Research Findings
A. Research Findings
1. The Setting of the Research
The research was held on SMP Negeri 3 Lolofitu Moi that was located on West Nias regency. It is around 45 kilometers from Gunungsitoli town. This school was included on very good criterion of school level standard in its regency whereby it was proven by the accreditation scale of this school that was A. Besides, this school also included as the healthy school among of the Junior High School level of West Nias regency in the competition of the healthy school last year. Furthermore, this school also successful to delegate some students in regency level of the OSN competition. Two of them are the winner but in different field of study. One of them was successful in biology and another in mathematic. Yet, there was still unsuccessful in English feld of this competition. To support the students achieve the successfulness of studying, this school also provides a free wireless connection to all of students which allow them to access the reference of teaching-learning material beyond the library that provided many hardcopy books. Additionally, this school also looks very awesome which many fresh green flower and mini garden. Besides learn in the classroom, sometimes the teacher let the students to learn out of the classroom. The condition of the atmosphere of the environment of the school supported the students in learning, and of course, this condition automatically motivated the students to achieve the successfulness in learning.
The total numbers of teachers were 16 persons. Meanwhile, the total number of the class were 9 in three different grades. The seventh grade consisted of four classes, the eighth grade consisted of three classes, while the ninth grade consisted of two classes. The total numbers of the students were 272 persons.
The population of the research was the eighth grade which consisted of three classes. The total numbers of the students of population were 92 persons. In conducting the research, the research selected two representative samples that was selected through cluster sampling; they were; 8-1 class as experimental class, and 8-2 as control class and each of them consisted of 32 students.
2. Tried-Out Instrument
a. Validity of the Instrument
Before conducting the research, the researcher tried out the instrument externally in in SMP Negeri 2 Lolofitu Moi. This tried out has purpose to validate the instrument itself whereby it applicable or not. In validation, the researcher tried out 20 items of multiple choice in SMP Negeri 2 Lolofitu Moi. To seek the validity of the test, the obtained scores of the tryout were calculated by using the Product Moment Formula as suggested by Arikunto (2013:213):
r xy =
which: r xy = the coefficient correlation N
= the number of sample (respondent)
X = the total score of X variable Y
= the total score of Y variable It is valid if the r count ≥r table.
b. Reliability of the Instrument
To seek the reliability of the instrument, the researcher used the split-half method as suggested by Arikunto (2013:223) as follows. 2x r 1/2 1/2
r 11 = (1 + r 1/2 ½ )
Which: r 11 = the reliability of instrument r 1/2 1/2 = the correlation between the score every split-half method
3. The Data Analysis
The data analysis of the research were consisted of several point, such as seeking the mean of the data, standard deviation, variances, the normality, homogeneity and hypothesis testing that are explained as follows.
a. Mean
According to the result of computation of pretest data, the researcher noticed the mean of studen ts’ mark of experimental class was 61 that was classified in adequate criterion and under the Minimum Competence Criterion (See Appendix 11a); and the mean of students’ mark of control class was 53 that was also classified in low criterion and under the MCC score (See Appendix 11b). The higher score of pretest of experimental class was 85, while the lower score was 40. Besides, the higher score of pretest of control class was 80, while the lower score was 25. Based on that data, the researcher noticed that the mean of students’ mark of experimental class was higher than the students’ mark of control class, yet, the mean score of both classes still under the MCC score and it was indicated that the students had low ability in mastering vocabulary.
However, in posttest, there wa s progressing of the students’ ability in mastering vocabulary after Taxonomy Strategy in treatment was applied which was shown by the mean of their mark. The mean of the studen ts’ mark of experimental class was 81 that was classified high and pass on MCC score (See Appendix 11c); while the mean of students’ mark of control class was 71 that was classified adequate but under the MCC score (See Appendix 11d). The higher score of the posttest of experimental class was 100, while the lower score was 55. Yet, the higher score of posttest of control class was
95, while the lower score was 45. To make clear, the mean of students’ marks are stated in the next table.
Table 6
The MEAN of PRE-TEST and POST-TEST SCORES of EXPERIMENTAL and CONTROL CLASS
Higher Lower The
Lower
Mean Higher
Mean
Score Score Number MCC
Score
of Class
Score Pre- of Pre-
Post-
Post- Post- Students
Test Test
b. Degree of Mastery
In another aspect, the students’ degree mastery of vocabulary was also has progression. In pre-test data of experimental class, it was counted that no one have very high criterion. Yet, it was counted 18.8 % of the students in high criterion, there was around 40.6 % of the students who had ability in adequate criterion, 28.1% of them had ability in low criterion, and 12.5 % of students that had ability in very low criterion (See Appendix 10a).
However, the students’ degree mastery had progression after treatment that can
be seen on post-test data. Based on the calculation, the post-test data shown that approximately 34.4 % of students were in very high criterion, approximately 25.0 % in high criterion, 31.3 % were in adequate criterion, 9.4 % in low criterion, but there was no one in very low criterion (See Appendix 10c). To make clear, the percentage degree
of students’ mastery of pre-test and post-test of experimental class in mastering vocabulary present in the following table.
Table 7
The Percentage Degree of Students’ Mastery of Pretest and Posttest of Mastering Vocabulary through Taxonomy Strategy of Experimental Class
Posttest No.
