modifying song lyrics to improve students
Post on 05-Apr-2018
224 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
1/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Improving EL 4 Students Mastery of Parts of Speech by Modifying Song Lyrics into
Their Own Versions
Parawati Siti Sondari
LB LIA BUAH BATU
ABSTRACT
This research was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of song lyrics to improve the
EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech. This research used pre-experimental design, the
intact group design, as the students were placed in classes on the basis of placement test
(Hatch and Farhady, 1982) and compared two groups; experimental (my EL 4 students who
modified the song lyrics into their own versions) and control group (another EL 4 class that
didnt use any songs). The data were gained from pre-test and post-test. Prior to starting the
treatment, a test was prepared as the pre-test and post-test. The test consisted of 16
multiple-choice items of 4 parts of speech (nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs) presented
in a text in order to provide context. After some treatments the result showed that the
experimental group had better progress than the control group. Hence, it was concluded
that the contribution of song lyrics in teaching parts of speech to elementary 4 students ledto a higher level of parts of speech mastery improvement.
BACKGROUND
The most difficult part of utilizing lexicon is in terms of form and function. Especially to
the elementary students as they discovered that knowing the meaning of the lexicon is
clearly insufficient. As teachers, we need to demonstrate that there is some order and
coherence in lexicalization (Quirk and Stein, 1990). Thus, teacher must come up with the
suitable means to teach the lexical items which meet the prerequisite for learning grammar
as proposed by Thornbury (1999); attention, understanding, memory, and motivation. One
of the means that meet such prerequisites is song lyrics.
1
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
2/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Songs have good reputation as an effective teaching material. Lynch (2002) remarks,
songs are usually directed to the native-speaking population so they usually contain
contemporary vocabulary, idioms and expressions. Baoan (2008) also states, Songs not
only can motivate students but also contain rich linguistic information, including
pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, rhetoric and language sense.
According to Lynch (2005), EFL, English as a foreign language, ESL, English as a
Second language and foreign language teachers should all consider using songs as a regular
part of their classroom activities. Teachers need to come up with various methods in
teaching, and songs have so much to offer to be utilized in the classroom.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
In this research, the following questions are posed:
1. Are song lyrics effective to improve EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech?
2. Which parts of speech improves the most?
ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS
A. Assumptions
1. The test used as the pre-test and post-test is considered suitable to measure EL 4students mastery of parts of speech.
2. The experimental group and the control group are considered having relatively
similar ability in their mastery of parts of speech prior to the treatment.
B. Hypothesis
There are significant differences between the experimental group and the control group
METHODOLOGY/PROCEDURE
This research is aimed to investigate the effectiveness of song lyrics in improving EL 4
students mastery of parts of speech. It is also aimed to find out which parts of speech
improve significantly after the song lyrics are given. The parts of speech are limited only to
four parts of speech, namely noun, adjective, verb, and adverb in accordance with EL 4
grammar focus on lessons 7, 9, and 11.
2
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
3/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
A. Research Method
The method of this research is pre-experimental study, the intact group design (Hatch and
Farhady, 1982). The formula is:
G1
(Experimental group)
X
(Treatment)
T2
(Post-test)
G2
(Control group)
T2
(Post-test)
Pre-test (attached on the appendix) was administered to both groups before the treatment in
order to know the students schemata on parts of speech (on August 23rd for the
experimental group and the 26th for the control group). The experimental group, consisting
of 16 students, was given treatment, which is the song lyrics, and post-test (on September
13th). The control group, which consists of 25 students, only got post-test (on September
9th) without treatment.
According to Sujana (1989), the comparing test of mean between experimental and control
group, which is calculated by using statistical analysis (t-test) where the level of
significance () is 0.05, requires the investigation on the normal distribution assumption in
order to justify that the changes occurred are caused by the treatment. Homogeneity of
variances also needs to be calculated by using One-Way ANOVA in order to prove
whether both groups means population is homogenous or not. Conclusion was finally
drawn based on this t-test by comparing the improvements of both groups.
B. The Song Lyrics as the Treatment
The song lyrics utilized were taken from www.azlyrics.com. There song lyrics were
Nothing Really Matters by Madonna, My Heart Will Go On by Celine Dion, I Have A
Dream by Westlife,Im Like A Birdby Nelly Furtado (the sample of songs were attachedon the appendix). These songs were given some blanks on particular parts that enable the
students to change the original message of the songs, the titles were changed and the
context of the songs was also subjected to change.
