Table 4.12 Table of Mean of Scores
Self-Confidence B Teaching method A
CLL A
1
SLT A
2
High self-confidence B
1
78.30 76.95
77.62 Low self-confidence
B
2
79.05 56.05
67.55 Total
78.67 66.5
From the computation result of ANOVA test, it can be concluded that: 1. The score of F
o
between columns Methods is 49.44 and the score of F
t
at the level of significance α
= 0.05 is 3.92. Because F
o
F
t
or Fo 49.44 is higher than F
t
3.92, the difference between columns is significant. In other words, there is significant different on students’
speaking skill between those who are taught using community language learning and those taught using situational language teaching.
Based on calculation on the mean score, the mean scores of the students who are taught using community language learning 78.675
is higher than that of those who are taught using situational language teaching 66.5. Thus, it can be concluded that Community Language
Learning is more effective than Situational Language Teaching. 2. The score of F
o
between rows Self confidence is 33.86 while the score of Ft at the level of significance
α =0.05 is 3.92. Because F
o
F
t
0.05 or F
o
33.86 is higher than F
t
3.92, the difference between rows is significant. Thus, it can be concluded that there is significant
difference on the students’ speaking skill between those who have high self confidence and those who have low self confidence. Based on the
commit to user
calculation of the mean score, the mean scores of the students who have high self confidence 77.625 is higher than that of those who
have low self confidence 67.55. Thus, it can be concluded that the students who have high self confidence have better speaking skill than
those who have negative attitude. 3. The score of F
o
columns by rows Interaction is 39.69 and the score of Ft at the level of significant
α =0.05 is 3.92. Because FoFt or Fo