Pretest
Classification
Number of
Number of
1 Very high
5 Very low
Besides, the calculation of pre-test and post-test data of control class also shown the progression of the students’ ability in mastering vocabulary. In pre-test data, it can
be seen that there was no one student had ability in very high criterion. There was approximately 6.3 % students who had ability in high criterion, 37.5% in adequate criterion, 34.4 % in low criterion, and 21.9 % in very low criterion (See Appendix 10b).
Ho wever, the students’ ability had progression after treatment also like the students’ ability of experimental class that can be seen on post-test data. After calculation, the post-test data shown that approximately 15.6 % students had ability in very high criterion, it was counted 18.8 % students had ability in high criterion, 34.4
% in adequate criterion, 28.1 % in low criterion, and 3.1 % in very low criterion (See Appendix 10d). To make clear, the percentage degree of students’ mastery of pre-test and post-test of control class in mastering vocabulary present in the following table.
Table 8
The Percentage Degree of Students’ Mastery of Pretest and Posttest of Mastering Vocabulary through Conventional Teaching of Control Class
Posttest No.
Pretest
Classification
Number of
Number of
1 Very high
5 Very low
c. Standard Deviations
Based on the computation result, the standard deviation of the pre-test for experimental class was 12.17 (See Appendix 11a), while in post-test was 11.89 (See Appendix 11c). Besides, the standard deviation of the pre-test for control class was
12.34 (See Appendix 11b), while in post-test was 13.05 (See Appendix 11d). To make easy for understanding, the standard deviation of students’ marks are stated in the following table.
Table 9
The STANDARD DEVIATION of PRE-TEST and POST-TEST SCORES of EXPERIMENTAL and CONTROL CLASS
Standard
Standard
The Number of
Class
Deviation of
Deviation of
Experimental Class
32 12.17 11.89 Control Class
d. Variance
In pre-test, the variance of experimental class was 148.02 (See Appendix 11a) while the variance of control class was 152.25 (See Appendix 11b). While, in post-test, the variance of experimental class was 141.31 (See Appendix 11c), while the variance of control class was 170.31 (See Appendix 11d). The next table is made to make the point of variance be easily for understood.
Table 10
The VARIANCE of PRE-TEST and POST-TEST SCORES of EXPERIMENTAL
and CONTROL CLASS
Variance of Class
The Number of
Variance of
141.31 Control Class
Experimental Class
e. Normality
To know the students’ prior knowledge for both class, the researcher sought the normality of pre-test data. Meanwhile, to test the normality, the researcher used
Liliefors’ formula as suggested by Herhyanto, et al., (2014:8.17). Based on the computation of pre-test data, the researcher noticed that L count of experimental class was
lower than L table (0.0978<0.1566) (See Appendix 12a). Meanwhile L count of control class was also lower than L table (0.1389<0.1566) (See Appendix 12b).
Recognizing to the result of computation before, it was concluded that both of class had normal distribution before treatment. It indicated that the students has equal prior knowledge. This condition promoted that both samples were representatives’ samples and ready to be treated.
Furthermore, based on the calculation of post-test data, the researcher also noticed L count of experimental class was lower than L table (0.0978<0.1566) (See Appendix 12c), while L count of control class was also lower than L table (0.1219<0.1566) (See Appendix 12d).
In summary, L table was still higher that L count of both class and it indicated the samples had normal distribution in post-test calculation. To make easy for understanding, the following is table of the normality of pre-test and post-test of experimental and control class.
Table 11
The NORMALITY of PRE-TEST and POST-TEST SCORES of EXPERIMENTAL
and CONTROL CLASS
L count of Class
L count of
L table
Pre-Test
Post-test
0.0978 Control Class
Experimental Class
f. Homogeneity
To know the homogeneity of the sample, the researcher used formula as suggested by Irianto, et al., (2007:276) as has been explained in Chapter III (See Page 75). Based on the pre-test data computation (See Appendix 13a), it was noticed that
F count = 1.03, while F table = 1.82. Since F count (1.08 )≤F table (1.82), so it can be concluded that the samples of the research were homogeny. Then, based on the calculation of post-test data (See Appendix 13b), it was also indicated F count = 1.21, while F table = 1.82. Since F count (1.21 )≤F table (1.82), so it also can be concluded that the samples of the research were homogeny. To make easy for understanding, the next is table about the homogeneity of pre-test and post-test scores of experimental and control class.
Table 12
The HOMOGENEITY of PRE-TEST and POST-TEST SCORES of EXPERIMENTAL and CONTROL CLASS
F count of Class
F count of
F table
Pre-Test
Post-test
Experimental Class
1.03 1.82 1.21 Control Class
g. Hypotheses Testing
According to the calculation data of hypotheses testing in Appendix 14, it was noted that t count = 3.204, while t table = 1.999 (It was confirmed with df = n 1 +n 2 -2 which
the level of significance 0.05). Since t count (3.204) > t table (1.999), it can be concluded that H a was accepted and H 0 was rejected. In other words, the result of the computation data of post-test on the research shown that there was significant effect of Taxonomy Strategy on the students’ ability in mastering vocabulary at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 3 Lolofitu Moi in 2016/2017. To make easy for understanding, the next table is the hypothesis testing of the research.
58
Table 13
The Hypothesis Testing of the Research
Class
t count t table N
Variables
X: Taxonomy Strategy as Experimental Independent Variable
32 Y: The Students’ Ability in Control
3.204
1.999
Mastering Vocabulary as Dependent Variable