Figure 3.1 Kemmis and McTaggart’s Action Research Design
4
4
Anne Burns, Collaborative Action Research …, p. 33.
CYCLE 1
CYCLE 2
Figure 3.2 The Classroom Action Research Procedure Adapted from Kemmis and
Taggart
Planning
After interviewing the teacher and the students, and observing the classroom.
Then, the writer and the teacher discuss to create lesson plan, and the instruments
Interview, questionnaire, and test
Reflecting
The writer and the teacher discuss about the result from post test in first cycle, in
this case, the writer want to know students’ score after doing the post test.
It was improved or not.
Planning
The writer modified the lesson plan based on the result of reflecting phase.
The writer prepares the post test.
Reflecting
The writer and the teacher discuss the result of the implementation of modified
action. If the students’ result was good it was not necessary continue to next cycle.
Observing
The writer observes the students’ activities in the classroom and students’ response in
learning imperative sentences through total physical response. From the post test result
in second cycle it could be seen students’ improvement in learning imperative.
Observing
The writer observes students in teaching and learning process, students’ condition and the
students’ response in learning imperative sentences. After that the writer gives students
test to know their ability in imperative.
Acting
The writer conducts the lesson plan that has been made; lesson plan based on imperative
sentences through total physical response. The writer observes the students in every cycle.
Acting
The writer implemented the lesson plan which has been revised. In imperative material, the
students have to act the verb and listen to the writer command.
D. SubjectParticipants of the Research
The subject or participants in this research are the students of seventh grade of SMP Islam Ruhama. The total population is 72 students from 2
classes. Then the writer took the students of seventh grade VII.1 as the samples.
E. Role and Position of the Researcher
In the research, the writer acted as planner. The writer made lesson plan, prepared; teaching tools, observed, collected the data, and reported the
result.
F. Data and Source of Data
The several sources of data in this research, there are students, teacher and collaborator.
a. Student
To gets data, the result of study and students activities in teaching and learning process.
b. Collaborator English teacher
Collaborator as source of data to knows Classroom Action Research CAR implementation comprehensively from student and also writer.
G. Instruments of the Research
The writer used several instruments in this Classroom Action Research CAR as follow; observation, interview, questionnaire, and the test.
H. Technique in Collecting Data
a. Observation
The writer and collaborator observe the class; the class management in English learning process, student difficulties in English learning
especially in imperative sentence, and the teacher technique. These are done before and during an action.
b. Questionnaires
The writer gives questionnaires after an action research to know the student opinion about method is used in the Classroom Action Research
CAR. In this questionnaires the writer will give the score 1 one if the indicator in learning phase appear. Then, to know the data of
questionnaire, it uses the formula:
5
Score =The total number of students who selected “Yes” answer X 100
Number of Students The result of the data adds to the percentage, it uses the classification into
the category as follows:
6
Table 3.1 The Interpretation of
Students’ Questionnaire
NO The Score
The Criterion
1 81-100
Excellent
2 61-80
Good
3
41-60 Enough
4
21-40 Fairly
5 0-20
Very fairly
c. Interview
Interview guide is given to the students of seventh grade students of SMP Islam Ruhama and the collaborator the English teacher. The writer asks
the students and collaborator before implementing Classroom Action Research CAR. It is to know student
s’ ability in using grammar, students
’ participation in learning grammar and imperative sentences, and the method or any strategies usually adopted by the teacher in
5
Nana Sudjana, Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya, 2009, p. 133.
6
Peat A. Sahartian, Prinsip dan Teknik Supervisi Pendidikan, Surabaya: Usaha Nasional, 1981, pp. 55-56.
teaching grammar. The interview also is carried out after Classroom Action Research CAR
to know the collaborators’ response toward the idea of total physical response.
d. The test
The writers evaluate the student by giving test, before doing action research pre test and after an action research post test. In this research,
the test is done in multiple choice forms.
I. Technique of the Data Analysis
The qualitative analysis is used in the observation of students’
activities during teaching learning process, the interview before and after Classroom Action Research CAR and the questionnaire after Classroom
Action Research CAR. In this case, the writer collected the entire data which have gained. In analyzing the numerical data, the writer gains the
average of students’ imperative sentence score per action in one cycle. It is used to measure how well studen
ts’ performance on imperative sentences. It uses the formula:
7
Mx : Mean X : Individual score
N : Number of students
7
Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2008, p. 81.
∑X Mx=
── N
After that , the writer tries to know the class percentage which pass the KKM 65, the writer uses the formula:
8
P : The class percentage F : Total percentage score
N : Number of students After getting mean of students’ score per actions, the writer identifies
whether or not there might have any improvement of students’ imperative sentence from pre-
test up to students’ average score in cycle 1 and cycle 2. In analyzing that, the writer uses the formula:
9
P : P ercentage of students’ improvement
y : Pre-test result y1 : Post-test 1
8
Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan …, p. 43.
9
David E. Meltzer, The Relationship between Mathematics Preparation and Conceptual Learning Gain in Physics: A Possible Hidden Variable in Diagnostic Pretest Scores, Iowa:
Departement of Physics and Astronomy, 2008, p.3.
F P =
── X 100 N
y1 - y P =
─── X 100 y
