condition of the teaching and learning process, and the students’ involvement during the teaching and learning process.
Interview gu ide was used to complete the data that hadn’t covered yet by
using questionnaire. This instrument was used especially to interview the teacher’s perception toward students’ speaking ability, the students’ involvement
during the lesson, the techniques, the materials, the teaching media and the activities. It was also used to interview some samples of students along teaching
and learning process of speaking in the class.
F. Data Analysis Technique
The collected data were in the forms of qualitative. The qualitative data were analyzed in four steps. Based on the explanation of Miles and Huberman
1994, qualitative data analysis can be done through some steps. They are data collection, data reduction, data display, and conclusions drawing and verifying.
The first step was by collecting all the data such as observation and interview. The second step was data reduction. In this step, I selected, limited,
simplified, and transformed the data by summarizing or paraphrasing the interview transcripts. The next step was data display. The data which had been
reduced were then organized and compressed. The data display of this research was in the form of text written, and interview transcripts. Then, the last step was
making conclusion drawing and verification. The conclusion was gained based on the results of the students’ speaking performances, questionnaire, and
interview transcript. In making conclusion, the collaborators and I worked collaboratively to obtain the valid findings.
G. Validity and Reliability of the Research
Denscombe 2007:335 states that validity means whether or not the data reflect the truth, reflect reality and cover the crucial matters. To fulfill the validity
of the research, Anderson in Burns 1999:161 proposes five criteria namely democratic validity, outcome validity, process validity, catalytic validity, and
dialogic validity. 1.
The democratic validity is related to the extent to which the research is truly collaborative and allows for the inclusion of multiple voices. In this research,
the criterion is related to the participants’ opportunity to give their personal opinion, ideas, and comments about the implication of the action research. The
democratic validity was fulfilled by having discussions with the research team member. During the discussion they were given abundant chances to give
ideas, comments, and suggestion toward the research. The first, some discussions were held to discuss the progress of the research. In the end of
every meeting, the English teacher and I had a discussion to reflect the actions of that day. In the end of every cycle, a discussion was held to evaluate the
actions that had been implemented and to plan the actions in the next cycle. 2.
The outcome validity is related to notions of actions leading to outcomes that are successful within the research context. To fulfill the outcome validity, some
indicators that show improvement of the students’ speaking skills were formulated together. The indicators are as follows:
a. The students would be able to speak appropriately.
b. Animation movies can be a reinforcement medium for the students in
learning speaking. c.
The students would be interested to learn speaking through animation movies as a medium in speaking class.
d. The students’ confidence level would improved after learning to speak
English through animation movies and performing in the class. 3. The process validity is related to the criterion to make the action research
believable. To get the process validity, I collected the data by doing observation, taking note during the observation, and recording the interview
process. In this case, the actions were believable. 4. The catalytic validity; it relates to the extent to which the research allows
participants to deepen their understanding of the social realities of the context and how they can make changes within it. This validity is accomplished by
interviewing the teacher and the students to know their perceptions of the problem and the understanding of their roles in the research.
5. The dialogic validity is the process of peer review that is commonly used in the academic research. This validity was fulfilled by discussing the research
finding with collaborators. The members of the discussion gave their opinion and their criticisms about the research report.
By considering the situation and condition in the field, I chose five criterion of validity to reflect the truth, the reality and crucial matters of my research. They
were the democratic, the outcome, the process, the dialogic and the catalytic validity.
To obtain trustworthiness, I used a triangulation technique. Burns 1999:164 proposes four forms of triangulations, but in my research, I only chose
two forms of triangulation. They were time triangulation and investigator triangulation.
1 Time Triangulation
The data was collected at one point in time or in over period of time to get a set sense of what are involved in the process. In this study, the data were collected
on October 2014. During that period of time, I would conduct my research in using animation movies
to improve students’ speaking learning process. 2
Investigator triangulation More than one observer was involved in the same research setting to avoid
the observer being biased and to provide checks on the reliability of the observations. In this study, there were two observers in this study, the English
teacher as collaborator and I myself as researcher teacher.
H. Steps of the Research