Data Description RESEARCH FINDINGS

Table 4.2 Frequency Distribution of Experimental Class’ Pre-test No. Interval Class Frequency Percentage 1 13-19 2 7.14 2 20-26 1 3.57 3 27-33 11 39.29 4 34-40 5 17.86 5 41-47 8 28.57 6 48-57 1 3.57 ∑ 28 100.00 Based on the table 4.2, it can be concluded that most of students got score about 27-33 with the frequency 11,28.57 students got score about41- 47,17.86 students got score about 34-40,7.14 students got score about 13- 19,and3.57 students got score about48-57 and 20-26. The score also can be described in chart as a follow: Figure 4.2 Frequency Distribution of Experimental Class’ Pre-test b Post-test 1 Range R = = = 47 2 4 6 8 10 12 13-19 20-26 27-33 34-40 41-47 48-57 2 Class C = n = number of students = 28 = 1 + 3.3 log 28 = 1 + 3.3 1.45 = 1 + 4.785 = 5.785= 6 3 Interval i = = = 4 Percentage p = Table 4.3 Frequency Distribution of Experimental Class’ Post-test Based on the table 4.3, it can be concluded that most of students got score about 67-74 and 43-50 with the frequency 9.21.43students got score about 51-58,7.14 students got score about 75-82,and 3.57 students got score about 83-90 and 59-66. The score also can be described in chart as a follow: No. Interval Class Frequency Percentage 1 43-50 9 32.14 2 51-58 6 21.43 3 59-66 1 3.57 4 67-74 9 32.14 5 75-82 2 7.14 6 83-90 1 3.57 ∑ 28 100.00 Figure 4.3 Frequency Distribution of Experimental Class’ Post-test 2. Data of Control Class by Using Deductive Instruction Table 4.4 The Score of Students in the Control Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 43-50 51-58 59-66 67-74 75-82 83-90 No. Pre-test Post-test Gained Score 1 37 57 20 2 30 60 30 3 43 60 17 4 50 77 27 5 37 87 50 6 43 60 17 7 27 33 6 8 53 83 30 9 43 57 14 10 47 53 6 11 30 50 20 12 37 53 16 Based on the table 4.2, the lowest score and the highest score of pre-test at the control class are 17 and 53. While the lowest score and the highest score of post-test are 33 and 83. Therefore, it can be concluded that the score of post-test at control class is higher than the score of its pre-test. No. Pre-test Post-test Gained Score 13 40 53 13 14 27 67 40 15 33 37 4 16 27 63 36 17 30 37 7 18 37 53 16 19 30 63 33 20 17 50 33 21 23 33 10 22 43 53 10 23 50 57 7 24 43 57 14 25 40 53 13 26 27 40 13 27 33 40 7 28 40 50 10 N = 28 Ʃ = 1017 Ʃ = 1536 Ʃ = 519 MEAN 36.32 54.86 18.54 Figure 4.4 The Score of Pre-test and Post-test of Control Class To know more detail about the frequency distribution at the control class, the data can be calculated on the table of interval class as follows: a Pre-test 1 Range R = = = 36 2 Class C = n = number of students = 28 = 1 + 3.3 log 28 = 1 + 3.3 1.45 = 1 + 4.785 = 5.785 = 6 3 Interval i = = = Pre-test 36.07 Post- test 53.93 Control Class 4 Percentage p = Table 4.5 Frequency Distribution of Control Class’ Pre-test No. Interval Class Frequency Percentage 1 17-22 1 3.57 2 23-28 5 17.86 3 29-34 6 21.43 4 35-41 7 25.00 5 42-47 6 21.43 6 48-53 3 10.71 ∑ 28 100.00 Based on the table 4.5, it can be concluded that most of students got score about 35-41 with the frequency 7,21.43students got score about 42-47 and 29-34,17.86 students got score about 23-28,10.71 students got score about 48-53,and 3.57 students got score about 17-22. The score also can be described in chart as a follow: Figure 4.5 Frequency Distribution of Control Class’ Pretest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 17-22 23-28 29-34 35-41 42-47 48-53 b Post-test 1 Range R = = = 54 2 Class C = n = number of students = 28 = 1 + 3.3 log 28 = 1 + 3.3 1.45 = 1 + 4.785 = 5.785 = 6 3 Interval i = = = 4 Percentage p = Table 4.6 Frequency Distribution of Control Class’ Post-test No. Interval Class Frequency Percentage 1 33-41 6 21.43 2 42-50 3 10.71 3 51-59 10 35.71 4 60-68 6 21.43 5 69-77 1 3.57 6 78-87 2 7.14 ∑ 28 100.00 Based on the table 4.6, it can be concluded that most of students got score about 51-59 with the frequency 10,21.43students got score about 60-68 and 33-41,10.71 students got score about 42-50, 7.14 students got score about78-87,and 3.57 students got score about 69-77. The score also can be described in chart as a follow: Figure 4.6 Frequency Distribution of Control Class’ Post-test

