P : the class percentage
F : total percentage score
N : number of students
The last, to get the improvement score from the pre-test up to post-test score in cycle 1 and cycle 2, it uses the formula:
38
P = 100
P : percentage of students’ improvement
y1 : post-test 1 result
y : pre-test result
P = 2
−
100
P : percentage of students’ improvement
y2 : post-test 2
y : pre-test result
M. The Trustworthiness of Study
In trustworthiness, the researcher will discuss about data collection in every observation from performing action research cycles are analyzed descriptively by
using percentage to see tendency that happened in learning activity. In analyzed the test item, the writer uses two ways to know the trustworthiness
of the data as follow:
38
David E. Meltzer, the Relationship between Mathematics Preparation and Conceptual Learning Gains in Physics: A Possible Hidden Variable in Diagnostic Pretest Score, Lowa: Department of
Physics and Astronomy, 2008, p.3.
1. Discriminating Power
The analysis of discriminating power of test items is to know the performance of the test through distinguishing students who have high
achievement and low achievement. Discriminating power provides more detailed analysis of the test items than does item difficulty, because it shows
how the top scores and lower scores performed on each item.
39
The computing of discriminating power uses the formula following:
40
=
−
In which, D : The Index of discriminating power
U : The number of pupils in upper group who answered the item
correctly L
: The number of pupils in lower group who answered the item correctly
N : Number of pupils in each of groups
Next, the discriminating scale uses:
Table 3.1 The Classification of Discriminating Power
DL REMARKS
0.6 – 10 Very good
0.4 – 0.6 Good
0.1 – 0.3 Ok
-1 – 0.0 Bad
39
Kathleen M. Bailey, Learning about Language Assessment: Dillemas, Decisions, and Direction London: Heinle Heinle Publisher, 1998, p. 135.
40
Wilmar Tambunan, Evaluat ion of St udent s Achievem ent , Jakart a: Depdiknas, 1998, p.139
2. Difficulty Items
The researcher analyzes the students’ test. It is categorized into high, medium, and low. In this study the researcher compares the difficulty items
analysis by comparing students who answer correctly with all of students who follow the data. The formula which is used is:
=
P : Index of difficulty
R : the total number of students who selected the correct answer
T : the total number of students including upper and lower group
The criterion using as follow:
Table 3.2 The Classification of Difficulty Level
DL REMARK
0 – 0.30 High
0.30 – 0.79 Medium
0.80 – 1.00 Low
N. The Criteria of the Action Success
The researcher will know the students’ success and failure in doing this action research. In this study, the criteria success research based on when there 70
students could pass the target score of pre-test, post test 1 and post test 2 of the Minimum Mastery Criterion – Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal KKM at SMPN 238
Jakarta, where the writer did her research in 60 sixty. So if when there 70 students could pass the target score of pre-test, post test 1 and post test 2 of the
Minimum Mastery Criterion – Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal KKM, it means that the research could be called success, and the researcher can stop the next action.
CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTION, DATA ANALYSIS, RESULT
INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the description of the data gathered from the action activities. This chapter also presents the result of research. In this case, it discusses the
way to develop students’ mastery in using verb I present tense and verb II past tense by using transformation drill at VII.6 grade students of SMPN 238 Jakarta,
academic year 2010 2011.
A. The Description of the Data
Before the implementation of the action, the writer divided three parts of data description in order to know the obstacles teaching and learning activities. Those are
pre- observation, pre- interview and pre- test. Here are the explanations:
1. The Result of Pre- Observation
The aim of pre-observation is to know the teaching and learning process directly before implementing the CAR. It was conducted on November 17
th
– 26
th
2010 at VII-6 grade of SMPN 238 Jakarta at 08.10 A.M. – 09.30 A. M. There are 36 students in the class. Based on pre-observation, it is known that in teaching
simple present and past tense at first grade of SMPN 238 Jakarta academic year 2010 2011, it can be seen that the students be passive. When the teacher taught
the grammar, especially in simple present and simple past tense, she only told to the students about the rules which used in present and past tense. And then, she
writes the example based on the rules to the students. So after that, she asked for
