A comparative study between teaching grammar deductively and inductively to the eighth grade students - Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya Repository
APPENDIX 1 Table 1
THE CALCULATION OF TAKING GROUPS AS THE SAMPLE OF THE
EXPERIMENT The sample students’ scores based on their latest formative scores CLASS VIIIA CLASS VIIID CLASS VIIIE NO 2 2 2 X A A D D E EX X
X X
X
1 70 4900 95 9025 90 8100
2 80 6400 90 8100 55 3025
3 85 7225 75 5625 90 8100
4 95 9025 75 5625 90 8100
5 85 7225 80 6400 95 9025
6 95 9025 85 7225 65 4225
7 85 7225 55 3025 85 7225
8 100 1000070 4900 95 9025
9 80 6400 95 9025 75 5625
10 95 9025 80 6400 75 5625
11 90 8100 65 4225 80 6400
12 65 4225 85 7225 40 1600
13 95 9025 60 3600 70 4900
14 100 10000 90 8100 65 4225
15 100 10000 75 5625 90 8100
16 95 9025 85 7225 80 6400
17 85 7225 70 4900 70 4900
18 85 7225 95 9025 75 5625
19 95 9025 85 7225 75 5625
20 80 6400 85 7225 90 8100
21 85 7225 85 7225 85 7225
22 80 6400 90 8100 65 4225
23 95 9025 85 7225 95 9025
24 80 6400 85 7225 95 9025
25 55 3025 90 8100 700 10000 26 75 5625 90 8100 85 7225 27 80 6400 75 5625 95 9025 28 90 8100 80 6400 95 9025 29 85 7225 95 9025 60 3600 30 90 8100 65 4225 70 4900 31 80 6400 85 7225 95 9025 32 85 7225 65 4225 80 6400 33 75 5625 90 8100 80 6400 34 60 3600 85 7225 80 6400 35 95 9025 80 6400 90 8100 36 70 4900 90 8100 95 9025 37 55 3025 85 7225 90 8100
CLASS VIIIA CLASS VIIID CLASS VIIIE TOTAL
3095 3015 3005 9115 Σx 2 (
9579025 9090225 9030025 27699275 Σx) 2
264025 249475 250675 764175 Σx n 37 37 37 111 Mean
83.65 81.49 81.22 -
n : Number of students in each group = 37 N : The total number of students in all groups = 111 K : Number of groups = 3
ANOVA TABLE Source of variation Sum of dF Mean of f calculation f critical Squares (SS) Square (table) (MS) Between groups 131.5314 2 65.7657
Within groups 15545.9461 108 143.9439 0.456884244 3,07 Total 15677.4775 110 209.7096 dF ( betweengro ups ) = K −
1 =
2 1 ) = ( n − A B C 1 ) ( n − 1 ) ( n − + + dF ( withingrou ps ) = ( n − 1 ) = 108 2 ∑ 2 J total ( 9115 )
CF
= = = 748497 , 5225
Ntotal
111 2 2 2 ⎛ ⎞
x x x ( ) ( ) ( ) A B C
∑ ∑ ∑
⎜ ⎟
SS betweengro ups = CF
− = + + ( ) 131 , 5314
⎜ ⎟
n n n A B C 2 ⎝ ⎠ 2 2 SS x x x CF =
( A B C ) ∑ ∑ ∑
(total ) − = 15677 , 4775 + +
SS Py
( ) 131 , 5314
MS betweengro ups
( ) = = = 65 , 7657
dF Py
( )
2 SS Ey
( ) 15545 , 9461
MS withingrou ps
( ) = = = 143 , 9439
dF Ey
( ) 108
MS Py
( )
f calculatio n = = , 456884244 MS Ey
( ) f calculation < f table (5%) 0,456884244 < 3,07 Because f calculation < f table (5%) so Ho is accepted Therefore, there is no significant difference between groups.