B. Data Analysis

In analyzing the data, it was used t-test to make it easier in testing the hypotheses. The formula of the t-test is as a follow: √ Ʃ Ʃ Before analyzing the data by using t-test formula, there are several steps that should be done as follows: 1. Determining mean of gained score of control class: = ∑ = = 18.5 2 4 6 8 10 12 33-41 42-50 51-59 60-68 69-77 78-87 2. Determining mean of gained score of experimental class: = ∑ = = 23.9 3. Determining deviation of control class: ∑ = ∑ – ∑ =13427 – =13427 – = 13427 – 9620.04 = 3806.96 4. Determining deviation of experimental class: ∑ = ∑ – ∑ = 18991 – = 18991 – = 18991 – 15984.32 = 3006.68 5. Determining value of hypotheses testing by using t-test formula: √ Ʃ Ʃ √ √ √ √ 6. Determining degrees of freedom: = 28 + 28 – 2 = 54 After getting the degrees of freedom, looking at t-table t t at the degree of freedom 54 in significant degrees 0.05 5 . The t-table t t is -1.674. 1

C. Data Interpretation

Based on data analysis, if t-table t t is higher than t o 2.6 -1.674, the null hypothesis H o is rejected and the alternative hypothesis H a is accepted. It should be concluded that it is effective to use inductive instruction in teaching simple present tense at the seventh grade of SMP Islam Bait Al-Rahman. But, both inductive instruction and deductive instruction bring the improvement in teaching simple present tense in experimental class and control class. In fact, the students in the experimental class achieve higher score in their post-test. It can be described at figure 4.1 and 4.4 that can be compared as a follow: 1 Budi Susetyo, Statistika untuk Analisis Data Penelitian, Bandung: PT Refika Aditama, 2010, p. 320. Figure 4.7 The Comparison of Pre-test and Post-test in Experimental Class and Control Class In this case the post-test score in experimental class and control class are different on 5 point only. If looking to the control class improvement, it was getting 18 point of range of pretest and post-test. And for the experimental class, it was getting 24 point of range of pretest and post-test. It can be inferred that both experimental and control class got the improvement on test of simple present tense. Based on the range of post-test score of experimental class and control class, it can not decide that inductive instruction is the only instruction that effective in teaching simple present tense. In other word, there is no significance different between using inductive instruction and deductive instruction on test of simple present tense at seventh grade of SMP Islam Bait Al-Rahman. Indeed - during the observation of teaching and learning process - students in the experiment class are more active than students in control class. As Haight, Herron and Cole statement, they said that inductive instruction has benefit to motivate students’ active role in teaching and learning process. 2 Teaching simple present tense by using inductive instruction in SMP Islam Bait Al-Rahman indicated that students in experimental class have an active role in teaching and learning process. 2 Carrie E. Haight, Carol Herron, and Steve P. Cole, The Effects of Deductive and Guided Inductive Instructional Approaches on the Learning of Grammar in the Elementary Foreign Language College Classroom, Foreign Language Annals, 2007, Vol. 40 No. 2. p. 299. Pre-test 35,86 Pre-test 36,23 Post-test 59,75 Post-test 54,86 Experimental Class Control Class