C. Procedures or Techniques of Teaching Parts of Speech by Using Song Lyrics
3
http://www.azlyrics.com/http://www.azlyrics.com/http://www.azlyrics.com/ -
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
4/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
The followings are the techniques in using the song lyrics to teach parts of speech.
The first treatment on Saturday, August 30th The second treatment on Saturday, August 30th
Pre-writing activity
Analyze the parts of speech in a song
entitledBad Actress by Def leppard(attached on the appendix) while
listening to the song.
Fill out the derivational chart of those
words.
Discuss the analysis result.
Whilst-writing activity
Analyze the original songNothing
Really Matters in pairs.
Fill out the blanks on the song while
listening to the song in pairs.
Post-writing activity
Give feed back and correction to the
modified lyrics.
Pre-writing activity
Listen to the songNothing Really Matters
and fill out the blanks. Analyze the parts of speech of the words
in the blanks.
Fill out the derivational chart of those
words.
Discuss the analysis result.
Whilst-writing activity
Analyze the original songMy Heart WillGo On individually.
Fill up the blanks on the song while
listening to the song.
Post-writing activity Give feed back and correction to the
modified lyrics.
The third treatment on Saturday, September 6th The fourth treatment on Saturday, September 6th
Pre-writing activity
Listen to the songMy Heart Will Go
On and fill out the blanks.
Analyze the parts of speech of the
words in the blanks.
Fill out the derivational chart of those
words.
Discuss the analysis result.Whilst-writing activity
Analyze the original songI Have A
Dream in pairs.
Fill out the blanks on the song while
listening to the song in pairs.
Post-writing activity
Give feed back and correction to the
modified lyrics.
Ask the students to read aloud their
modified songs.
Pre-writing activity
Listen to the songI Have A Dream and fill
out the blanks.
Analyze the parts of speech of the words
in the blanks.
Fill out the derivational chart of those
words.
Discuss the analysis result.Whilst-writing activity
Analyze the original songIm Like A Bird
individually.
Fill up the blanks on the song while
listening to the song.
Post-writing activity
Give feed back and correction to the
modified lyrics.
RESULT OF THE STUDY
In testing the hypothesis, several steps need to be undertaken. The first is to figure out the
normality of distribution of the data, the second is to find out the homogeneity of variances
and the last one is the t-test. These steps are inferential statistics which is intended to prove
4
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
5/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
the hypothesis. Due to the limitation of the number of pages, the detailed steps are attached
on the appendix.
A. The Pre-test and Post-Test between The Experimental and The
Control Group
A. 1. The Experimental Group and Control Group Pre-test
The normality distributions of the pre-test results of the two groups were calculated using
Kolgomorov-Smirnov on SPSS program. The pre-test results of both groups, as shown on
table 1, are normally distributed as the value of probability is more than the alpha level
0.05.
Table 1. The Normality Distribution of Pre-test Scores
Group P-Level Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) Data Distribution
Experimental 0.05 0.627 Normal
Control 0.930
The homogeneity of variances of the pre-test scores were calculated by using One-Way
ANOVA and Ho (the scores of both groups have the same variances) was used.
Table 2. The Homogeneity of Variances of Pre-test Scores
Source DF SS MS F ratio FcriticalBetween Groups 1 6.244 6.244 1.230 4.08
Within Groups 39 198.000 5.077
The table showed that the variance is homogenous, as F ratio is less that F critical (1.230 0.05). It shows that there is still no difference between both groups. However,
this result does not indicate that the treatment utterly fails. In order to see the effect of the
treatment clearly, a comparison between the pre-test and post-test scores of each group
need to be conducted.
B. Comparing the Experimental and Control Group Means
B. 1. The Experimental Group Means
The pre-test and the post-test results of the experimental group are compared in order to see
the effect of the treatment towards parts of speech mastery.
Table 7. Experimental Group Means Scores
Group N Means
Pre-test Post-test
Experimental Group 16 8.00 9.31
Based on the table above, we can see that there is a significant difference between the two
means scores, which indicates that the treatment works. In order to see whether the increase
of the mean scores is significant or not, paired t-test was conducted.
Table 8. The Paired T-test of the Experimental Group
7
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
8/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Paired Samples Statistics
8,0000 16 1,71270 ,42817
9,3125 16 1,66208 ,41552
before treatment
after treatment
Pair
1
Mean N Std. Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Paired Samples Correlations
16 ,047 ,863before treatment
& after treatment
Pair
1
N Correlation Sig.
