» » Skripsi Bahasa Inggris Bab IV

Skripsi Bahasa Inggris Bab IV



CHAPTER IV
THE DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS


A.      The Data
The data in this study were analyzed by using quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data were taken from the students’ writing scores, while qualitative data were taken from the diary notes, observation sheets, questionnaire sheet, and interview. The data had been gathered within two cycles. The research was conducted in a class of X, SMA Negeri 21 Medan which consisted of 40 students.
Since the students’ achievement was not significantly improved in cycle I, it was needed to conduct cycle II. Cycle I consisted in four meetings while cycle II consisted in three meetings. So, there were seven meetings in this research.

1.          The Quantitative Data
The quantitative data were taken from the result of writing tasks during the research conducted. By applying peer review in the process of writing, the students’ scores showed improvement continuously. The students’ scores can be seen in the following table:





Table 4.1 Students’ Writing Scores of Orientation test, Cycle I and Cycle II

No.
Students’ Initials
Orientation Test Score
Cycle I Score
Cycle II Score
1.
AJ
71
85
91
2.
AP
71
83
92
3.
AYP
42
62
73
4.
CCP
67
72
79
5.
DAR
69
80
89
6.
DSAP
34
52
71
7.
DRSP
71
84
92
8.
EERS
68
75
84
9.
ESRS
70
82
88
10.
ERS
67
76
85
11.
FG
45
63
72
12.
GS
72
85
90
13.
GTNS
68
74
87
14.
HAA
38
57
68
15.
HN
57
72
84
16.
HS
47
63
71
17.
HA
55
67
74
18.
IDU
68
86
90
19.
IDHS
63
73
76
20.
JP
34
57
64
21.
JNM
53
65
71
22.
JPT
44
65
73
23.
JMS
53
66
72
24.
KAPR
72
87
91
25.
LG
43
64
74
26.
LA
70
84
87
27.
MKZH
62
71
79
28.
MYR
56
67
74
29.
MM
64
76
83
30.
MSS
67
83
89
31.
MAA
81
90
94
32.
NSRT
59
76
86
33.
NDA
61
75
86
34.
PN
69
76
85
35.
RH
74
89
93
36.
RS
47
62
71
37.
SNM
71
82
91
38.
SMESH
43
68
73
39.
SMM
67
87
91
40.
YP
55
71
76
∑X
2388
2952
3259
X
59.7
73.8
81.4

2.             The Qualitative Data
The qualitative data were taken from observation sheets, questionnaire sheet, diary notes and interview.
a.       Observation sheet
        Observation sheets were used to record the situation and the problems found during the process of teaching and learning recount text through peer review technique. Observation sheet was filled by the English teacher as the collaborator/observer.
b.      Questionnaire sheet
        Questionnaire sheet was distributed in the last meeting of cycle II. It  was used to know the students’ opinion about the application of peer review technique in learning recount texts and in the process of writing recount texts. The questionnaire consisted fifteeen statements and it was made up based on liket scale, they are strongly agree (3), agree (2), and disagree (1).
c.       Diary notes
        The diary notes were analyzed in order to know all the progression achieved in teaching and learning recount text through peer review technique. It contained the writer’s personal evaluation of the running class. It was found that students’ learning process in writing recount text through peer review technique improved from cycle I to cycle II.


d.      Interview
        There were two interview sessions conducted. The first was done before conducting cycle I and the second one was done in the end of cycle II. The first interview was conducted to the English teacher and some students about students’ difficulties  and capability in writing a text and teaching writing process in the class. The second interview was about English teacher’s and students’ opinion about the application of peer review technique in the process of writing.
        The detailed information of qualitative data can be seen in Appendix C, D, E and F.

B.       Data Analysis
1.      Analysis of Quantitative Data
The researcher took three writing scores from orientation test score to cycle II score to show the improvement of students’ achievement in writing recount text. It was found out that the students’ scores improved from orientation test, cycle I to cycle II by means of peer review technique.
The scores of the students’ writing were calculated based on these components: content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanic. The improvement of the students’ writing scores in recount text after applying peer review can be seen as the follows:



Table 4.2 The Range of Score Improvement

Ranges of score Improvement
Total Students
Students’ Initials
Orientation Score
Cycle II Score
30 – 38
6 students
AYP
42
73
DSAP
34
71
HAA
38
68
JP
34
64
LG
43
74
SMESH
43
73
21 – 29
13 students
AP
71
92
DRSP
71
92
FG
45
72
HN
57
84
HS
47
71
IDU
68
90
JPT
44
73
MSS
67
89
NSRT
59
86
NDA
61
86
RS
47
71
SMM
67
91
YP
55
76
12 – 20
21 students
AJ
71
91
CCP
67
79
DAR
69
89
EERS
68
84
ESRS
70
88
ERS
67
85
GS
72
90
GTNS
68
87
HA
55
74
IDHS
63
76
JNM
53
71
JMS
53
72
KAPR
72
91
LA
70
87
MKZH
62
79
MYR
56
74
MM
64
83
MAA
81
94
PN
69
85
RH
74
93
SNM
71
91
Number of student
40 students


