of the research from the beginning to the end not just the analysis and the findings.
Meanwhile, the quantitative data of this research were obtained from the tests conducted. It was analyzed using descriptive statistics in the form of mean.
By comparing the means of the writing tests result given to the students, the researcher was able to see the improvement on the students’ writing ability.
H. Validity and Reliability of the Data
To assess the validity of the data, then the researcher used five criteria proposed by Anderson et al. in Burns 1999:161 namely democratic validity,
outcome validity, process validity, catalytic validity and dialogic validity. The ways to fulfill those validities will be explained as follows:
1. Democratic validity
Democratic validity relates to stakeholders’ chance to give their personal opinions, ideas, and comments about the implication of the action
research. In this research, the democratic validity fulfilled by having discussion with the members of the research, that is the students, the English
teachers, and the collaborator. They were given an opportunity to give their ideas, comments, and suggestions toward the research. The discussion result
then would be the consideration in evaluating cycles.
2. Outcome validity
Outcome validity of action research leads to outcomes achieved within the research context. Outcome validity also depends on the process
of conducting the research. To get this validity, the researcher not only solved the problem, but also formulated new questions related to the
research. 3.
Process validity Process validity relates to the criterion to make the actions done in
action research valid. Process validity is closely related to the reliability and competency of the researcher himself. The researcher observed the teaching
and learning process by using field notes, interviewed the students, and had discussions with the English teacher, and the collaborator.
4. Catalytic validity
Catalytic validity refers to how stakeholders respond to their own internal changes. To establish this validity, the results of each cycle
presented to the member and asked their comments or responses. Later on, the responses considered to modify the process.
5. Dialogic validity
Dialogic validity means that each stakeholder can participate in the process of the research. This validity was fulfilled by discussing the research
findings with the English teacher, the collaborator, and some students of English Education Department of UNY. The members of discussion were
invited to give their opinions and critics related to the research report.
The reliability of the research was obtained by giving genuine data such as the field notes, interview transcript and other records. According to
Burns 1999, there are four triangulation techniques to get trustworthiness. The researcher will use three of those triangulation techniques which are time
triangulation, investigator triangulation, and theoretical triangulation. Each of them is explained below.
a. Time Triangulation
The data of the research were collected at one point of time or over a period of time to get a sense of what are involved in the process of the
changes. In this research, the researcher conducted the actions from October 19
th
2013 until November 9
th
2013. b.
Investigator Triangulation Two or more investigators are involved in the same research setting.
According to Burns and Grove 2001, the use of investigator triangulation removes the potential for bias that may occur in a study conducted by a
single investigator. To fulfil the investigator triangulation, the researcher invited the English teacher and the collaborator to the class.
c. Theoretical Triangulation
Theoretical triangulation means that the data are analyzed form more than one perspective. In this research, the researcher reviewed theories
from some books.
41
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