Paired S amples Test
-1 ,3125 2,330 0 6 ,58251 -2,5541 -,0709 -2,253 15 ,040before t reatment
- after treatment
Pair
1
M ea n Std . D ev ia tio n
Std. Error
Me an Lowe r Upp er
95% Conf idence
Interval o f the
Dif ference
Paired Dif ferences
t d f Sig . (2-ta iled)
If the probability score is less than the alpha level 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis
(there is no difference between the experimental and the control group) and accept the
alternative hypothesis (there are differences between the experimental and the control
group). Based on the table above, we can see that the probability score is less than the
alpha level (0.040
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
9/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Paired Samples Statistics
8,80 25 2,533 ,507
9,80 25 1,848 ,370
test before treatment
test after treatment
Pair1
Mean N Std. Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Paired Samples Correlations
25 ,400 ,047test before treatment
& test after treatment
Pair
1
N Correlation Sig.
Pai red S amples Test
-1 ,0 0 2,4 6 6 ,4 93 -2,0 2 ,0 2 -2,027 24 ,0 54test before trea tmen t
- test after treatment
Pair
1
M e an S td . D e via tio n
Std. Error
Me a n Lo w er Up p e r
95 % C o n f id en c e
Interval of the
D i f ference
Pa i red D i f ference s
t d f S ig . (2-ta ile d )
The table above showed that the probability value is higher than the alpha level (0.054>
0.05), so the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that in the control group there is no
difference between the two means scores.
C. Comparing the Parts of Speech
In order to answer the second research question, the means scores of the pre-test and post-
test of each parts of speech of the experimental group are compared. The parts of speech
are ranked based on the mean difference of the two tests.
Table 11. The Comparison of the Means Scores of Each Part Of Speech
No. Parts of Speech Means Scores Mean Difference
Pre-test Post-test
1. Adverb 1.63 2.06 1.43
2. Adjective 2.31 2.88 0.57
3. Noun 1.81 2.38 0.57
4. Verbs 2.19 2.50 0.31
As it is shown on the table above, adverb has the highest increase, while adjective
and noun have the same mean difference. Verb is at the bottom of the table as it has the
lowest increase.
9
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
10/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
CONCLUSION
This research is aimed to improve EL 4 students mastery of parts of speech in terms of
using the right form of the words in accordance to the function and the meaning. The
research was conducted by giving song lyrics as the treatment and utilized pre-test and
post-test to measure the improvements. In order to see whether the treatment works,
another class was chosen as the control group which they didnt get any treatment. The
result was there is a difference between the experimental and the control group. Therefore,
the hypothesis is accepted and the first research question is answered that the song lyrics is
considered effective. The difference is in terms of the improvement that both groups
achieved. Despite the fact that both groups had almost the same means scores on the post-
test and that both groups were considered equal in proficiency based on the pre-test, theexperimental group achieved significant improvement as the paired t-test value is less than
the alpha level (0.040.05). This fact explains that modifying song lyrics into different version can help
EL 4 students to improve their analytical skills in using parts of speech. Another result is
the song lyrics mostly help the students in improving their analysis and use of adverbs.
In a nutshell, modifying song lyrics into different version is considered a pretty much
helpful aid to improve El 4 students morpho-syntactic skills. It offers loads of fun,
creativity, and critical discussion along the process. Expectantly, this research will spark
teachers willingness to apply this treatment in the classroom.
REFERENCES
10
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
11/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Baoan, Wang. (2008). Application of popular English Songs in EFL Classroom
Teaching. Available at http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htm.
Explore 1 Book (2006). Who Would Have Thought
Hatch, Evelyn and Farhady, Hossein. (1982). Research Design and Statistics for Applied
Linguistics. London: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
M Lynch, Larry. (2005). 9 Reasons Why You Should Use Songs to Teach English as a
Foreign Language. Available at http://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com
M. Lynch, Larry (2002). Using Pop Songs to Improve Language Listening
Comprehension Skills. Available at http://EnzineAarticles.com
Quirk, Randolph and Stein, Gabrielle. (1990). English in Use. England: Longman.
