. The results of the questionnaires were presented in Chapter
IV.
D. Data Gathering Technique
The data were gathered in two ways. In the first way, the writer conducted an interview with the English teachers of SMA 9 Yogyakarta, distributed
questionnaires to the tenth grade students of SMA 9 Yogyakarta, and conducted classroom observations. The purpose of gathering data in the first way was to
obtain the data on learners’ characteristics, background knowledge, and the estimation of the learning media and facilities available.
In the second way, the writer distributed questionnaires to the English teachers of SMA 9 Yogyakarta and to some lecturers of the English Language
Education Study Program at Sanata Dharma University. The purpose of distributing questionnaires in the second way was to obtain feedback and
suggestions to improve the designed set of the materials.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The data obtained through the first questionnaires needs survey were analyzed to find out the percentage of respondents’ opinions and other factual data
needed for needs analysis. The formulation to calculate the percentage is presented as follows:
n x 100
∑
n
Note: n = the number of respondents who choose certain statements
∑ n = the total number of respondents
For the second questionnaires, the writer employed two types of questionnaires, namely closed-ended and open-ended questionnaires. The
respondents’ judgments to the statements in the close-ended questionnaires were expressed using some points of agreement Brown and Rodgers, 2002: 120.
In the close-ended questionnaires, there are five points of agreement to judge the statements. The description of these five points of agreement is
illustrated in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Points of Agreement
Points of Agreement Meanings
1 Strongly disagree with the statement
2 Disagree with the statement
3 Uncertaindoubt
4 Agree with the statement
5 Strongly agree with the statement
The data gathered through the closed-ended questionnaires were recorded in the table of raw data. After being recorded in the table of raw data, the data
were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The type of descriptive statistics that was used to summarize and describe the data was the measure of central tendency.
There are three major measurements of the central tendency, namely mean, median, and mode. Mean Mn is the average of all points in a distribution.
Median Mdn is the midpoint in a distribution. Mode Md is the most frequent point in a distribution. The formulation to find out the mean is presented as
follows: PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
∑
x
× =
N
Note:
×
= mean
∑
= sum
x
= score
N
= number of respondents The computation of the data on respondents’ opinions to the designed
materials were summarized and presented in the statistical description. It means that the result of the calculation was presented in the form of data that showed the
mean, median and mode. The table of the descriptive statistics of the respondents’ opinions is presented as follows:
Table 3.3: The Descriptive Statistics of Respondents’ Opinions Blank
Frequency of Occurrence
Central Tendency No.
Respondents’ opinions 1 2 3 4 5 N Mn Mdn
Md
Note: N = number of respondents Mdn = median Mn = mean
Md = mode
After the results were calculated and analyzed in terms of the central tendency, the results were then interpreted based on the criteria listed in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: The Assessment of Central Tendency
0 - 1 The designed materials were very poorly designed
1.1 - 2 The designed materials were poorly designed
2.1 - 3 The designed materials were fairly designed
3.1 - 4 The designed materials were good and acceptable, but still need
some revisions 4.1 - 5
The designed materials were well-designed and acceptable
F. Research Procedures