From the table above, there were 6 students whose scores improved around 30 – 38 points.  This high improvement was apparent because of peer review technique. By doing peer review in pairs they could know what the things that should be revised from their writing. Although not all of the improvement of the scores made them reached the standard minimum score but it still kept improving. HAA and JP didn’t reach the standard minimum score because they were not too serious in revising their writing but AYP, DSAP, LG, and SMESH were very serious. They also paid attention to and listened to the researcher’s explanation and instructions. They always kept asking questions while teaching learning process and doing peer review.
There were 13 students whose scores improved around 21 – 29 points. These students mostly were serious when teaching and learning process was running and doing peer review under the researcher’s instructions and help. They were also very serious while revising their work after doing peer review. They always paid full attention and listened to the researcher’s explanation. Because of that, their scores kept improving and could reached the standard minimum score. AP, HN, HS, JPT, and RS actually were not too serious in teaching-learning process, but when they revised their writing they did it well. Sometimes AP, JPT, RS made some jokes during peer review session with their pair that made the class became a little bit noisy. But as far as they did it to learn, it was fine for the researcher and to made them not feel bored while teaching learning process.
Most of students got score improved around 12 – 20 points. Although they got the lowest improvement but it did not mean that all of them are bad students. First, CCP from 67 – 79 this student got the lowest improvement among them because he did not pay full attention and listen to the researcher’s explanation and instructions, but the others always paid attention and listen to the researcher’s explanation and instructions. They were very serious and active when teaching learning process was running. They always asked if they had problems especially during peer review session. Some of them were also very good in reviewing their pair’s writing like AJ, ESRS, GS, KAPR, LA, MAA, RH, and SNM. By reviewing their pairs’s writing their also could improve their writing themselves.
Based on the data analysis, there were variations on the students’ scores. In the orientation test score, the lowest score was 34 and the highest one was 81. In cycle I, the lowest score was 52 and the highest one was 90. In cycle II, the lowest score was 64 and the highest one was 94. The comparison of the students’ writing scores can be seen in Table 4.3 below:
Table 4.3 The Comparison of Students’ Writing Scores
Types of Score
Orientation Test Score
Cycle I Score
Cycle II Score
The Lowest Score
34
52
64
The Highest Score
81
90
94
Mean
59.7
73.8
81.4
Number of Students
40
40
40

From the table above, it was seen that students’ scores kept improving from orientation test until cycle II. It had increased from 59.7 to 81.4. The calculation can be seen in Appendix B.
In this research, the indicator of successful in writing was that the students have got score up to 70 based on the standard minimum score of English lesson at that school. The percentage of the students who got score up to 70 can be seen in the table 4.4 below:
Table 4.4 The Percentage of the Students’ who Got Score up to 70
Evaluation
Students who got score up 70
Percentage
Orientation Test
8
20%
Cycle I
26
65%
Cycle II
38
95%

In orientation test, there were only 8 students (20%) who got score 70 up. The percentage of students’ achievement in writing recount text kept increasing when peer review technique was applied. In cycle I, there were 26 students (65%) who got score 70 up and in cycle II, there were 38 students (95%) who got score 70 up. After analyzing the data, it can be concluded that all students got improvement in their writing scores and peer review technique effectively helped students in writing recount text.
2.         Analysis of Qualitative Data
As explained before, the qualitative data were analyzed from observation sheets, questionnaire sheet, diary notes and interview.
a.             Observation sheet
From the observation sheets, there were many things that had been observed. It can be concluded that teaching learning process became much better in cycle II. Teacher’s performance, students’ attitude and the class situation improved from the first meeting to the last one. For example, in the fourth meeting, the researcher was not too able to control and direct the class because it was the first time for the students did peer review so they had so many questions to the researcher and asked her to see their work one by one. In the third meeting, some students did not full pay attention to the researcher and they tend to talk to their friends that made the class became noisy, but the researcher admonished the students. However, in the next meeting especially in cycle II, the researcher could control and direct the class well and the students paid more attention to her and they learnt more active and seriously. The data of observation sheet can be seen in Appendix C and the result of observation sheets can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.5 The Result of Observation Sheets

