29 KR r =
1 −
k k
− −
2
. 1
S k
M k
M
=
1 30
30 −
− −
2
20 30
67 30
67 1
=
1 30
30 −
− −
2
400 30
37 67
1
=
29 30
− −
12000 2479
1 =
1, 03 1 – 0, 21 = 1,03 x 0,79
= 0,81
The calculation above shows that the reliability of the teat is 0,81. So, the reliability of the test is high. It is based on Arikunto 1986:93, the standard of reliability
is: 0,00 – 0,40
= The reliability is low 0,41 – 0,70
= The reliability is significant 0,71 – 0,90
= The reliability is high 0,91 – 1,00
= The reliability is very high
4.2. Research Findings
A fter analyzing the data, I will describe the ability of the sixth year students of
SDN No. 101878 Tg. Morawa to use personal pronouns as subject and object. I will tabulate their grade and the percentage.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
30
TABLE 3 Students’ Score in Using Personal Pronouns as Subject
No. Students’
number Correct
answer for each
student R
Number of items
N Score
for each student
X Frequency
f fx
1. 21, 23
15 15
100 2
200 2.
8, 24 14
15 93,3
2 186,6
3. 4, 25
13 15
86,7 2
173,4 4.
5, 13, 14, 18, 19
12 15
80 5
400
5. 7, 9, 22, 29
11 15
73,3 4
293,2 6.
1, 15, 16 10
15 66,7
3 200,1
7. 3, 28
9 15
60 2
120 8.
10, 11, 12, 20
8 15
53,3 4
213,2
9. 30
7 15
46,7 1
46,7 10.
17 6
15 40
1 40
11. 2, 6, 16, 27
5 15
33,3 4
133,2
Total
∑
f
= 30
∑
fx
=2006,3
To find the mean score of the students’ ability in using personal pronouns as subject, I calculated by using this following formula:
Universitas Sumatera Utara
31 X
=
∑ ∑
f fx
So, X =
∑ ∑
f fx
=
30 3
, 2006
= 66,88
Thus the mean score of the students’ ability is 66,88, it means that they have good ability in using personal pronouns as subject.
TABLE 4 The Percentage of the Students’ Ability in Using
Personal Pronouns as Subject Classification
Frequency Percentage
Level of Ability Range
Very good 80 – 100
11 36,7
Good 60 – 79
9 30
Average 40 – 59
6 20
Poor 20 – 39
4 13,3
Very poor 0 –19
Total 30
100
Universitas Sumatera Utara
32 From the table 4 about the percentage of students’ ability in using personal
pronouns as subject, it shows that 11 students 36,7 of the respondents have very good ability, 9 students 30 of the respondents have good ability, 6 students 20 of
the respondents have average ability, and 4 students 13,3 of the respondents have poor ability.
TABLE 5 Students’ Score in Using Personal Pronouns as Object
No. Students’
number Correct
answer for each
student R
Number of items
N Score
for each student
X Frequency
f fx
1. 21, 23, 24
15 15
100 3
300 2.
9, 13 14
15 93,3
2 186,6
3. 4, 5, 7, 18,
19, 25 13
15 86,7
6 520,2
4. 8, 26
12 15
80 2
160 5.
16 11
15 73,3
1 73,3
6. 1, 29, 30
10 15
66,7 3
200,1 7.
3, 11,15, 22 9
15 60
4 240
8. 12, 14
8 15
53,3 2
106,6 9.
27 7
15 46,7
1 46,7
10. 6, 28
6 15
40 2
80 11.
17 5
15 33,3
1 33,3
12. 10, 20
4 15
26,7 2
53,4
Universitas Sumatera Utara
33 13.
2 3
15 20
1 20
Total
∑
f
= 30
∑
fx
=2020,1
To find the mean score of the students’ ability in using personal pronouns as object, I calculated by using this following formula:
X =
∑ ∑
f fx
= 30
1 ,
2020
= 67,34
Thus the mean score of the students’ ability is 67,34, it means that they have
good ability in using personal pronouns as object.
TABLE 6 The Percentage of the Students’ Ability in Using
Personal Pronouns as Object
Classification Frequency
Percentage Level of Ability
Range
Very good 80 – 100
13 43,3
Good 60 – 79
8 26,7
Average 40 – 59
4 13,3
Poor 20 – 39
5 16,7
Universitas Sumatera Utara
34 Very poor
0 –19
Total 30
100
From the table 6 about the percentage of students’ ability in using personal pronouns as object, it shows that 13 students 43,3 of the respondents have very good
ability, 8 students 26,7 of the respondents have good ability, 4 students 13,3 of the respondents have average ability, and 5 students 16,7 of the respondents have poor
ability.
TABLE 7 The Students’ Score in Using Personal Pronouns
No. Name
A B
Total Score
Classification
1. M. Agil Pradana
10 10
20 67
Good 2.
Masoky Pratama 5
3 8
27 Poor
3. Kimmiko Tenno S
9 9
18 60
Good 4.
Trisna Meivan 13
13 26
87 Very good
5. Desi Wulandari
12 13
25 83
Very good 6.
Ridho Tri Suci 5
6 11
37 Poor
7. Melati Febrianti
11 13
24 80
Very good 8.
Uci Lestari 14
12 26
87 Very good
9. Fitriya Kinanti
11 14
25 83
Very good 10. Janna Isnaini
8 4
12 40
Average 11. Ariska Yanna
8 9
17 57
Average
Universitas Sumatera Utara
35 12. Rikardo Nababan
8 8
16 53
Average 13. Khairuddin
12 14
26 87
Very good 14. Joko Suprianto
12 8
20 67
Good 15. Yulia Viviane
10 9
19 63
Good 16. Diah A. Wulandari
5 11
16 53
Average 17. Ridho Septian
6 5
11 37
Poor 18. Abdurrahman F
12 13
25 83
Very good 19. Inke P. Sebayang
12 13
25 83
Very good 20. Ayu Ningtias A
8 4
12 40
Average 21. Bella Anggriani S
15 15
30 100
Very good 22. M. Puput Ramadhan
11 9
20 67
Good 23. Taufik Hidayat
15 15
30 100
Very good 24. Bunga Nauli Sa’aba
14 15
29 97
Very good 25. Puriadi
13 13
26 87
Very good 26. Dewi Rukmana
10 12
22 73
Good 27. Diah Nurjanah
5 7
12 40
Average 28. Nurul Khodijah Hrp
9 6
15 50
Average 29. Dicky Kurniawan
11 10
21 70
Good 30. Nico Prasetio
7 10
17 57
Average
Total 604
2015 Mean Score
20,13 67,17
Universitas Sumatera Utara
36 Thus, the mean score of the students’ ability is 67,17, it means that they have
good ability in using personal pronouns as both subject and object.
TABLE 8 The Percentage of Students’ Ability in Using Personal Pronouns
as Subject and Object Classification
Frequency Percentage
Level of Ability Range
Very good 80 – 100
12 40
Good 60 – 79
7 23,3
Average 40 – 59
8 26,7
Poor 20 – 39
3 10
Very poor 0 –19
Total 30
100
According to the ability level and the grades possessed by the 2008 sixth year students of SDN No. 101878 Tg. Morawa, I can state that:
- 40 out of 30 respondents has very good ability in using personal pronouns - 23,3 out of 30 respondents has good ability in using personal pronouns
- 26,7 out of 30 respondents has average ability in using personal pronouns - 10 out of 30 respondents has poor ability in using personal pronouns
Thus, I can say that the result of the process teaching and learning English in using personal pronouns is very good or satisfactory.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
37
5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