APPENDIX 2 TRY OUT RELIABILITY Table 1 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM RELIABILITY OF THE FIRST TRY OUT TEST No X
13
11
11
11
12
12
13
13
13
13
14
8 625 625 576 576 529 484 484 484 484 484 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 400 400 361 324 256 256 196 169 169 169 169 169 144 144 121 121 121
16
16
18
19
20
20
21
21
21
9
81
21
KR-21 Formula
Where, r : reliability estimation M : the mean of the test score K : the number of items in the test V : variance
1 = 0,99
1
) (
KV M K M k k r
− =
− −
⎜ ⎝ ⎛
⎟ ⎠ ⎞
Where, V : Variance n : number of students ΣX: the total sum of the correct answer
N 36 Mean 17,7 Var 331,41975
= 331,41975
/ 2 2
− =
V ∑ ∑
n n x x
= 17,77
X ∑
n
M =
21
21
X 2
12
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
11
23
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
22
24
21
25
22
22
22
22
22
23
24
24
25
36
25
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
64 Total 640 12.272
Table 2 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM RELIABILITY OF THE SECOND TRY OUT TEST No X
8
81
81
81
81
81
7 576 529 400 400 400 361 361 361 361 361 361 361 324 324 324 324 289 289 256 225 144 121 100 100
8
8
8
8
8
64
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
12
15
16
64
64
17
Where, V : Variance n : number of students ΣX: the total sum of the correct answer
Where, r : reliability estimation M : the mean of the test score K : the number of items in the test V : variance
1 = 0,93
1
) (
KV M K M k k r
− =
− −
⎜ ⎝ ⎛
⎟ ⎠ ⎞
KR-21 Formula
=229,2825
64
/ 2 2
− =
V ∑ ∑
n n x x
= 14,44
X ∑
n
M =
N 36 Mean 14,44 Var 229,2825
64
64
17
18
X 2
13
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
12
25
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
24
26
18
20
18
18
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
27
23
24
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
49 Total 520 8.490
Table 3 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM RELIABILITY OF THE THIRD TRY OUT TEST No X
6
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
5 484 400 361 324 289 256 256 256 256 256 225 225 225 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 100
5
6
7
49
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
10
64
49
14
=163,819444
Where, r : reliability estimation M : the mean of the test score K : the number of items in the test V : variance
1 = 0,94
1
) (
KV M K M k k r
− =
− −
⎜ ⎝ ⎛
⎟ ⎠ ⎞
KR-21 Formula
Where, V : Variance n : number of students ΣX: the total sum of the correct answer
/ 2 2
49
− =
V ∑ ∑
n n x x
= 12,11
X ∑
n
M =
N 36 Mean 12,11 Var 163,8194
25
36
36
14
14
X 2
13
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
12
26
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
25
27
14
17
14
14
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
18
28
19
20
22
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
25 Total 436 6.066
Table 4 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM RELIABILITY OF THE FOURTH TRY OUT TEST No X
7
49
49
49
49
81
6 361 324 289 289 256 256 225 225 225 225 225 225 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 169 144 121 100 100
6
6
6
7
7
49
7
7
7
7
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
49
49
14
Where, V : Variance n : number of students ΣX: the total sum of the correct answer
Where, r : reliability estimation M : the mean of the test score K : the number of items in the test V : variance
1 = 0,93
1
) (
KV M K M k k r
− =
− −
⎜ ⎝ ⎛
⎟ ⎠ ⎞
KR-21 Formula
=150,208333
36
/ 2 2
− =
V ∑ ∑
n n x x
= 12,11
X ∑
n
M =
N 36 Mean 11,78 Var 150,2083
36
36
14
14
X 2
13
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
12
25
