34
Table 4.5: The Result of Questionnaire Two
Aspek yang diukur Sangat
Sulit Sulit
Mudah Sangat
Mudah Kog-
nitif 1. Bagaimana pendapat Anda
mengenai soal ‘Filling in the gap dialogue
’?
12.9 54.8
29 3.3
2. Bagaimana pendapat Anda mengenai soal ‘Answering
questions ’?
12.9 48.4
38.7
3. Apa yang Anda rasakan saat menulis ulang cerita dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
`13.8 62.1
24.1
4. Apa yang Anda rasakan saat menulis ulang cerita dari soal
‘Answering questions’?
17.2 27.6
55.2 Sangat
Panik Panik
Tenang Sangat
Tenang Ting-
kah laku
1. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat mengerjakan soal ‘Filling in the
gap dialogue ’?
3.5 17.2
69 10.3
2. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat mengerjakan soal ‘Answering
questions?
3.4 31.1
58.6 6.9
3. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
12.9 22.6
54.8 9.7
4. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Answering questions’?
6.5 19.3
67.7 6.5
Sangat Antusias
Antu- sias
Tidak Antu-
sias Sangat
Tidak Antusias
Afek- tif
1. Bagaimana perasaan Anda saat saat mengerjakan soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
6.5 58
35.5
2. Bagaimana perasaan Anda saat saat mengerjakan soal
‘Answering questions’?
6.5 67.7
22.6 3.2
3. Bagaimana perasaan Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
6.5 38.7
51.6 3.2
4. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Answering questions’?
6.2 56.3
25 12.5
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
35 Table 4.5 showed the result of Questionnaire 2. The percentage showed
the number of participants who chose the answer comparing to the total number of all participants. The researcher divided the aspects into three, cognitive aspect,
behaviour aspect, and affective aspect. The cognitive aspect aimed to know participants’ opinion related to their competence in doing the assessments. The
behaviour aspect aimed to know participa nts’ response in doing the assessments
related to their physical response. The affective aspect aimed to know students’ motivation in doing the assessments. There were two parts in each aspect. One of
them was related to the way the participants did the assessments both word-focus assessment and content-focus assessment. The other one was related to the way
they rewrote the texts both the one which formed word-focus assessment and the other one which formed content-focus assessment.
From the questionnaire, it showed that there was fluctuation in the participants’ answers. The analysis was divided into two parts, the participants’
answers related to the assessment and the participants’ answers related to the rewriting. When they did the assessment, they might not feel the effect of it. For
example, they did not realize that by doing content-focus assessment, they understood more information. However, when they rewrote what they heard, they
would realize the effect of the assessments. The percentage of students who said that word-focus assessment was very
difficult was 12.9. The same as the percentage in word-focus assessment, 12.9 of the students also said that content-focus assessment was very difficult.
However, it was not the same as the next level of difficulty. The percentage of
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
36 students who said that word-focus assessment was difficult was 54.8. The
percentage of participants who thought that content-focus assessment was difficult was 48.4. Hence, the percentage decreased 6.4. It meant that the students who
thought that content-focus assessment was difficult were less than ones who thought that word-focus assessment was difficult. The next result ensured that
content-focus assessment was easier for them. Twenty nine percent of the participants said that word-focus assessment was easy. The percentage increased
9.7 in content-focus assessment. The percentage of students who said that word- focus assessment was very easy was 3.3. No one said that content-focus
assessment was very easy. Related to the open questionnaire they filled in before, the reason was that they needed to think more in doing the content-focus
assessment. Looking at behaviour aspect in doing the assessment, 3.5 of participants
were very panic. The percentage decreased 0.1 in content-focus assessment. Only 3.4 of them were very panic. However, the result was different in the next
level of difficulty. The percentage of participants who were panic in doing content-focus assessment increased from ones in doing word-focus assessment.
When they did word-focus assessment, 17.2 of them were panic. It increased 13.9 in content-focus assessment. When they did content-focus assessment,
31.1 of them were panic. It seemed that content-focus assessment made them panic. The same analysis, the percentage of participants who were calm in doing
the word-focus and content-focus assessment decreased 10.4 from 69 into 58.6. The percentage of participants who were very calm in doing word-focus
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
37 assessment and content-focus assessment also decreased 3.4 from 10.3 into
6.9. It was because they seldom had content-focus assessment. They were accustomed to have word-focus assessment, which only filled in the gap dialogue.
Therefore, when they were forced to really understand the information from the recording so that they were able to answer the questions, they had to listen and
think hard. Hence, they were panic. Looking from the affective aspect, the percentage of participants who were
very enthusiastic in doing word-focus and content-focus assessment were the same, 6.5. However, it increased 9.7 from participants’ answers that they were
enthusiastic in doing content-focus assessment. The percentage of students who were not enthusiastic in doing the assessments decreased 12.9 from the ones in
word-focus assessment to the ones in content-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the percentage of participants who were not very enthusiastic increased 3.2 in
content-focus assessment. However, from all percentages, the researcher analyzed that they had more motivation in doing content-focus assessment.
