improves the students’ speaking skills or not. At the end, the results of
both pre-test and post-test would be compared using t-test in SPSS and analysis of students’ means scores in each speaking aspect.
F. Validity and Reliability of the Instrument
1. The validity of the instrument The instrument is declared as a valid one if the instrument which is
used in the study can be used to measure what the researcher wants to measure. In this research, the researcher adapted five criteria of research
validity proposed by Anderson in Burns 1999. They are democratic, outcome, catalytic, process, and dialogic validity.
Democratic validity was fulfilled by conducting discussion with the English teacher as the collaborator in implementing actions. The
researcher and the collaborator had more than one discussion. The first discussion was conducted in the beginning of the cycle. They had two
discussions more after implementing the video recording project in Cycle I and Cycle II to evaluate the actions had been implemented and plan the
actions in the next cycle. The discussion was mainly about the teacher’s
opinion, comments, and suggestion toward the research. The outcome validity relates to the notion of actions leading to
outcomes that are successful within the research context. Concerning the outcome validity in this research, the researcher formulated some
indicators that measure the students’ speaking skills.
The catalytic validity relates to the extent to which the research allows participant to deepen their understanding of social realities of the
context and how they make changes within it. The English teacher got new enjoyable learning media on how to teach speaking more
interestingly. Moreover, the students got the opportunity in learning English through a very fun activity. They became more active during the
teaching and learning process. The process validity relates to depend-ability and competency of
the research. In other words, this validity could be achieved if the researcher gave a clear explanation of conducted research procedure. So,
the research was claimed to be observable. To gain this validity, the researcher assisted by the English Teacher as her collaborator. The
English teacher took notes in every meeting. She noted down every single thing happened in the teaching and learning process. In this way,
the process of the research was done systematically in order to get complete information in describing how the video recording project was
implemented and how such an action improved students’ speaking skills.
The dialogic validity is the process of peer review. It is commonly used in the academic research to find the weaknesses or lacks of the
research by conducting a discussion with practitioner peers, other members of the research, or expert. The peer reviewer gave comments
and review on the research, how the researcher presented the materials, how the researcher implemented the video recording, and so on. They