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
24
26
14
17
14
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
17
27
18
19
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
36 Total 424 5.562
APPENDIX 3
C.1 30 6 0,83 Easy
C.2
C.14 23 13 0,92 Moderate
C.1532 4 0,89 Easy
C.12 14 22 0,39 Moderate
C.1313 23 0,36 Moderate
C.11
19 16 0,53 Moderate
C.9 9 27 0,25 Difficult C.10
12 24 0,33 Moderate
C.7 27 9 0,75 Easy
C.821 15 0,58 Moderate
C.5 23 13 0,64 Moderate C.6
26 10 0,72 Easy
C.3 20 16 0,56 Moderate C.4
9 27 0,25 Difficult
21 15 0,58 Moderate
ITEM DIFFICULTY Table 1 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DIFFICULTY OF THE FIRST TRY OUT TEST No Right Answer Wrong Answer
A.2c 24 12 0,67 Moderate
B.1IF Interpretation
A.1a 28 8 0,78 Easy
A.1b32 4 0,89 Easy
A.1c 33 3 0,92 Easy
A.2a10 26 0,27 Difficult
A.2b
19 17 0,53 Moderate
21 15 0,58 Moderate
B.8 28 8 0,78 Easy
B.9 23 13 0,64 Moderate B.10B.2 16 20 0,44 Moderate B.3
15 21 0,42 Moderate
B.4 30 6 0,83 Easy
B.524 12 0,67 Moderate
B.6 7 29 0,2 Difficult B.7
22 24 0,61 Moderate
9 27 0,25 Difficult
Table 2 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DIFFICULTY OF THE SECOND TRY OUT TEST No Right Answer Wrong Answer
10 26 0,28 Difficult
27 9 0,75 Easy
C.3 11 25 0,3 Moderate C.4
15 21 0,42 Moderate
C.5 30 6 0,83 Easy
C.610 26 0,28 Difficult
C.7 13 23 0,36 Moderate C.8
C.9 14 22 0,39 Moderate C.10
14 22 0,39 Moderate
19 17 0,53 Moderate
C.11
16 20 0,44 Moderate
C.12 11 25 0,3 Moderate
C.1316 20 0,44 Moderate
C.14 10 26 0,28 Difficult
C.15C.1 11 25 0,3 Moderate C.2
B.10
IF Interpretation
A.1a 19 17 0,53 Moderate
A.1b11 25 0,3 Moderate
28 8 0,78 Easy
A.1c 24 12 0,67 Moderate
A.2a15 21 0,42 Moderate
A.2b
30 6 0,83 Easy
A.2c 32 4 0,89 Easy
B.1B.2 16 20 0,44 Moderate B.3
12 24 0,33 Moderate
19 17 0,53 Moderate
B.4 11 25 0,3 Moderate B.5
16 20 0,44 Moderate
B.6 21 15 0,58 Moderate B.7
15 21 0,42 Moderate
B.8 16 20 0,44 Moderate B.9
8 28 0,22 Difficult
Table 3 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DIFFICULTY OF THE THIRD TRY OUT TEST No Right Answer Wrong Answer
B.8 19 17 0,53 Moderate B.9
C.9 11 25 0,3 Moderate C.10
13 23 0,36 Moderate
C.7 14 22 0,39 Moderate C.8
12 24 0,33 Moderate
C.5 16 20 0,44 Moderate C.6
15 21 0,42 Moderate
C.3 10 26 0,28 Difficult
C.410 26 0,28 Difficult
C.1 16 20 0,44 Moderate C.2
15 21 0,42 Moderate
B.10
17 19 0,47 Moderate
15 21 0,42 Moderate
IF Interpretation
A.1a 24 12 0,67 Moderate
A.1bB.6 21 15 0,58 Moderate B.7
8 28 0,22 Difficult
B.4 19 17 0,53 Moderate B.5
11 25 0,3 Moderate
B.2 16 20 0,44 Moderate B.3
11 25 0,3 Moderate
A.2c 27 9 0,75 Easy
B.121 15 0,58 Moderate
A.2b
19 17 0,53 Moderate
A.1c 28 8 0,78 Easy
A.2a32 4 0,89 Easy
16 20 0,44 Moderate
Table 4 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DIFFICULTY OF THE FOURTH TRY OUT TEST No Right Answer Wrong Answer
B.8 20 16 0,56 Moderate B.9
C.9 16 20 0,44 Moderate C.10
14 22 0,39 Moderate
C.7 20 16 0,56 Moderate C.8
12 24 0,33 Moderate
C.5 15 21 0,42 Moderate C.6
17 19 0,47 Moderate
C.3 11 25 0,3 Moderate C.4
15 21 0,42 Moderate
C.1 18 18 0,5 Moderate C.2
12 24 0,33 Moderate
B.10
14 22 0,39 Moderate
10 26 0,28 Difficult
IF Interpretation
A.1a 26 10 0,72 Easy
A.1bB.6 15 21 0,42 Moderate B.7
17 19 0,47 Moderate
B.4 12 24 0,33 Moderate B.5
18 18 0,5 Moderate
B.2 14 22 0,39 Moderate B.3
20 16 0,56 Moderate
A.2c 22 14 0,61 Moderate
B.119 17 0,53 Moderate
A.2b
20 16 0,56 Moderate
A.1c 18 18 0,5 Moderate
A.2a23 13 0,64 Moderate
12 24 0,33 Moderate
The Formula of Item Difficulty N correct
IF = N total
Where,
IF : Item Facility N correct : number of students answering correctly N total : number of students taking the test.