Thornbury, Scott. (1999). How to Teach Grammar. England: Longman
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 The test as pre-test and post-test
Appendix 2 The pre-test and post-test results
Appendix 3 The pre-test and post-test calculations
Appendix 4 Parts of speech calculations based on pre-test and post-test results
Appendix 5 Song samples; song lyrics as analysis tools and modified song lyrics
Appendix 1 The test as pre-test and post-test
11
http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htmhttp://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com/http://enzineaarticles.com/http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jun08/less03.htmhttp://bettereflteacher.blogspot.com/http://enzineaarticles.com/ -
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
12/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Steven SpielbergA Director with Numerous Achievements
Steven Spielberg is surely one of the most [1] (a) successive movie directors of all
(b) succeed
(c) successfultime. He has been directing various kinds of moviesfrom science fiction to heavy drama.
Of course, [2] (a) succession never comes to a person overnight. It has to be
(b) success(c) successful
built over years, with [3] (a) patient and persistence.
(b) patiently
(c) patienceAs a boy, Spielberg was [4 ] (a) actual a slow reader. However, he had a gift for
(b) actually
(c) actuality
storytelling. He just loved telling stories. That is probably why he was [5 ] (a) eager to(b) eagerly
(c) eagerness
make his own films. Spielbergs parents were not aware of their sons talent. All the
probably knew was how much he enjoyed spending time in front of the television set and
playing around with a camera.Spielberg made his first film with script and actors at age 12. Who starred in it? His
three sisters did! He liked using them in his films because he could [6] (a) exploitation
(b) exploit(c) exploited
the purpose of telling a good story. After making around four homemade movies, he themin any way. He could kill them over and over, all for learned how [7] (a) powerful a film
(b) powerfully
(c) power
could be. So, he began to take his hobby [8] (a) serious. Somehow, he knew it could(b) seriously
(c) seriousness
become his future career.
Spielbergs parents [9 ] (a) divorce when he was still a teenager. Although(b) divorcee
(c) divorced
he was really hurt, he was not discouraged. In fact, he made use of the tragedy as sadthemes in many of his films.
Later, Spielberg moved to Northern California. There, he continued making his
movies. He made Firelight at age 16. It had one showing in a Phoenix movie-house.However, making that film made him neglect his studies, so his [10] (a) graduation were
(b) graded
(c) grades
really bad.
12
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
13/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
After graduating from high school, Spielberg studied at Cal State, Long Beach.
During his studies, he made Amblin. It was a small project, but it changed his [11](a) live.
(b) life.(c) lives.
Amblin won awards at the Venice and Atlanta film festivals. For this success,
Spielberg[12 ]
(a) signature a seven-year contract with Universal Studios. He then(b) signing
(c) signed
[13] (a) professionally made movies like Jaws, raiders of the Lost Ark, The Goonies(b) professional
(c) profession
and E.T..
After setting up his own film company, Dreamworks, Spielberg [14](a) continuous(b) continued
(c) continuously
making more successful movies, such as A.I., Hook, Jurassic Park, Schindlers List, and
The Terminal. Spielberg got an Oscar and The National Society of Film Critics Award asbest director for Schindlers List. It was a masterpiece! Saving Private Ryan was another
masterpiece [15] (a) brilliance made by Spielberg.(b) brilliant
(c) brilliantly
Besides being an outstanding moviemaker, Steven Spielberg is alsoa [16] (a) wonder , loving father. For him, directing a movie is easier than managing
(b) wonderfully
(c) wonderful
a family.
Appendix 2 The pre-test and post-test results
13
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
14/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
A. The pre-test results
The Experimental GroupNo. Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tota
1. Syifa 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 7
2. Sisca 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 9
3. Siti 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7
4. Nuraida 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8
5. Ahdiyanti 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 12
6. Silmi 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 8
7. Juniar 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 9
8. Tiur 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7
9. Lulu 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7
10. Vicky 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 10
11. Aini 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8
12. Ahsan 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 10
13. Raja 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
14. Wandi 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 8
15. Relo 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 6
16. Aji 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7
N Total 6 11 10 10 8 4 12 13 15 1 8 11 4 4 0 11
The Control GroupNo. Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tota
1. Widianti 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 9
2. Fahmi H 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8
3. Ryan M. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7
4. Diani D. 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 8
5. Yasmin 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14
6. Miral M. 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 6
7. Inggi 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 6
8. Frida P. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 8
9. Aulia G. 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 7
10. M. Aliyana 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6
11. Disha M. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 9
12. Rizki J. S. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 9
13. Fahreza L. 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6
14. Mutiara 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4
15. Chita F. A. 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 6
16. Rindu P. 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 10
17. Juniko K 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 11
18. Delsita Y. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 11
19. Andreas N 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 10
20. Okeu A. P. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 12
21. Ira Melyani 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 13
22. Ratna D. 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 12
23. Rika P. E. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 9
24. Indriani D. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 8
25. Gilang A. 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 11
N Total 13 15 8 23 21 8 25 33 29 14 23 28 30 29 22 35
B. The post-test results
14
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
15/21
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
16/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Appendix 3 The pre-test and post-test calculations
A. Pre-test calculations
The Experimental Group- The Normality distributions
16
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
17/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
16
8,0000
1,71270
,188
,188-,155
,750
,627
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Normal Parameters a,b
Absolute
PositiveNegative
Most Extreme
Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
PRETEST
Test distribution is Normal.a.
