ANOVA formula. The result of ANOVA analysis showed that the F value was 0.260, while the value of F table in the 5 significance level was 2.6783. Based on the
output, the result of F was lower than that of the F table 0.260 2.6783. Thus, it can be said that there were no differences among the four classes. The population was
homogeneous. Afterward, the researcher decided the experimental group and the control group by using lottery. And based on the lottery, it was stated that class of XI
IIS 5 was considered as the experimenatal group and class of XI IIS 2 belonged to control group.
3.5 Data Collection Methods
Data collection method dealt with the procedures of collecting the data of the research. There was one single data that was collected in this research which named
primary data. The primary data was collected from the narrative reading comprehension test. Further, information about the data collect method was explained
below:
3.5.1 Reading Comprehension Test
T est is an instrument to measure the students’ ability. In this research, reading
comprehension test dealt with a set of instrument to measure the students’ ability in
reading comprehension after they were taught by using PLAN strategy for the experimental group that was used as the primary data of this research. Reading
comprehension test is used to collect the data of the research about the students’
reading comprehension achievement in identifying general and specific information. Standing in the same line, Hughes 2003:12 state that achievement are directly
related to language courses, their purpose being to establish how successful individual students, groups of students, or the courses themselves have been in
achieving objectives. Further, Hughes 2003:11 categorizes the test into four different types of test, they are proficiency test, achievement test, diagnostic test, and
placement test. Each type of the test has its own purpose. The researcher chose an
achievement test that issued in this test beca use it measures the students’ reading
comprehension achievement. The reading comprehension test included identifying the general information and the specific information stated in the text of the test.
In conducting the achievement test, the researcher provided a teacher-made test that had been discussed with the English teacher and both consultants. The
achievement test was constructed based on the 2013 Curriculum for Senior High School and in the form of multiple choices with five options. This idea is supported
by Hughes 2003:76, multiple choice has some advantages, there are: the scoring is rapid, economical and the candidates only have to make a mark on the paper. It
means the achievement test in the form of multiple choices is easy to score; besides that it is easy for the students to mark the answer. The achievement test was
constructed as many as 20 test items and it was administered in 60 minutes. The achievement test consisted of two different narrative texts with 10 questions
consisting per each text. Each text provided 4 test items for identifying the general information and the rest 6 test items for identifying the specific information of the
text. Each item had the same score that is 5, so the total score was 100. All the test items of the test were created by the researcher.
Here is the table distribution of general and specific information test item number per each text.
Table 3.2 Table distribution of general and specific information test item General and Specific information test item number distribution
General Information
1 3
9 10 11 13 14 18
Specific Information
2 4
5 6
7 8
12 15 16 17 19 20
The try out test had been given to another class which was not taught and taken as the research respondent. This try out aimed to know the reliability and
difficulty index. The posttest should be fulfilled the criteria of a good test especially in terms of its validity and reliability. In line with this statement, Hughes 2003:26
states that a test is said to be valid if it measures what is intended to measured, a good test is not only valid but also reliable. The reliability of the test in this research is
measured by administering the test to one class that is not selected as the experimental group and the control group. Then, the result of the test is analyzed by
using Spearman-Brown Formula Split Half Odd-Even of SPSS Program. 1.
Finding out the reliability coefficient of the test by using Spearman-Brown Formula of SPSS Program.
=
Notes: r
11
The reliability coefficient of the whole items r
xy
The correlation coefficient of product moment Meanwhile, Hughes 2003:39 defines these criteria of the result of reliability
coefficient as follows: 0.80
– 1.00 : Very high reliability 0.60
– 0.80 : High reliability 0.40
– 0.60 : Moderate reliability 0.20
– 0.40 : Low reliability 0,00
– 0,20 : Very Low reliability 2.
Giving interpretation to r
11
Constructing the test items should be balanced. This means that the test items are not too easy or too difficult in order to make the test items reliable. It is
supported by Heaton 1990:179, who states that the difficulty index test of the test items should be carried out, thus that the test items are not too easy or too difficult.
Based on the statement above, the researcher should measure the difficulty index of the test items. The level of difficulty index could be analyzed by using the following
formula: FV =
� �
r
11
1 + r
xy
2r
xy
Notes: FV
: Facility Value The difficulty index R
: The number of the current answers N
: The number of the students taking the test To give the interpretation of the difficulty index, Heaton 1988:179 suggests
that there are some criteria to determine the degree of the difficulty index. The criteria of the difficulty index as follows,
Table 3.3 Table of Heaton’s Difficulty Index
Difficulty Index 0,30
0,30 – 0,70
0.70
Interpretation Difficult
Fair Easy
3.5.2 The Result of the Try Out Test
