The effectiveness of mindmaple software toward students’ writing ability at MTs Muslimat NU Palangkara Raya - Digital Library IAIN Palangka Raya
CHAPTER IV RESULT OF THE STUDY In this chapter, the writer presented the research findings, result data analysis and discussion. A. The Data Description In this section, it described the obtained data of improvement the students’writing
narrative text before and after taught bymindmaple software. The presented data consisted of distribution of pre-test score of control and experimental group and also the distribution of post test score of control group and experimental group.
1. The Result of Pre-test Score Control Group and Experimental Group
a. The Result of Pre-test Score of Control Group
th
The pre-test was conducted on Friday, 29 April 2016 in the VIII B room. The students asked to write narrative text that interested them about the fairy tale that should cover the generic structure consisted of identification and allocated time was 90 minutes. Thestudents
’ pre-test score of control group were distributed in the following table (see appendix 5) in order analizing the student’s background knowledge of narrative text. The writer calculated the scores of mean, standard deviation, and standard error using SPSS 18 program as follows.
Table 4.1 The Calculation of Mean, Standard Error of Mean, Median, Mode, and Standard Deviation StatisticsControl N Valid
34 Missing Mean 60.1471 Std. Error of Mean 1.26458 Median 58.5000 Mode
57.50 a Std. Deviation 7.37371 Minimum
47.50 Maximum
72.50
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
Based on the calculation above, the higher score pre test of control group was 72.50 and the lowest score was 47.50. And the result of mean was 60.1471.Median was 58.5000. Mode was 57.50.The standard error of mean was 1.26458.And the standard deviation was 7.37371.
b. The Result of Pre-test Score of ExperimentalGroup
The pre-test was conducted on Monday,25
th
April 2016 in the VIII Croom. The students asked to write narrative text that interested them about the fairy tale that should cover the generic structure consisted of identification and allocated time was 90 minutes.
The students’ pre-test score of experimental group were distributed in the following table (see in appendix 5) in order analizing the students’ background knowledge before treatment.
The writer calculated the scores of mean, standard deviation, and standard error using SPSS 18 program as follows.
Table 4.2 The Calculation of Mean, Standard Error of Mean, Median, Mode,Statistics Experimental N Valid
48.50 E11
47.50
8 C08
68.50 E08
59.00
9 C09
57.50 E09
56.50
10 C10
52.50 E10
55.00
11 C11
55.00
7 C07
12 C12
70.00 E12
71.50
13 C13
57.50 E13
52.50
14 C14
48.00 E14
70.00
15 C15
59.00 E15
47.50 E07
58.00
31 Missing Mean 60.6774 Std. Error of Mean 1.30951 Median 58.0000 Mode
2 C02
58.00 Std. Deviation 7.29103 Minimum
47.50 Maximum
73.00 Based on the calculation above, the higher score pre-test of control group was 73.00
and the lowest score was 47.50. And the result of mean was 60.6774.Median was 58.0000. Mode was 58.00.The standard error of mean was 1.30951.And the standard deviation was 7.29103.
Then, it was presented in the following table:
Table 4.3 Pre-Test Score of Control and Experimental Group
Control Group Experimental Group
NoCode Score Code Score
1 C01
59.50 E01
71.00
64.00 E02
51.50 E06
57.50
3 C03
56.50 E03
58.00
4 C04
58.00 E04
70.00
5 C05
58.00 E05
58.00
6 C06
58.00
17 C17
58.50
50.00
29 C29
59.50 E29
57.50
30 C30
68.50 E30
71.50
31 C31
50.00 E31
56.00
32 C32
58.50
33 C33
34 C34
28 C28
56.00 Total 2045 1881
Mean
60.15
60.67 Highest
72.50
73.00 Lowest
47.50
47.50
2. The Result of Post Test Score Control Group and Experimental Group
a. The Result of Post test Score of Control Group The post test was conducted on Saturday, 21
th
May 2016 in the VIII B room. The students asked to write narrative text that interested them about the fairy tale that should cover the generic structure consisted of identification, allocated time was 90 minutes
The students’ post test score of control group were distributed in the following table (see in appendix 5) in order analizing theknowledge of narrative text.