The second part was about participants’ opinion when they rewrote the texts from the recording. In cognitive aspect, the percentage of participants who
said that when they rewrote text from content-focus assessment was very difficult was more 3.4 than the ones in word-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the result
was very different in the other levels of difficulty. The percentage of participants who said that when they rewrote text from content-focus assessment was difficult
was less 34.5 than the ones in word-focus assessment. The percentage of participants who said that when they rewrote text from content-focus assessment
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
38 was easy increased 31.1 from the ones who said word-focus assessment was
easy. No one said that both rewriting texts from word-focus assessment and content-focus assessment were easy. The result showed that content-focus
assessment helped them to rewrite text more easily than word-focus assessment. When they were able to rewrite text meant that they understood the content of the
recording. It was confirmed by the explanation from H. Douglas Brown 2004: 119 that through understanding the content of the message and the context of it,
we could determine the type of speech event. Hence, the students felt that content- focus assessment helped them to rewrite the text.
The result in behaviour aspect added more confirmation that content-focus assessment helped them to understand the information in the recording. The
percentage of participants who were very panic in rewriting text from content- focus assessment was less 6.4 than the ones in word-focus assessment. Those
who were panic in rewriting text from content-focus assessment also decreased 3.3 from those in word-focus assessment. The percentage of participants who
were calm in rewriting text from content-focus assessment increased 12.9 from those in word-focus assessment. A little bit different from the previous result, the
percentage of participants who were very calm in rewriting text from content- focus assessment decreased 3.2 from those in word-focus assessment. However,
from the whole percentage related to behavior aspect, most students were calm and not panic in doing content-focus assessment. It was because when they did
content-focus assessment, they had understood the whole content. Therefore, when they rewrote the text, they could rewrite it well.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
39 In affective aspect, the percentage of students who were very enthusiastic
in rewriting text from content-focus assessment decreased 0.3 from those in word-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the result was different in two other levels
of difficulty. The percentage of students who were enthusiastic in rewriting text from content-focus assessment increased 17.6 from those in word-focus
assessment. It was confirmed also by the result in the percentage of students who were not enthusiastic in rewriting text from content-focus assessment. It decreased
26.6 from those in word-focus assessment. However, the result of stude nts’
answer that they were not very enthusiastic was a bit different. It increased 9.3 from those in word-focus assessment. Overall, the researcher analyzed that the
increasing percentage of students who were enthusiastic and the decreasing percentage of students who were not enthusiastic in rewriting text from content-
focus assessment was higher than the decreasing percentage of students who were very enthusiastic and the increasing percentage of participants who were not very
enthusiastic. Therefore, the researcher analyzed that stude nts’ motivation was
higher in rewriting text from content-focus assessment. The result of the second observation sheet in the second cycle was more or
less the same as the one in the first cycle. The most obvious thing that was different was that the students were panic in the second cycle. It was because in
the meeting, the class period was only 50 minutes, so that the researcher needed to manage time well to cover all activities. Therefore, the students looked panic.
On November 26, 2010, the researcher conducted interview to eleven students. The students were chosen randomly. There were six questions in the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
40 interview. The first question was about their opinion of listening class. Six of the
students said that listening was difficult because they did not master the vocabulary and were not accustomed to listen to native speakers. Therefore, they
did not understand the information from the recording and they felt difficult in joining listening class. Three students said that listening was not too difficult and
not too easy. It depended on the recording they said. Actually, the problem was the same as the previous answer. Two students said that listening was easy
because it was a habit for one of them. That student often watched TV and movie without subtitle.
The second question was about word-focus assessment, whether it was difficult. Nine of the students said that word-focus assessment was easier to
answer because they did not think deeply to understand the whole information from the recording and they were accustomed to have word-focus assessment.
Only two of them said that word-focus assessment was difficult. Their reason was because they needed to answer exactly the same as what the speakers said.
The third question was about content-focus assessment. Eight of the students said that content-focus assessment was difficult. Their reasons were they
needed to understand the whole content of the recording and to answer the questions with their own words based on the information in the recording. Three
of them said that content-focus assessment was easier because of the same reason. They did not answer the questions with the words which were exactly the same as
what the speakers said in the recording. It became the reason why content-focus assessment was better than word-
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
41 focus assessment. The students were forced to listen and understand the whole
content. Hence, their understanding could be seen from their answers. The level understanding of restating with their own words was better than imitating. It
would show their competence whether they really understood. The next question was about whether they focused on the words they had
to fill in when they did word-focus assessment. Nine of them said that they tended to focus only in the parts of the words they had to fill in without paying attention
to other information in the recording. Only two of them paid attention to the whole content of the recording when they did word-focus assessment.
It was the weakness of word-focus assessment. Students tended to focus on words they had to fill in without listening and understanding the whole recording.
However, actually the goal of listening class was to listen to the whole information, to understand the topic, and to grab the whole information in their
mind. The next question was about which assessment helped them more in
understanding the whole content. Nine of them said that content-focus assessment helped them more in understanding the whole content of the recording. Only two
of them who said that word-focus assessment helped them to understand the information more. From the answers, the research analyzed that content-focus
assessment was more helpful in understanding information from the recording. The last question was about the improvement of listening skill that they
felt. Eight of them said that their listening skill improved through content-focus assessment. They said that they could overcome higher level of difficulty of the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
42 recording. Only two of them said that they felt nothing about the improvement in
their listening skill. One of the students did not know because she just joined the first cycle of this research. Hence, the influence could not be known.
C. The Improvement of Research Findings in the First and Second Cycles