The Criteria of the Level of Difficulty
IF Index Interpretation
0.10 - 0.30 Difficult item (D) 0.30 - 0.70 Moderate item (M) 0.70 -1.00 Easy item (E)
APPENDIX 4
C.1 18 12 0,33 Satisfactory
C.2
C.14 15 8 0,39 Satisfactory
C.1517 15 0,11 Poor
C.12 12 2 0,55 Good
C.1311 2 0,5 Good
C.11
13 6 0,39 Satisfactory
C.9 7 2 0,28 Satisfactory C.10
8 4 0,22 Satisfactory
C.7 16 11 0,28 Satisfactory
C.813 8 0,28 Satisfactory
C.5 14 9 0,28 Satisfactory
C.615 11 0,22 Satisfactory
C.3 14 6 0,44 Good
C.49 0 0,5 Good
14 7 0,39 Satisfactory
ITEM DISCRIMINATION Table 1 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DISCRIMINATION OF THE FIRST TRY OUT TEST No R U R L D Interpretation A.1a 15 13 0,11 Poor A.1b
B.8 16 12 0,22 Satisfactory
B.9 14 9 0,28 Satisfactory
B.1014 8 0,33 Satisfactory
B.6 6 1 0,28 Satisfactory B.7
14 10 0,22 Satisfactory
B.4 17 13 0,22 Satisfactory
B.510 5 0,28 Satisfactory
B.2 10 6 0,33 Satisfactory
B.313 8 0,28 Satisfactory
A.2c 15 9 0,33 Satisfactory
B.114 5 0,5 Good
A.2b
7 3 0,22 Satisfactory
A.1c 17 16 0,05 Poor A.2a
18 14 0,22 Satisfactory
7 2 0,28 Satisfactory
Table 2 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DISCRIMINATION OF THE SECOND TRY OUT TEST No R U R L D Interpretation
A.1a 14 5 0,5 Good
A.1bC.1 9 2 0,39 Satisfactory C.2
C.14 8 2 0,33 Satisfactory
C.1510 6 0,33 Satisfactory
C.12 8 3 0,28 Satisfactory
C.1311 5 0,33 Satisfactory
C.11
13 6 0,39 Satisfactory
C.9 8 6 0,11 Poor
C.109 1 0,44 Good
C.7 11 2 0,5 Good
C.88 2 0,33 Satisfactory
C.5 17 13 0,22 Satisfactory
C.610 5 0,28 Satisfactory
C.3 8 3 0,28 Satisfactory C.4
16 11 0,28 Satisfactory
10 4 0,33 Satisfactory
16 12 0,22 Satisfactory
B.2 11 5 0,33 Satisfactory
B.3
A.1c 15 9 0,33 Satisfactory
A.2a10 5 0,28 Satisfactory
A.2b
18 12 0,33 Satisfactory
A.2c 17 15 0,11 Poor B.1
8 3 0,28 Satisfactory
13 6 0,39 Satisfactory
B.10
B.4 9 2 0,39 Satisfactory B.5
10 6 0,33 Satisfactory
B.6 14 7 0,39 Satisfactory
B.710 5 0,28 Satisfactory
B.8 11 5 0,33 Satisfactory
B.98 4 0,22 Satisfactory
6 2 0,22 Satisfactory
Table 3 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DISCRIMINATION OF THE THIRD TRY OUT TEST No R U R L D Interpretation
A.1a 15 9 0,33 Satisfactory
A.1b11 6 0,28 Satisfactory
C.9 9 2 0,39 Satisfactory C.10
11 2 0,5 Good
C.7 10 4 0,33 Satisfactory
C.88 4 0,22 Satisfactory
C.5 11 5 0,33 Satisfactory
C.610 5 0,28 Satisfactory
C.3 8 2 0,33 Satisfactory C.4
8 2 0,33 Satisfactory
C.1 10 6 0,33 Satisfactory
C.210 5 0,28 Satisfactory
B.10
B.8 13 6 0,39 Satisfactory
B.917 15 0,11 Poor
9 6 0,17 Poor