66.50 E28
56.00
72.50 E17
22 C22
71.00
18 C18
57.50 E18
52.50
19 C19
69.00 E19
65.00
20 C20
70.00 E20
71.00
21 C21
57.50 E21
56.50
69.50 E22
65.00 E27
73.00
23 C23
52.50 E23
57.50
24 C24
58.50 E24
71.00
25 C25
59.50 E25
67.00
26 C26
59.00 E26
59.00
27 C27
The writer calculated the scores of mean, standard deviation, and standard error using SPSS 18 program as follows:
Table 4.4 The Manual Calculation of Mean, Standard Error of Mean, Standard Deviation Statistics Post-test ControlN Valid
32 Missing
2 Mean 70.6094 Std. Error of Mean 1.32206 Median 69.5000 Mode
69.50 Std. Deviation 7.47872 Minimum
58.50 Maximum
83.00 Based on the calculation above, the higher score pre test of control group was 83.00
and the lowest score was 58.00. And the result of mean was 70.6094, median was 69.5000, mode was 69.50, the standard error of mean was 1.32206 and the standard deviation was 7.47872.
b. The Result of Post test Score ofExperimentalGroup
The post test was conducted on Wednesday,11
th
May 2016 in the VIII C room. The students asked to write narrative text that interested them about the fairy tale that should cover the generic structure consisted of identification, allocated time was 90 minutes and should post their text on by using mindmaple software.
The students’ post test score of experiment class were distributed in the following table (see in appendix 5) in order analizing the students’ wriitng narrative text after the treatment.
The next step, the writer calculated the scores of mean, standard deviation, and standard error using SPSS 18 program as follow.
Table 4.5 The Calculation of Mean, Standard Error of Mean, Standard Deviation Statistics6 C06
4 C04
68.00 E04
77.00
5 C05
58.50 E05
84.50
72.00 E06
68.00 E03
72.50
7 C07
77.00 E07
81.50
8 C08
83.00 E08
77.50
3 C03
Post-test Experimental N Valid
Then, it was presented in the following table:
31 Missing Mean 78.2581 Std. Error of Mean 6.7953 Median 79.0000 Mode
74.00 a Std. Deviation 3.78345 Minimum
68.00 Maximum
85.00
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
Based on the calculation above, the higher score post test of experimental group was 85.00 and the lowest score was 68.00. And the result of mean was 78.2581,median was 79.0000,mode was 74.00,The standard error of mean was 6.7953 and the standard deviation was 3.78345.
Table 4.6 Post Test Score of Control and Experimental Group Control Group Experimental Group84.00
No Code Score Code Score
1 C01
79.50 E01
79.50
2 C02
69.50 E02
85.00
11 C11
69.50 E27
69.50 E29
29 C29
79.50
68.00 E28
28 C28
76.50
27 C27
30 C30
79.00
81.00 E26
26 C26
80.00
81.00 E25
25 C25
74.50
58.50 E30
77.50 E24
79.50 Total 2259.5 2427
58.50
85 Lowest
83.00
78.29 Highest
70.61
Mean
34 C34
74.50
63.00
33 C33
58.50
32 C32
82.00
68.00 E31
31 C31
79.00
24 C24
77.00 E11
77.00
17 C17
76.00
16 C16 - E16
79.00
61.00 E15
15 C15
14 C14 - E14
81.50
76.00
68.00 E13
13 C13
78.50
69.50 E12
12 C12
74.00
69.50 E17
18 C18
74.00
60.00 E21
62.50 E23
23 C23
74.00
82.50 E22
22 C22
80.50
21 C21
80.00 E18
72.00
64.50 E20
20 C20
77.50
72.00 E19
19 C19
81.00
68 The distribution of students’ score in pre-testand post-test of control group and experimental group can also be seen in the following figure.
6 5 4 3
2 1 50 Post-test Pre-test 47.5 52.5 56.5
58 59 64 66.5 69 70 72.5
61
63 68 72 77 79.5 81 83 Figure 4.1 Distribution in pre-test and post-test ControlGroup
Based on the figure above, it can be seen that the studentspre-test score of control group. There was onestudents who got score 47.5. There wasone student who got score
72.5. Then, the post-test of student score on control group there was one student who got score 58.5 and there was one student who got score 83.
Figure 4.2 Distribution in pre-test and post-test Experimental
Group
Based on the figure above, it can be seen that the studentspre-test score of Experimental group. There was onestudentwho got score 47.5. There wasone student who got score 73. Then, the post- test of students’ score on experimental group there was one student who got score 68 and there wasone student who got score 85.