Focus
Description
Choices
Note
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
The writer as a teacher
The teacher prepares teaching material systematically.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
The teacher attracts students’ attention.
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The teacher explains teaching objective.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
The teacher motivates students to be brave in writing
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
2.85
Good
The teacher explains about peer review technique clearly
-
3
3
3
-
3
3
2.14
Good
The teacher explains the lesson about recount text clearly
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The teacher gives all the students chance to ask about the lesson
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
The teacher responds to the students’ questions well.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
The teacher pays attention to all individuals in the class
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The teacher monitors all pairs while peer review session
-
-
2
3
-
3
3
1.57
 Poor
The teacher gives feedback to the students
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
2.57
Good
The teacher is able to control and direct the class.
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
2.42
Good
The teacher manages the time effectively and efficiently.
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The Students
The students pay attention to the teacher’s explanation.
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The students answer questions given by teacher.
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2.57
 Good
The students ask questions to the teacher if there is something unclear.
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.85
Good
The students give good responses to the topic given.
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.85
Good
The students do peer review well in pairs.
-
-
2
3
-
3
3
1.57
Poor
The students discuss about their writing actively.
-
-
1
3
3
3
3
1.85
Poor
The students feel enjoyable and interested along teaching learning process.
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2.57
Good
The students help each other in understanding materials given
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
2.14
Good
All the students do their writing task
2
-
3
3
2
3
3
2.28
Good
The Context
The classroom is safe from noisy.
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
2.42
Good
The classroom is clean and comfortable
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
The classroom has teaching aids (marker, duster, whiteboard, etc)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very Good
In which:
Very Good  : 3,0
Good           : 2,0 – 2,9
Poor            : 1,0 – 1,9


b.   Questionnaire sheet
The questionnaire sheet was delivered to know students’ opinion and interest in learning writing recount text through peer review technique. The results of questionnaire sheet showed that peer review technique helps them improve their English writing ability in content, organization and grammar. Their second draft is better than the first one by means of peer review and English writing became more interesting and easier through peer review technique. The data of the questionnaire sheet can be seen in Appendix D and the result of questionnaire sheet can be seen in the following table:




Table 4.6 The Result of Questionnaire Sheet
NO.
STATEMENTS
CHOICES
Strongly Agree
 (3)
Agree
(2)
Disagree
(1)
1.
Peer review helps me improve my English writing ability in content.
27
13
0
2.
Peer review helps me improve my English writing ability in organization.
14
26
0
3.
Peer review helps me improve my English writing ability in grammar.
25
15
0
4.
My second draft is better than the first draft by means of peer review.
25
15
0
5.
I like to review my classmate’s writing.
9
26
5
6.
I like to have my classmates review my writing.
10
28
2
7.
English writing becomes easier by means of peer review.
12
28
0
8.
English writing becomes more interesting through peer review.
6
33
1
9.
Peer review increases my confidence in English writing.
8
32
0
10.
Peer review helps me overcome my fear in English writing.
8
31
1
11.
Peer review helps me overcome my fear in receiving correction from the teacher.
10
30
0
12.
Peer review increases my frequency of checking a dictionary.
22
18
0
13.
Peer review increases my motivation to read materials related to writing skill.
18
19
3
14.
Peer review also helps me improve my English reading ability.
15
23
2
15.
Peer review helps me in writing a text, especially in writing a recount text
32
8
0






c.       Diary notes
Diary notes were written up by the researcher in every meeting while conducting the research. From the diary notes, it showed that the students’ interest to learn writing recount text through peer review technique was increasing even though at the first time they were still confused how to do that. But, after twice they did peer review it became enjoyable for them and they could understand how to do that. Some students actually were not too serious in teaching learning process, but when they revised their writing they did it well. Sometimes they  made some jokes during peer review session with their pair that made the class became a little bit noisy. But as far as they did it to learn, it was fine for the researcher and to made them not feel bored while teaching learning process. Besides that, there were some problems occured such as some of the students did not pay full attention while teaching learning process and during peer review session that sometimes disturbed the other students. But the researcher always admonished them, approached and motivated them to learn seriously. It made the students did better while teaching learning process from meeting to meeting. The complete data of diary notes can be seen in Appendix E.
d.        Interview
       There were two interview sessions conducted. The first interview between the researcher and the English teacher (collaborator) showed that students’ ability in writing was still low, considering that writing is a productive skill influenced by some elements such as vocabulary, grammar, organization, spelling, and punctuation. Sometimes, the students were also had no idea to write. The English teacher taught his students rarely use different teaching techniques. He just gave the materials based on their textbook and explained to them. The English teacher also never applied peer review technique before. The first interview of the researcher with five students from that class showed that four of them liked learning English but one of them did not. Vocabulary, grammar, and no idea to write are their difficulties in writing a text.
       The second interview with the English teacher showed that peer review technique is a good technique in teaching writing. The English teacher is interested in apllying it for other genres of writing. The students also are interested in doing peer review. By doing peer review technique, they knew their mistakes or weaknesses from their writing and how to revise it. The interview data can be seen in Appendix F.