B.6 14 7 0,39 Satisfactory
B.76 2 0,22 Satisfactory
B.4 13 6 0,39 Satisfactory
B.59 2 0,39 Satisfactory
B.2 11 5 0,33 Satisfactory
B.38 3 0,28 Satisfactory
A.2c 16 11 0,28 Satisfactory
B.114 7 0,39 Satisfactory
A.2b
14 5 0,5 Good
A.1c 16 12 0,22 Satisfactory
A.2a10 6 0,33 Satisfactory
Table 4 THE CALCULATION OF ITEM DISCRIMINATION OF THE FOURTH TRY OUT TEST No R U R L D Interpretation
A.1a 15 11 0,22 Satisfactory
A.1b9 5 0,5 Good
C.9 10 6 0,22 Satisfactory
C.109 5 0,5 Good
C.7 13 7 0,33 Satisfactory
C.88 4 0,22 Satisfactory
C.5 10 5 0,28 Satisfactory
C.611 6 0,28 Satisfactory
C.3 7 4 0,17 Poor
C.410 5 0,28 Satisfactory
C.1 11 7 0,22 Satisfactory
C.27 5 0,11 Poor
B.10
B.8 14 6 0,44 Good
B.915 8 0,39 Satisfactory
8 2 0,33 Satisfactory
B.6 10 5 0,28 Satisfactory
B.711 6 0,28 Satisfactory
B.4 8 4 0,22 Satisfactory B.5
11 7 0,22 Satisfactory
B.2 9 5 0,22 Satisfactory B.3
12 8 0,22 Satisfactory
A.2c 14 8 0,33 Satisfactory
B.113 6 0,39 Satisfactory
A.2b
13 7 0,33 Satisfactory
A.1c 11 7 0,22 Satisfactory
A.2a8 4 0,22 Satisfactory
The Formula of Item Discrimination R − R u L D
=
n
Where, D : The item discrimination power Ru: The number of upper group students who give the correct answers R L : The number of lower group students who give the correct answers n : a half number of students
The Criteria of the Item Discrimination Discrimination Power Interpretation
0.00-0.19 Poor 0.20-0.39 Satisfactory 0.40-0.69 Good 0.70-1.00 Excellent
APPENDIX 5 Table 1 THE CALCULATION OF THE FIRST POST TEST SCORES Inductive Group ( VIIID ) Deductive Group ( VIIIE ) NO
25
29 841 31 961
18 22 484 18 324
19
30 900 27 729
20 15 225 30 900
21
26 676 26 676
22 27 729 23 529
23
28 784 25 625
24 11 121 21 441
21 441 31 961
15 14 196 20 400 16 29 841 19 361
26
29 841 28 784
27 12 144 25 625
28
27 729 30 900
29 31 961 25 625
30
28 784 29 841
31 28 784 27 729
32
29 841 24 576
17
27 729 22 484
X A
22 484 20 400
X
2 A
X B
X
2 B
1
23 529 31 961
2 30 900 10 100
3
17 289 28 784
4
5 27 729 29 841
14
6
29 841 28 784
7 28 784 26 676
8
19 361 21 441
9 31 961 26 676
10
27 729 26 676
11 19 361 12 144
12
29 841 18 324
13 18 324 25 625
Total 782 20.184 761 19.903 n 32 32
Mean 24,4375 23,78125
SD 5,8856 7,6315TEST OF HYPOTHESIS OF THE FIRST POST TEST
1. Ha: μA > μB : There is a significant difference between the mean groups
Ho: μA = μB : There is no significant difference between the mean groups
2. dF = nA + nB – 2 = 62 t (5%) = 1,671
3. Calculation of t-observation ( o ): τ
INDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X = = A 24 , 4375 n = 32 n 2 2 n x − ( x )
∑ ∑ SD = = A 5 , 8856 n n
( − 1 )
DEDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X B
= = 23 , 78125 n = 32
n 2 2 n x x
− ( )
∑ ∑ SD B = = 7 , 6315 n n −
( 1 ) Χ − Χ A B o = = 0,3852
τ 2
2
⎛ ⎞ 1 ) SD A ( n −
- ( n − 1 ) SD B
1
1 A B + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
− + n n n n A B A B
2 ⎝ ⎠
Where : Χ : Mean SD : The Standard Deviation n : The number of students
Σx : The total sum of the samples’ scores
4. Conclusion t-obtained < t-table (5%) 0,3852 < 1,671 Because t-obtained < t-table (5%) so Ho is accepted Hence there is no a significant difference between both groups and that group B (deductive group) is greater.
Table 2 THE CALCULATION OF THE SECOND POST TEST SCORES Inductive Group ( VIIIE ) Deductive Group ( VIIID ) NO
27 31 961 28 784
30 900 20 400
20 29 841 25 625
21
31 961 18 324
22 31 961 25 625
23
29 841 27 729
24 31 961 20 400
25
30 900 28 784
26
25 625 29 841
28
18 29 841 29 841
30 900 28 784
29 31 961 21 441
30
18 324 29 841
31 30 900 29 841
32
31 961 15 225
33 31 961 31 961
34
31 961 20 400
35
31 961
19
30 900 22 484
X A
27 729 30 900
X
2 A
X B
X
2 B
1
31 961 21 441
2 23 529 22 484
3
31 961 30 900
4 31 961 23 529 5 24 576 26 676
6
7 29 841 28 784
17
8
31 961 29 841
9 30 900 24 576
10
29 841 31 961
11 30 900 19 361
12
31 961 29 841
13 26 676 24 576
14
31 961 31 961
15 31 961 24 576 16 31 961 31 961
Total 994 29.340 897 23.659
n 34 35Mean 29,2352 25,6285
SD 2,9134 4,4396
TEST OF HYPOTHESIS OF THE SECOND POST TEST
1. Ha: μA > μB : There is a significant difference between the mean groups
Ho: μA = μB : There is no significant difference between the mean groups
2. dF = nA + nB – 2 = 67 t (5%) = 1,671
3. Calculation of t-observation ( o ): τ
INDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X = = A 29 , 2352 n = 34 n 2 2 n x − ( x )
∑ ∑ SD = = A 2 , 9134 n n
( − 1 )
DEDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X B
= = 25 , 6285 n = 35
n 2 2 n x x
− ( )
∑ ∑ SD B = = 4 , 4396 n n −
( 1 ) Χ − Χ A B o = = 3,9804
τ 2
2
⎛ ⎞ 1 ) SD A ( n −
- ( n − 1 ) SD B
1
1 A B + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
− + n n n n A B A B
2 ⎝ ⎠
Where : Χ : Mean SD : The Standard Deviation n : The number of students
Σx : The total sum of the samples’ scores
4. Conclusion t-obtained > t-table (5%) 3,9804 > 1,671 Because t-obtained > t-table (5%) so Ha is accepted Hence there is a significant difference between both groups and that group A (inductive group) is greater.
