Research Procedures RESEARCH METHODS

3.7.2. Calculating the Mean Score

Mean told us about how difficult or easy the test was. According to Heaton 1991, p.175, the mean score of one test is arithmetical average i.e. the sum of separate score which is divided by the total number of students. It was efficient to measure the central tendency, even it was not always appropriate. To calculate the mean, the researcher uses the formula as follow: Where: X : Mean  x : total scores N : Number of students Heaton, 1991:175

3.8. Data Treatment

According to Hatch and Farhady 1982 in Setiyadi 2006: 168-169, using t-test for hypothesis testing has three basic assumptions: a. The data is interval or ratio b. The data is taken from random sample in a population c. The data is distributed normally. Therefore, the researcher used these following procedures in data treatment:

1. Random Test

This test was used to make sure whether the data are random or not. The researcher used SPSS version 17.0. In this case, the researcher used mean as the cit point run test. N x X   The hypothesis if for the random test is formulated as follows: H : the data is not random H 1 : the data is random In this research report, the criteria for the hypothesis are: H 1 is accepted if sig . In this case, the researcher uses the level of significant 0.05.

2. Normality Test

The researcher used normality test to investigate whether the data from the experimental class and control class are normally distributed or not. The hypothesis for the normality test is as follows: H : the data is not distributed normally H 1 : the data is distributed normally The criteria are: H 1 is accepted if sig . In this case, the researcher uses the level of significant 0.05.

3. Homogeneity Test

This test was used to know the data from the experimental class and control class are homogenous or not. In this research, the researcher used Independent Samples Test in SPSS 17.0 to know the homogeneity of the test. The hypothesis for homogeneity of variance test was: H : there is no significant difference equal H 1 : there is a significant difference not equal The criteria are: H is accepted if sig . In this case, the researcher uses the level of significant 0.05.

3.9. Hypothesis Testing

After collecting the data, the researcher recorded and analyzed them in order to find out whether there is a difference of students’ achievement in reading comprehension of narrative text or not after the treatment. The researcher used independent group T-test to know the level of significance of the treatment effect by using this formula: With: Where: : Mean from the difference pre-test and post-test of experimental class : Mean from the difference pre-test and post-test of control class : Standard error of differences between means n : Subjects on sample The criteria are: If the t-ratio is higher than t-table : H 1 is accepted If the t-ratio is lower than t-table : H is accepted Hatch and Farhady, 1982:111 c e X X c e S X X t    2 2 2 1                    n S n S S e e X X c e e X c X c e X X S 

Dokumen yang terkait

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

0 4 9

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

0 3 9

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CROSSWORD PUZZLE AT THE SEVENTH GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 21 BANDAR LAMPUNG

5 48 74

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH RECIPROCAL TEACHING TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 5 METRO

1 7 62

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH RECIPROCAL TEACHING TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 5 METRO

0 3 50

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH SQ3R AND TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND YEAR OF SMP NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG

3 69 60

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH RETELLING STORY AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATING A FAIRY TALE AT THE FIRST GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH

0 12 46

A Comparative Study of Students’ Speaking Achievement between Those Taught through Silent Viewing and Sound Only Technique at The First Grade of SMA N I Natar

0 11 67

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

2 14 60

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ LISTENING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH VIDEO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH AUDIO IN SMPN 26 BANDAR LAMPUNG

1 26 59