Calculated fromdata.b.
- The Homogeneity of variances
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
pretest result
3,556 1 39 ,067
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
ANOVA
pretest result
6,244 1 6,244 1,230 ,274
198,000 39 5,077
204,244 40
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Sumof
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
The Control Group
- The Normality distributions
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
25
8,8000
2,53311
,109
,109
-,095
,543
,930
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Normal Parameters a,b
Absolute
Positive
Negative
Most Extreme
Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
PRETEST
Test distribution is Normal.a.
Calculated from data.b.
- The Homogeneity of variances
17
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
18/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
pretest score
3,315 1 40 ,076
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
ANOVA
pretest result
6,244 1 6,244 1,230 ,274
198,000 39 5,077
204,244 40
Between Gro ups
Within Groups
Total
Sum ofSquares df Mean Square F Sig.
B. Post-test calculations
The Experimental Group
- The Normality distributions
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
16
9,3125
1,66208
,223
,155
-,223
,892
,404
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Normal Parametersa,b
Absolute
Positive
Negative
Most Extreme
Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
Asymp. Sig. (2-taile d)
POSTTEST
Test distribution is Normal.a.
Calculated from data.b.
- The Homogeneity of variances
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
POSTTEST
,281 1 39 ,599
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
18
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
19/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
ANOVA
POSTTEST
2,319 1 2,319 ,733 ,397
123,438 39 3,165
125,756 40
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Sum ofSquares df Mean Square F Sig.
The Control Group
- The Normality distributions
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
25
9,8000
1,84842
,187
,187
-,163
,937
,344
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Normal Parameters a,b
Absolute
Positive
Negative
Most Extreme
Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
POSTTEST
Test distribution is Normal.a.
Calculated from data.b.
- The Homogeneity of variances
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
POSTTEST
,281 1 39 ,599
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
ANOVA
POSTTEST
2,319 1 2,319 ,733 ,397
123,438 39 3,165125,756 40
Between Groups
Within GroupsTotal
Sum ofSquares df Mean Square F Sig.
Appendix 4 Parts of speech calculations based on pre-test and post-test results
19
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
20/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
Adjectives, items number 1, 5, 7, 16
Nouns, items number 2, 3, 10, 11
Verbs, items number 6, 9, 12, 14Adverbs, items number 4, 8, 13, 15
No. Name Pre-test Post-test
Adj N V Adv Adj N V Adv
1. Syifa 3 - 3 1 3 4 3 -
2. Sisca 3 1 2 2 3 3 - 1
3. Siti 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 2
4. Nuraida 1 3 2 2 4 3 1 3
5. Ahdiyanti 4 2 3 3 3 2 3 2
6. Silmi 2 2 2 2 3 1 - 2
7. Juniar 2 3 2 2 4 3 1 3
8. Tiur 1 3 2 1 1 2 3 2
9. Lulu 1 3 2 1 4 3 2 2
10. Vicky 4 3 3 - 3 2 3 3
11. Aini 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 3
12. Ahsan 3 2 3 2 3 1 4 1
13. Raja 2 1 1 1 4 2 - 2
14. Wandi 2 1 3 2 3 - 3 1
15. Relo 2 - 3 1 2 3 3 3
16. Aji 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 4
N Total 36 29 35 26 48 38 32 34
Appendix 5 Song samples; song lyrics as analysis tools and modified song lyrics
20
-
8/2/2019 Modifying Song Lyrics to Improve Students
21/21
Classroom Action researchTerm 3, 2008
top related