3. The Comparison Result Between Control and Experimental Group on The Post-Test
Table 4.7 The Comparison ResultBetween Post-test of Control and Experimental GroupNo Control Experimental Improvement Post-Test Post-test
1
69.50
79.50
Based on the data analysis, it can see by comparison post-test of Control group and Experimental group in the following table:
2
69.50
84.00
14.50
3
68.00
77.50
9.50 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 47.5 52.5 56 57 58 62 .5 67 70 71.5 73 74.5 76.5 77.5 79 80 81 82 85 Pre-test Post-test
10.00
- 8.50
- 3.00
- 4.00
69.50
28
7.00
76.50
69.50
27
11.00
79.00
68.00
26
10.50
80.00
25
79.50
79.00
81.00
24
74.00
81.00
23
74.50
77.50
22
18.00
80.50
58.50
21.00
21
Total 2259.5 2427 167.5 Mean
78.29
test experimental group is
70.61. Then, the Mean of post-
group and experimental group. Both control group and experiment group have not same score. It can be seen from the post-test control groupMean is
68 The table above showed us the comparison of post test score achieved by control
58.5
85 Lowest
83
10.15 Highest
78.29
70.61
79.50
29
32
19.50
82.50
63.00
31
16.00
74.50
58.50
30
6.50
74.50
68.00
62.50
81.50
. Then, for post-test of control group the highest score 83.00 and the lowest score 58.50. And then, for post-test experimental group the highest score 85.00 and the lowest score 68.00. It means that the control group and experimental group have different level in writing ability of narrative text after getting the treatment.
76.50
78.50
69.50
12
74.00
77.00
11
4.00
81.00
77.00
10
68.00
9
13
2.00
85.00
83.00
8
4.50
81.50
77.00
7
0.50
72.50
72.00
6
9.00
68.00
82.50
72.00
20
17.50
77.50
60.00
19
16.50
81.00
64.50
18
9.50
81.50
17
76.00
76.00
80.00
16
9.50
79.00
69.50
15
16.00
77.00
61.00
14
8.00
- 1.00
- 3.00
- 7.00
- 2.00
- 79.50
4. Testing the Normality and Homogeinity
a. Normality Test The writer used SPSS 18 to measure the normality of the data. 1) Testing Normality of Post Test Experimental and Control Group
Table 4.8 Testing Normality of Post Test Experimental and Control GroupThe criteria of the normality test of post test if the value of (probability value/critical value) was higher
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test Experiment Control N a,b
31
32 Normal Parameters Mean 78.2581 70.6094 Std. Deviation 3.78345 7.47872 Most Extreme Absolute .094 .153 Differences Positive .067 .153
Negative -.094 -.128 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .523 .864 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .948 .444 a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
experiment group 0.948. Then the normality both of class was consulted with table of Kolmogorov-
Smirnov with the level of significance 5% (α=0.05). because asymptotic significance of control0.444>0.05, and asymptotic significance of experiment 0.948>0.05.
It could be concluded that the data was in normal distribution.
It meant that the students’ pre test score of experimental and control group had normal distribution.
b. Homogeinity Test 1) Testing Homogeinity of Post Test Experimental and Control Group
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
2.471
5 14 .084
The criteria of the homogeneity test post test was if the value of (probability value/critical value) was higher than or equal to the level of significance alpha defined (r=a), it means that, the distribution was homogeneity. Based on the calculation using SPSS 18.0 above, the value of (probably value/critical value) from post test of the experimental and control group on Homogeneity of Variances in sig column is known that p-value was 0.084. The data in this study fulfilled homogeneity since the p value is higher 0.084 > 0.05.
B. Result Data Analysis
1. Testing Hyphothesis Using Manual Calculation
The result of t-test using SPSS 18.0 program, it was found the t-test was greater than the t table at 1% and 5% significance level or 2.00<5.17>2.65. It means that H a was
a
accepted and H was rejected It could be interpreted based on the result of calculation that H o .
stating that
Mindmaple software was effective for Teaching Writing Narrative Text of the eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya was accepted and H o stating
that
Mindmaple software was not effective for teaching writing narrativetext of the
was rejected. It meant that teaching
eight graders of MTs MuslimatNUPalangka Raya
writing with
using mindmaple software toward students’ writing ability was effective for teaching writing narrative text of the eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya .
To test the hypothesis of the study, the writer used t-test statistical calculation. Firstly, the writer calculated the standard deviation and the error of X
1 and X 2 at the previous data
= 1.48
= 0.68 ² + 1.32 ²
M1
M2
=
1 2
M1
M2
SE M1
1 and X 2 as follows:
M2 =
0.4624 + 1.7424 SE M1
M2 =
2.2048 SE M1
M2 = 1.484857
SE
M1 – SE M2
Standard error of mean of score between Variable I and Variable II SE
X
Table 4.10 The Standard Deviation and Standard Error of X2 7.478
1 and X
2 Variable
The Standard
Deviation
The Standard Error of Mean
X
1 3.783
0.68 X
1.32 X
The next step, the writer calculated the standard error of the difference mean between
1 = Experimental Group
X
2
= Control Group The table showed the result of the standard deviation calculation of X
1 was 3.783 and
the result of the standard error mean calculation was 0.68. The result of the standard deviation calculation of X
2 was 7.478and the result of the standard error mean calculation was 1.32.
- – SE
- 2 2 SE
- – SE
- – SE
- – SE
- – SE
- − = (31+32)
- – 2 = 61
- – test calculation using SPSS 18.0 program. To know the variances score of data, the formula could be seen as follows:
- – test was interpreted on the result of degree of freedom to get the result of degree of freedom (df) was 61. The following table was the result of t observed and t table from 61 df at 5% and 1% significance level.
1− 2 T = o 1− 2
78.26 −70.61 T = o
1.48
7.65 T o =
1.48
5.16892
T = o
T =
5.17
o
Which the criteria: If t-test (t- was accepted and H was rejected
a
observed) ≥ t-table, H If t-test (t- a was rejected and H was accepted observed) ≤ t-table, H Then, the degree of freedom (df) accounted with the formula:
Df =
The writer chose the significant levels at 5%, it means the significant level of refusal of null hypothesis at 5%. The writer decided the significance level at 5% due to the hypothesis typed stated on non-directional (two-tailed test). It meant that the hypothesis can’t direct the prediction of alternative hypothesis. Alternative hypothesis symbolized by “1”. This symbol could direct the answer of hypothesis, “1” can be (>) or (<). The answer of hypothesis could not be predicted whether on more than or less than.
The calculation above showed the result of t-test calculation as in the table follows:
Table 4.11 The Result of T-Test Using Manual Calculation
Variable T test T table Df/db
5 % 1 %2.00
2
5.17
2.65 X 1 -X
61 Where: X = Experimental Group
1 X 2 = Control Group
T test = The Calculated Value T table = The Distribution of t Value Df/db = Degree of Freedom Based on the result of hypothesis test calculation, it was found that the value of t
observed
was greater than the value of t able at 1% and 5% significance level or 2.00<5.17>2.65. It
It could be interpreted based on the result of means H a was accepted and H o was rejected. a
calculation that H stating that mindmaple software was effective for Teaching Writing
Narrative Textof the eight grade students at MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya was
o
accepted and H stating that mindmaplesoftware was not effective for Teaching Writing
was
NarrativeText of the eight grade students at MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya
rejected. It meant that teaching writing with
mindmaple software was effective for Teaching Writing Narrative Text of the eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya gave significant effect at 5% and 1% significance level.
2. Testing Hypothesis Using SPSS 18.0 Program
The writer also applied SPSS 18.0 program to calculate t test in testing hypothesis of the study. The result of the t-test using SPSS 18.0 was used to support the manual calculation of the t test. The result of the test using SPSS 18.0 program could be seen as follows:
Table 4.12 Mean, Standard Deviation and Standard Error of Experiment Group and Control
Groupusing SPSS 18.0 Program
Group Statistics
Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Score Experiment 31 78.26 3.783 .680 Control 32 70.61 7.479 1.322
The table showed the result of mean calculation of experimental groupwas 78.26, standard deviation calculation was 3.783, and standard error of mean calculation was 680.
The result of mean calculation of control groupwas 70.61, standard deviation calculation was 7.497, and standard error of mean was 1.322.
Table 4.13 The Calculation of T – Test Using SPSS 18.0 Independent Samples TestLevene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. T Df
Sig.
(2- taile d) Mean
Differe nce Std. Error Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Equal variances assumed
13.762 .000 5.097 61 .000 7.649 1.501 4.648 10.650 Equal variances not assumed 5.146 46.210 .000 7.649 1.486 4.657 10.640
The table showed the result of t
If α =0.05 < Sig, Ho accepted and Ha rejected If α = 0.05> Sig, Ha accepeted and Ho rejected
Based on data above, significant data is 0.000. It meant the t-test calculation uses at the equal variances assumed. Since the result of post test between experiemental and control group had differe nce score of variance, it found that α = 0.05 was higher than Sig (2-tailed) or (0.05>0.00), so that Ha was accepeted and Ho was rejected . The result of t test was 5.097, mean difference between experimental and control group was 7.649and the standard error difference between experimental and control group was1.501.
C. Interpretation
To examine the truth or the false of null hypothesis stating that the there is effect of mindmaple software in writing narrative text at eight graders of MTs Muslimat NUPalangka
table
Raya. The result of t t . The
t- table t- test Df 5 % (0,05) 1 % (0,01)
5.09
2.00
2.65
61 The interpretation of the result of t-test using SPSS 18.0 program, it was found the t observe was greater than the t table at 1% and 5% significance level or 2.00<5.09>2.65. It
It could be interpreted based on the result of means that H a was accepted and H o was rejected. a calculation that H stating that mindmaple software was effective for Teaching Writing
Narrative Text of the eight grade students at MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya was
and H o stating that
accepted mindmaple software was not effective for Teaching Writing Narrative Text of the eight grade students at MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya was
rejected. It meant that teaching writing with
mindmaplesoftware was effective for Teaching Writing Narrative Text of the eight graders at MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya gave significant effect at 5% and 1% significance level.
D. Discussion
The result of analysis showed that there was significant effect of mindmaple software in writing narrative text at the eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya. It can be seen from the means score between pre-test and post-test. The Mean score of post-test reached higher score than the mean score of Pre-test (X= 78.25< Y=70.60). It indicated that the students’ score increased after conducting treatment. In other words, the students writing narrative text taught by software have better than those taught by non-mindmaple software at the eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya.
In addition, after the data was calculated using the t formula using SPSS 18.00
test
program showed that the t observed was 5.09. In addition, After the students have been taught by using mindmaple software, the writing score were higher than before implementing it. This finding indicated that mindmaple softwarewas effective and supported the previous research done by DiniAnggraini and Yakub Ismailthat also stated teaching writing by using mindmapping was effective.
In teaching learning process, taught writing narrative text by using mindmaple softwarewas a tool used by the writer to teach the students. It could be seen from the score of students how the used of mindmaplegave positive effects for students writing narrative text.
Mindmaple software as means for language learning, effectively enhanced the writing narrative text at eight graders of MTs Muslimat NU Palangka Raya. The students writing narrative text was enhanced after the treatment when they were given opportunities to use mindmaple software in the learning process. They wrote better narrative text using more meaningful contents within a well-organized text in the post test.
The results supported theory by Erick Nyoni in Chaper I page 3, He begins by nothing that one of the hardest tasks in writing is getting started. He notes that this could be solved by
1
mapping. The students gave their attention to the material because the writer used different media than usual. Using mindmaple software as a media in writing text actively encourages collaborrative environment, increases motivation and the students participation. They could be add the skillwriting on Mindmapping technique.
Next results supported theory by Kholoud Hussein Amoush in Chapter I page 4, Zaid said that the students who use mapping manifest considerable improvement reading
2
comprehension, written expression and vocabulary development. In line with it, the writer gave the students the assignment , asked the students’ to search idea and asked them to makes map on mindmapping techniqueusing mindmaple software not on paper so that the students had antusiasm on produce the text
, and the students’ trains to writing especially narrative text.
Based on the result of study above, it proved that mindmaple software gave effect to students when writing narrative text. These statistical findings were suitable with the theories as mentioned before.
According to this theory, schemata represent knowledge about concepts, objects and the relationship they have with other objects, situations, events, sequences of events, action, and sequences of action.
1 Erick Nyoni, Sementically Enhanced Composition Writing with Learning of English as a Second
Language (ESL) , p. 266 2