Table 3 THE CALCULATION OF THE THIRD POST TEST SCORES Inductive Group ( VIIID ) Deductive Group ( VIIIE ) NO
29 18 324 20 400
21 20 400 25 625
22 25 625 26 676 23 26 676 18 324
24 28 784 21 441
25 26 676 26 676
26 30 900 26 676
27 25 625 7 49
28 28 784 26 676
30 27 729 25 625
18 28 784 18 324
31 25 625 20 400
32 28 784 15 225
33 25 625 21 441
34 30 900 17 289
35 23 529 24 576
36 21 441 13 169
37 30 900
19 26 676 20 400 20 18 324 22 484
17 27 729 25 625
X A
6 28 784 24 576
X 2 A
X B
X 2 B 1 26 676 21 441
2 28 784 26 676
3 25 625 24 576
4 30 900 25 625
5 26 676 26 676
7 25 625 26 676
16 26 676 25 625
8 27 729 26 676
9 26 676 23 529
10 22 484 26 676
11 26 676 21 441 12 28 784 22 484
13 25 625 26 676
14 26 676 24 576
15 29 841 21 441
Total 957 900 801 18471 n 37 36 Mean 25,8648 22,25 SD 3,001 4,3053
TEST OF HYPOTHESIS OF THE THIRD POST TEST
1. Ha: μA > μB : There is a significant difference between the mean groups
Ho: μA = μB : There is no significant difference between the mean groups
2. dF = nA + nB – 2 = 71 t (5%) = 1,671
3. Calculation of t-observation ( o ): τ
INDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X = = A 25 , 8648 n = 37 n 2 2 n x − ( x )
∑ ∑ SD = = A 3 , 001 n n
( − 1 )
DEDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X B
= = 22 , 25 n = 36
n 2 2 n x x
− ( )
∑ ∑ SD B = = 4 , 3053 n n −
( 1 ) Χ − Χ A B o = = 4,1711
τ 2
2
⎛ ⎞ 1 ) SD A ( n −
- ( n − 1 ) SD B
1
1 A B + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
− + n n n n A B A B
2 ⎝ ⎠
Where : Χ : Mean SD : The Standard Deviation n : The number of students
Σx : The total sum of the samples’ scores
4. Conclusion t-obtained > t-table (5%) 4,1711 > 1,671 Because t-obtained > t-table (5%) so Ha is accepted Hence there is a significant difference between both groups and that group A (inductive group) is greater.
Table 4 THE CALCULATION OF THE FOURTH POST TEST SCORES Inductive Group ( VIIIE ) Deductive Group ( VIIID ) NO
30 23 529 19 361
22 25 625 24 576 23 26 676 18 324
24 24 576 23 529
25 25 625 24 576
26 26 676 22 484
27 28 784 25 625
28 23 529 25 625
29 24 576 25 625
31 26 676 25 625
19 24 576 18 325 20 23 529 15 225
32 25 625 24 576
33 28 784 25 625
34 26 676 19 361
35 27 729 24 576
36 30 900 21 441
37 24 576
Total 890 22.246 840 19.441
n 36 37 Mean 24,7222 22,702721 27 729 24 576
18 26 676 26 676
X A
6 28 784 26 676
X 2 A
X B
X 2 B 1 25 625 22 484
2 18 324 25 625
3 25 625 16 256
4 21 441 26 676
5 26 676 19 361
7 25 625 24 576
17 23 529 24 576
8 25 625 26 676
9 29 841 26 676
10 23 529 25 625
11 25 625 17 289 12 20 400 26 676
13 24 576 20 400
14 24 576 24 576
15 18 324 25 625
16 25 625 19 361
SD 2,6361 3,2090
TEST OF HYPOTHESIS OF THE FOURTH POST TEST
1. Ha: μA > μB : There is a significant difference between the mean groups
Ho: μA = μB : There is no significant difference between the mean groups
2. dF = nA + nB – 2 = 71 t (5%) = 1,671
3. Calculation of t-observation ( o ): τ
INDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X = = A 24 , 7222 n = 36 n 2 2 n x − ( x )
∑ ∑ SD = = A 2 , 6361 n n
( − 1 )
DEDUCTIVE GROUP
x ∑
X B
= = 22 , 7027 n = 37
n 2 2 n x x
− ( )
∑ ∑ SD B = = 3 , 2090 n n −
( 1 ) Χ − Χ A B o = = 3,837