3.         Research Account
a.      Cycle I
       The first cycle was conducted in four meetings. It was started by explanning about recount text including the definition, social function, generic structures and language features. In the last meeting of cycle I, the students did peer review in pairs from their writing task given by the researcher from the previous meeting. It became the students’ writing score in Cycle I by applying peer review technique. The detailed procedure of cycle I is explained as follows:
1)      Planning
    In this phase, the lesson plans for four meetings were arranged. The reseacher prepared teaching materials, designing peer review sheet and the instruments for collecting data, that are observation sheet, diary notes, and interview.
2)      Action
    In action, the researcher implemented all the point that planned. Firstly, teacher gave apperception to the students by asking what they have known and heard about recount text. Teacher also motivated students the importance of writing English for academic and occupational purpose. Then, the students were taught about recount text (the definition, social function, generic structures and language features). The students were given recount texts. They were asked to analyze the texts in terms of generic strucures and langugae features in pairs. The result of pair discussion was discussed together. The students were also explained about peer review technique including the purpose and the procedure of doing it. Next, the students divided in pairs. Then, they did peer review on their writing task given by teacher in previous meeting. The result of peer review discussion in pairs (final draft) was handed in to the teacher. They were serious and active enough follow the rules.
3)      Observation
    By observing teaching learning process in cycle I, it was found out that cycle I was less successful. Most of preparation planned was done well in this cycle although some students did not make good cooperation, like did not paid full attention and made noise while teaching learning process, but the overall condition ran well.
4)      Reflection
    Having observed all the data, it was necessary to conduct cycle II. There were still many students who did not get score up to 70 and were not too serious and active in teaching learning process and tend to be noisy in the classroom. Dealing with the purpose of the researcher to improve students’ achievement in writing recount text, the researcher conducted cycle II by repeating the steps in cycle I and gave more threatment in order to get the better result in cycle II.

b.      Cycle II
       Based on the reflection of cycle I, the researcher would like to conduct cycle II. It was done in three meetings.
1)        Planning
       In planning phase of cycle II, the activities done were similar with the planning in cycle I.
2)        Action
       In this phase the teacher was more active in monitoring all the students, especially while peer review sessions. The teacher also explained about recount text, its generic structures, language features (simple past tense)  and peer review technique more clearly. More motivation and approach were given to the students whose writing ability were still low. The activities in this cycle ran better than cycle I. They were more active and serious while teaching learning process. They could do peer review better in this cycle.
3)        Observation
       From the observation of this cycle, the students were still spirited in learning recount text. Teaching learning process ran better than the previous cycle. The students were more active and seriously in teaching learning process, especially during peer review session. The students’ understanding about recount text and how to give comments and revisions on their pair’s work also was better than before.
4)        Reflection
       After cycle II had completely done, the result showed that there was a significant improvement for most of students. The students’ writing score and teaching learning process were better than in cycle I. It could be concluded that peer review technique could really help the students in writing recount texts and made learning writing more enjoyable in the class.



C.      Research Findings
The result of this research indicated that there was an improvement of students’ scores in writing recount texts through peer review technique. It was proved by the data, which showed that the mean of the students in cycle II (81.4) was higher than in cycle I (73.8) and also in Orientation test (59.7). It was also proved from the percentage of the students who got scores up to the standard minimum score (70) that the percentage in cycle II (95%) was higher than in cycle I (65%) and also in Orientation test (20%).
The researcher also analyzed the qualitative data to support this research findings. The qualitative data were taken from observation sheets, questionnaire sheet, diary notes and interview to know how peer review technique could improve the students’ ability in writing recount text.
The observation sheets indicated that there were some progress that was shown in every meeting, especially in the second cycle. The students were more enjoyable in learning. Teacher’s performance and students’ attitudes, responses and understanding became better.
Then, the questionnaire sheet showed that peer review technique really had helped students in writing recount texts. Most of them strongly agreed that their second draft was better than the first one by means of peer review. English writing became more interesting through peer review technique.
Next, the diary notes indicated that the situation of teaching learning process was better from the first meeting to the last one. The students were more active and serious when teaching learning process, especially during peer review session. They paid good attention to the teacher and did all the task given well.
Last, interview showed that peer review technique is an effective technique that could improve students’ writing recount achievement and it was needed to apply this technique in the writing process.
Based on the result of quantitative and qualitative data, it was found out that peer review technique had successfully improved students’ writing recount achievement.


Subscribe to receive free email updates: