improving the students’ vocabulary mastery in …
TRANSCRIPT
i
IMPROVING THE STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY MASTERY IN
WRITING THROUGH WORD ANALOGY TECHNIQUE (A Quasi-Experimental Research Study at the Eleventh Grade of SMAN 8 Pinrang)
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Makassar
Muhammadiyah University in Part Fulfillment Of the Requirement for the
Degree of Educationin English Department
BY:
ABDUL RAHMAN
10535 3812 09
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR
2014
ABSTRACT
ABDUL RAHMAN, 2014. English Education Department Faculty of Teacher
Training and Education, Makassar Muhammadiyah University. Improving the
students’ Vocabulary Mastery in Writing through Word Analogy Technique at the
Eleventh Grade Students of SMN 8 Pinrang. Supervised by HM. Basri Dalle and
Nunung Anugrawati.
The objective of the research was to know the improvement of the
students’ vocabulary mastery in writing in terms of noun and adjective through
Word Analogy Technique at the eleventh grade of SMAN 8 Pinrang.
This research used A Quasi experimental design that consisted of
Experimental class and Controlled class. The research population was the eleventh
grade. The total number of population was 60 students. The instrument of data
collection for this research was a written test. This research was used to measure
the effectiveness of using Word Analogy Technique in improving writing ability
in terms of noun and adjective.
The research findings indicated that; (1) t- value was greater than t–table
where 42.98 > 2.0017, it was proved the hypothesis that there was a significant
difference between students who were taught writing using Word Analogy
Technique and who weren’t; (2) The mean score obtained by the students through
pre-test was 11.03 and post-test was 14.03 in experimental class while the mean
score of pre-test was 10.03 and post-test in controlled class was 11.43. Based on
the research findings, it could be concluded that Using Word Analogy Technique
was effective in improving the students’ vocabulary mastery in writing.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Alhamdulillai Robbil A’lamin, the writer expresses his sincere gratitude to
the almighty God, Allah SWT, who has given guidance, mercy, and good health.
So that he could finish writing this thesis. Salam and Shalawat are delivered to the
final, chosen, religious messenger, Muhammad S.A.W.
The writer would like to express his deepest prost profound and gratitude
to his parents, his father Sunre S.Pd,I, his mother Nurhayati , his grandfather Ali,
and his grandmother Hanapia (alm) for their prayer, financial, motivation and
sacrificed. His big thanks for all his lovely sister Suriani and brother Muh. Akbar,
who always pray to Allah SWT for his success.
The writer realizes that in carrying out the research and writing this thesis,
many people had contributed their valuable suggestion, guidance, assistance, and
advice for the completion of this thesis. Therefore he would like to thank them:
1. Thanks a lot for my little family who always give me motivation, praying,
spirit from he was child until now.
2. Dr. H. Irwan Akib, M. Pd., the rector of the Makassar Muhammadiyah
University for his advices during him study at the University.
3. Dr. A. Syukri Syamsuri, M. Hum., the dean of teacher training and
education.
4. Erwin Akib, S.Pd., M.Pd., the head of English Education Department of
FKIP UNISMUH Makassar, who gave me valuable authorities and
suggestion in doing thesis.
5. My greatest thanks are due to my first consultant Prof. HM. Basri Dalle,
and Nunung Anugrawati S, S.Pd., M. Pd., as the second consultant who
had given their valuable time and patient, to support assistance and
guidance to finish this thesis.
6. The mean and the staff and all lectures of the FKIP UNISMUH especially
to the lectures of English Department who taught him for many years.
7. H. Bahctiar M.H The head master of SMAN 8 Pinrang (SMAN 1
Lembang) and the teacher of English Mr. Kasim and all students in class
Exact One and Exact Two of SMAN 8 Pinrang who become his object in
conducting research in academic year 2014/2015.
8. Special thanks to Ika Purwinda who always help me her hand when I need
it, and thanks to all my best friends in Elang Community, HW, EDSA,
KMP Unismuh, KPMP Lembang, MAHAPALA, Ikatan Alumni SMAN 1
Lembang, Bumi Palem Occupant and all my friends in A class English
Department 2009.
9. Finally, for all everybody that could not be mentioned one by one, may
Allah almighty bless us now and forever.
Makassar, 27 April 2014
The Writer
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
Writing is one of the language skills which is very important in language
teaching and learning process. We have to know about vocabularies because they
are very important in composing a good writing.
In writing we need to master vocabulary because vocabulary is very
important in learning any language, including English. When we listen, speak,
read, and write, we use thounsands of vocabularies. Today, methodologists and
linguists have increasingly been turning their attention to vocabulary, stress its
importance in language teaching and reassessing some of the ways in which it is
taught and learned. For many years vocabulary was seen as an incidental to the
main purpose of language teaching. Students with inaquate vocabulary cannot
master language effectively as Harmer (1991: 85) states that if language structures
make up the skeleton of language, than it is vocabulary that provides the vital
organs and the flesh.
Referring to the experience of first language acquisition, learning and
teaching vocabulary is so important to master or use the language. This ability,
vocabulary mastery can be gained just through the environmental learning.
Children can have deeply implanted vocabulary, which are usually heard and said
in their daily life.
2
Many students mastery of vocabulary face difficulties in comprehending
the text because they do not have a good command of vocabulary. Certainly, we
realize that the mastery of vocabulary is a difficult task to do, especially English
vocabulary is complex, and this complexity brings difficulties to students who try
to master it. The difficulties may arise from the word it self and it is hard to
overcome. This is probably caused by the words from, various meaning and word
choice. Realizing such difficulties, it is not enough for English teacher to prepare
the students with only word list and ask them to memorize it, but they expected to
provide them with rich and exciting exercise and technique that can help them
enlarge and master the vocabulary quickly and independently.
There are two components that we can view in mastering and possessing
vocabulary. The first is the teacher. The teacher should find an effective effort to
improve students’ vocabulary through presenting learning material in the
classroom. The second is the students, in the case, there are some factors that
many cause students lacking vocabulary motivation, interest, and insufficient
exercises, lack of assignment and poor techniques and strategies for class
interaction by the teacher. So, one of the factors that can make students lack of
vocabulary is the poor technique and strategies used by teacher in class
interaction, especially in introducing new words. (Harmer 1992:1) stated Foreign
language learners and teachers inspired by these convincing and guiding words
have focused on innovative methods both for presenting, practicing, organizing
new words and making them accessible and memorable
3
Remembering that vocabulary in writing is very needed in learning a
language, the writer tries to introduce a new technique used word analogies.
Words analogies allow students to link familiar concept with news ideas, priors
experiences with new information. Therefore writer is going to conduct research
under the title “Improving he students’ vocabulary mastery in writing through
word analogies technique”.
B. Problem Statement
Related to the background above, the writer formulates the research
questions as follows :
1. How is the students’ vocabulary mastery in writing using word analogy
Technique in terms of nouns at Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Negeri 8
Pinrang?
2. How is the students’ vocabulary mastery in writing using word analogy
Technique in terms of adjectives at Eleventh Grade Students of SMA
Negeri 8 Pinrang?
C. Objective of the Study
In relating to the problem statements above, the objectives of the study
are to find out:
1. The students’ vocabulary mastery in writing using word analogy Technique in
term of nouns.
2. The students’ vocabulary mastery in writing using word analogy Technique in
of term adjectives
4
D. Significance of the Study
This research is expected to be piece of information for the English
teacher to improve the students’ vocabulary mastery in writing. Because it can
make the teacher easily help the students to improve their vocabulary mastery
when they are writing. Also, it is helpful contribution for further researchers who
are interested in teaching and learning English.
E. Scope of the Study
The scope of the study is restricted to find out the effectiveness of using
word analogies technique to improve students’ vocabulary mastery in writing and
The kinds of vocabulary presented in this research are nouns and adjective
because they are the centre of the sentences when we are writing a paper.
5
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES
A. Word Analogy Technique
Word analogy technique as a technique to throw away the complaint
high grades, low ability for effective and efficient language teaching. Analogies
are used to assist students in engaging in higher level word comprehension and
logical abilities. Students must analyze simple to complex relationships between
facts or concepts and use higher level thinking skills as they comprehend the
significance of analogies. Analogies are an effective means to connect familiar
concepts with new information. They are also designed to help students examine
the multiple meanings of words and concepts
1. Definition of Word Analogy Technique
Rackner (2000: 1) states: “An analogy is a type of word problem that of
ten appears on standardized tests. It is made up of two word pairs, like this: your
goal in solving an analogy is to find a word that correctly completes the second
pair. At first glance the words in an analogy may seem to have nothing to do with
each other, but the words are always logically related”.
Danniel (2001: 1) argues that An analogy is a comparison showing
resemblance between two are more cutities; calling attention to these likenesses is
to draw an analogy. Analogies help people to relate known things to unknown
5
6
things. They are also argumentative tools used in debate that are useful in creating
perspectives by relating to similar, possibly unrelated things.
Marks (1996-2003: 1) says that an analogy is statement in wich to things
are compared because they have something is common, sometimes the two things
are the some in some way.Sometimes they are opposite.
Danniel (2000: 1) defines that an analogy is a comparison showing
resemblance between two or more entities, calling attention to these likenesses is
to draw an analogy.analogies help people to related known things to unknown
things. They are also argumentative tools used in debat that are useful in creating
persvectives by relating to similar, possibly unrelated things.
Dell (1999: 1) states that analogies is a term that means word
relationship. Analogies are like a word puzzle solving analogiest help you develop
critied Thinking Skills.
So can conclude that an analogy is a literary device or technique that a
writer or storyteller uses to compare two things that have certain similarities but
are otherwise unlike. An analogy is a comparison of certain similarities between
things which are otherwise unlike.
7
2. Types of Analogy
Rackner (2000: 1) argues that an analogy often have one of following
relationships;
Antonyms; Words that have opposite meanings,
as in HOT: COLD
Synonyms; Words that have same or similar
meanings as in UNHAPPY: SAD
Descriptive; One word describes the other word, as
in FAST: CHEETAH
Part to whole; One word is an item in PIECE:PUZZLE
8
Item to category, one word is an item in the
category named by the other, as in BASEBALL:
SPORT BALLS
Table 2.1 Rackner (2000: 1) outlines the following word analogy types;
Types of Analogy
Part of whole Battery ; flashlight ; ; hard ; drive
Cause and effect Fatigue ;yawning ; ; itching ; scratching
Person to situation Mother ; home ; ; teacher ; school
Synonym Obese ; fat ; ; slender ; thin
Antonym Poverty ; wealth ; ; sickness ; health
Geography Chicago; Illinois; Denver; Colorado.
Measurement Pound ; kilogram ; ; quarter ; liter
Time March ; spring ; ; December ; winter
3. Solving Analogy
Rackner (2002: 2) argues that solving analogies is terrific way to sharpen
your thinking skills and prepare for standardized tests. An analogy is a type of
word problem that consists of two word pairs. To solve the analogy you must
find a word that correctly completes the second pair. At first glance, the words
9
in an analogy may seem to have nothing to do with each other, but the words
are always logically related. The first pair of words has a relationship similar
to the second pair of words. To solve the analogy, you need to figure out that
relationship.
Example:
- Read the analogy like this: Graceful is to clumsy as hot is to „blank‟.
- Then ask yourself: what is the relationship between graceful and
clumsy?
- These words have opposite meanings. They are antonyms so the second
pair of words must also be antonyms.
The following procedure is helpful in completing analogies:
1. Decide what relationship exists between the first two words.
2. Put the words in the context of a sentence: A finger is a part of a hand.
3. Determine which of the choices presented shows a similar relationship.
4. Substitute the selected words in the original sentence to verify choice.
The basic structure of an analogy is the sentence relationship. They are
usually written with the symbol: ("is to") and :: ("as"). Thus, "shoe : foot :: hat
: head" reads "Shoe is to foot as hat is to head."
B. Writing
Writing in English means fill the gap that exists between the ability to
express ideas, feeling and opinion. It is widely admitted that is a crucial means of
communication that cannot be separated from human life. The ability to
10
communicate thoughts and ideas through writing helps students become
successful, not only in school but throughout their lives. In order to communicate
effectively, students must organize and develop ideas in a logical, coherent, and
interesting manner that is easy for the reader to follow and understand.
1. What is writing?
Heard & Tucker2000: 44) stated that “Writing is a continuous process of
thinking, organizing, re-thinking and re-organizing. Writing is not a finished
product. Writing involves a number of steps or activities. All writers go through
the same process, whether they are writing a short letter to a friend or a
dissertation for a doctorate degree.
When we write, we use graphic symbols, that is; letters or combination of
letters which relate to the sounds we make when we speak. On one level, then,
writing can be said to be the act of forming these symbols; making marks on a flat
surface of some kind. But writing is clearly much more than the production of
graphic symbols, just as speech is more than production of sounds. The symbols
have to be arranged, according to certain conventions, to form words, and words
have to be arranged to form sentences, although again we can be said to be
“writing” if we are merely making lists of words, as in inventories of items such
as shopping lists.
Harmer (1991: 30) argued that “Writing is a productive skill which
involves though and emotions. It is a medium of communication. Writing
cannot be mastered at once but it needs practice. The practice may include
11
imitating or copying words and sentence from the given ideas or expressing
free ideas based on the writer knowledge experience and point of view”.
Writing is thinking of paper. Thinking is a mood at work, finding facts,
seeing relationship, testing the truth of them, researching conclusion of them,
and forming opinion. In other sense, writing can be a way of expressing idea
through written form, or a process of building, large units from smaller ones,
which the writer uses words to make a composition or essay writing.
Further, Donn Byrne (1988: 1) states that “writing involves the encoding
of a massage of some kind that is; we translate our thoughts into language”.
2. Component of writing
Norman (1990) in Yusuf (2007: 5) stated that the writing process is
highly sophisticated skill combining five general components. Namely:
content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics.
a) Content
b) Organization
c) Vocabulary
d) Language use
e) Mechanics
C. Vocabulary
Jumiaty (2003) stated that vocabulary is a list of works and sometimes
phrases, usually arranged in alphabetical order that expired at distally, grouchy.
Gove in Lamo (1966: 158) commended out: “Vocabulary is a list of
words and sometimes phrases, usually arranged in alphabetical order and defined
7
as dictionary, glossary or lexicon. All the words used by a particular person, class,
profession, etc. Sometimes all the words are recognized and understood by a
particular person although not necessarily used by him.”
Victoria Neufelt (1980: 25-60) states that vocabulary is, 1) a list of
collection of words and phrases usually alphabetically arranged and explained or
defined, 2) sum or stock of words employed by a language group, individual, or
work, or in relation to a subject, 3) a set or list of nonverbal symbols, 4) a set of
expressive forms used in an art, 5) a range of means by which one can apprehend
experiences or express ideas or feelings.
Based on the statement above the writer concludes that vocabulary is a
list of words that used by the people in real life of communication.
1. Types of Vocabulary
There are some tyfes of vocabulary. They are: Harmer (1991: 159)
divides vocabulary into two tyfes: they are active vocabulary refers to vocabulary
that students have been taught or learnt and which they are expected to be ableto
use. While passive vocabulary refers to words, which students will probably not
able to produce. Jane (1981: 115) divided vocabulary into two categories namely ;
a) words with specific meaning, e.g : pen,running, and sleep, b) Words with a
value or a grammatical function, e.g : but,therefore,ect
Suryaningsih (2005) divided vocabulary into four parts, namely: (1) Oral
vocabulary consists of words that are actively used in speech. The significant
character of oral vocabulary is that the speaker in rehearsed situation actively
12
8
used it, (2) Writing vocabulary consists of words, which are actively used in
writing. Since it is not under the constrain of time. It may have substantially wider
range than vocabulary or unrehearsed speech, (3) Listening vocabulary, is the
stoct of words to which one response with meaning and understanding in the
speech of others, (4) Reading vocabulary is the stock of words to which one
respond with meaning and understands in writing of other.
Based on the statement above the writer concludes that types of
vocbulary we can simply in our real life of communication we have to consider
use,(1) Productive and receptive vocabulary, (2) Active and passive vocabulary.
2. Vocabulary by part of speech
Jeananda Col (1993) divided part of speech into these classes:
noun - A noun is a type of word that represents a person, thing, or
place, like mother, apple, or valley.
verb - A verb is a type of word that describes an action or a state of
being, like wiggle, walk, run, jump, be, do, have, or think.
pronoun - A pronoun is a substitute for a noun. Some pronouns
are: I, me, she, hers, he, him, it, you, they, them, etc.
adjective - An adjective is a word that describes something (a
noun). Some adjectives are: big, cold, blue, and silly. One special
type of adjective is an article, a word that introduces a noun and
also limits or clarifies it; in English, the indefinite articles are a and
an, the definite article is the.
13
9
adverb - An adverb is a word that tells "how," "when," "where," or
"how much". Some adverbs are: easily, warmly, quickly, mainly,
freely, often, and unfortunately.
preposition - A preposition shows how something is related to
another word. It shows the spatial (space), temporal (time), or
logical relationship of an object to the rest of the sentence. The
words above, near, at, by, after, with and from are prepositions.
conjunction - A conjunction is a word that joins other words, phrases,
clauses or sentences. Some conjunctions are: and, as, because, but, or,
since, so, until, and while.
interjection - An interjection is a word that expresses emotion. An
interjection often starts a sentence but it can be contained within a
sentence or can stand alone. Some interjections are oh, wow, ugh, hurray,
eh, and ah.
3. The Principles of Teaching and Learning Vocabulary
Wallace (1989: 30) says that there are five steps to learn or to achieve
vocabulary in the mother tongue and target language as follows :
a) There is a felt need; b) There mother tongue learned mostly controls his
own rate of learning; c) The mother tongue is exposed to an enormous
quantity of his own language and has tremendous scope for repetition of
what he learns; d) The language is nearly always encountered in
appropriate context; e) Since he words are learned as they arise out a felt
need in a particular situation, they usually have a clear denotation. In
14
10
regard to the learning of vocabulary in foreign language, Walter (1997: 15)
states that the process of learning vocabulary involves four stages namely;
(1) discrimination, (2) understanding meaning, (3) remembering, and (4)
consolidation and extension of meaning.
Base the principle of teaching and learning vocabulary above, the
researcher conclude that teaching and learning vocabulary we have to consider
some principle stages or steps to achieve vocabulary mastery more
effectively.
4. Techniques in Teaching and Learning vocabulary
Harmer (1991: 161-162) describes some forms of presentation or
explanation in teaching vocabulary as follows; 1) Realia. One way of
presenting words is to bring the things they represent the words into the
classroom. 2) Pictures. One solution is the use of pictures. 3) Mime. Action
and gesture. It is often impossible to explain the meaning, of the words and
grammar either through the use of realia or in pictures. 4) Contract . We saw
how words exits because of their sense relation and this can be used to teach
meaning. 5) Enumeration. Another sense relation was that of general and
spesific words. 6) Explanation. Explaining the meaning of vocabulary items
can be very difficult, especially at beginner and elementary levels. 7)
Translation. Translation is a quick and easy way to present the meaning of
words but it is not without problems.
Brown (1994: 365-367) explain some guidelines for communicative
treatment of vocabulary instruction they are: Allocate specific class time to
15
16
15
11
vocabulary learning. Help students to learn vocabulary in context, play down
the role of bilingual dictionaries and encourage students to develop strategies
for determining the meaning of words.
Harmer (1991: 156-158) explains about what do students need to know
in learning vocabulary as follow; 1) Meaning. The first thing to realize about
vocabulary items that they frequently have more than one meaning. 2) Word
Use. 3) Words Formation. 4) Words Grammar.
5. Conceptual Framework
Words analogy involves many kinds of activities that students can do in
learning vocabulary. The activities are expected to engage students‟ affection
in learning. It also held to ensure that there is input before output; therefore,
students can be provided with a suitable input before they produce the word in
a subsequent task.
16
12
The conceptual framework underlined this research is given in the
following diagram:
Figure 2.1 Conceptual Frame work
Figure 1.Variable affecting writing ability
Quasi experimental research as table on the table showing the process of
research divides in to two groups, namely experimental class and control class.
After choose both classes the researcher gave them pre-test, after that the
researcher gave treatment using word analogy technique for experimental class
and for control class using word puzzle technique, and then gave both of classes
post test to knowing the improvement of the vocabulary mastery of students.
A QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL
RESEARCH
EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP
CONTROL
GROUP
PRE-TEST
WORD PUZZLE TECHNQUE WORD ANALOGY TECHNIQUE
POST TEST
THE IMPROVEMENT VOCABULARY MASTERY
NOUN AND ADJECTIVE
17
18
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This research applied quasi-experimental design. With pre-test and post-
test groups. It aimed to find out the effectiveness of using Word Analogy
Technique to improve the Students’ Writing Ability. The quasi-experimental
design used non-randomized control group pre-test and post-test design was
depicted as follows:
A. Research Design
This research had employed a quasi-experimental research design that
consisted of experimental class and control class. The design was described as
follows:
Table 3.1 Research design
Class Pretest Treatment Posttest
E O1 X1 O2
C O1 X2 O2
Notation: E = Experimental group
C = Control group
O1 = Pre-test
O2 = Post- test
X1 = Treatment by using word analogies technique
X2 = Treatment by using word puzzle technique
(Tuckman, 1999: 192)
19
a. Pre-test
Before giving treatment, the students were given pre-test. The pre-test was
used to identify students’ prior knowledge about vocabularies. It knew the
students previous vocabulary mastery before treatment.
b. Treatment
The treatment was conducted in the class for four meetings for each group.
Four meetings for experimental group and four meetings for control group. Every
meeting took for 90 minutes. The students were given the same activities for the
first, second, third and the fourth meetings, but the material and its vocabularies
were different.
Steps of treatment were done as follows:
1. Experimental group (Word Analogy Technique)
a. The teacher introduced the material to the class.
b. The teacher gave explanation about word analogy and shows a
relationship between words.
c. The teacher gave more examples of vocabularies about word
analogy and then translates it.
d. The teacher asked the students to identify the meanings of word
analogy given.
e. The teacher wrote down the vocabulary on the white board, and
asked the students to translate.
20
2. Control group (Word Puzzle Technique)
a. The teacher introduced the material to the class.
b. The teacher gave explanation about vocabulary.
c. The teacher gave more examples of kinds vocabularies and then
translated it.
d. The teacher asked the students to write the vocabulary and then
asked them to translate it.
e. The teacher gave examination.
c. Post-test
After giving treatments, the teacher gave the post-test to the students,
which had the same item given in the pre-test. It aimed to find out the result
of treatment, whether it was different from the pre-test or not.
B. Research Variables and Indicators
1. Variable of the Research
Variable object of research become the focus of the research (Arikunto,
1998). In this research, there were two variables namely: dependent and
independent variable. Dependent variable was vocabulary mastery of the students
and independent variable was the use of word analogy technique.
21
2. Indicators of the Research
Indicators of the research were students’ vocabulary mastery in writing
by using word analogies technique in term of nouns and adjectives.
1. Concrete and abstract nouns, singular and plural nouns.
2. Predicate adjectives and Attribute adjectives.
C. Research Hypothesis
Ho. = There was no significant difference of the students vocabulary
mastery in writing before and after being taught using word
analogies technique.
. = There was a significant difference of the students’ vocabulary
mastery in writing before and after being taught using word
analogies technique.
D. Population and Samples
a. Population
The population of the research was the eleventh year students of SMA 8
Pinrang academic year 2013/2014. It consisted of four classes, namely XI IPA 1,
XI IPA 2, XI IPS 1 and XI IPS 2. Each class consisted of approximately 30
students. Therefore, the total population was about 120 students as shown in the
following;
22
Table 3.2 Population of the research
No. Class Population
1. XI IPA 1 30
2. X IPA 2 30
3. XI IPS 1 30
4. XI IPS 2 30
Total 120
Source; (KTU SMAN 8 Pinrang)
b. Samples
The researcher used purposive sampling technique. The sample was class
XI IPA 1 and XI IPA 2 from Eleventh grade students of Senior High School 8
Pinrang academic year 2013/2014. It took 30 students of class XI IPA 1 and
30 students of class XI IPA 2. The total samples of the research were 60
students.
E. Research Instrument
The researcher used the writing test to assess and examine the
students’ eleventh grade writing ability in aspect vocabulary. There were two
kinds of research instrument in this research, namely pre-test and post-test.
The pre-test, and post-test was conducted to generate scores that were
analyzed to find out whether or not word analogy technique improve
vocabulary mastery in writing ability. The pre-test was conducted to both
experimental and control group before that treatment, in order to measure
students’ prior ability in writing. On the contrary, the post-test was conducted
to both groups after the treatment, in order to see whether or not there was a
change on students’ writing ability.
23
F. Technique of Data Collection
The technique of data collection in this research was using writing
composition test. The writing performance test carry out for the purpose of this
study in the form of writing test to make paragraphs about their family in pre-test
and about their school in post-test. It employed both groups in the first meeting of
instruction (pretest) and in the last meeting (posttest)
G. Data Analysis
To measure the students’ writing ability about their written at the student
second grade in SMAN 8 Pinrang. The researcher gave score based on the
descriptive writing ability scoring classification by Heaton. Classified the criteria
of scoring for vocabulary and organization as follows:
Table 3.3 Scoring rubric of noun
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 9.6 – 10 They effectively and excellent in using noun
Very Good 8.6 – 9.5 They effectively and very good in using noun
Good 7.6 - 8.5 They effectively and good in using noun
Fairly Good 6.6 – 7.5 They sometime hasty but fairly good in using
noun
Fair 5.6 – 6.5 They sometime fair in using noun
Poor 3.6 – 5.5 They poor in using noun
Very Poor 0 – 3.5 They very poor in using noun
24
Table 3.4 Scoring rubric of adjective
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 9.6 – 10 They effectively and excellent in using adjective
Very Good 8.6 – 9.5 They effectively and very good in using n
adjective
Good 7.6 - 8.5 They effectively and good in using adjective
Fairly Good 6.6 – 7.5 They sometime hasty but fairly good in using
adjective
Fair 5.6 – 6.5 They sometime fair in using adjective
Poor 3.6 – 5.5 They poor in using adjective
Very Poor 0 – 3.5 They very poor in using adjective
(Sokmen, 1997 )
The data collected are analyze the t-test, the steps are as follow:
1. Scoring the students correct answer of pre-test and post-test.
Students Score = 10max
simumscore
orethetotalsc
After collecting the data of the students the researcher classified the score of
the students into the following criteria:
1. 9.6-10.0 was classified as excellent
2. 8.6-9.5 was classified as very good
3. 7.6-8.5 was classified as good
4. 6.6-7.5 was classified as fairly good
5. 5.6-6.5 was classified as fairly
6. 4.6-5.5 was classified as poor
25
7. 0-4.5 was classified as very poor
(Depdikbud, 1985:6)
2. Calculating the collecting data from the students in answer the
test, the writer used formula to get mean score of the students as follow:
N
XX
Where : X = Mean score
∑X = The sum of all scores
N = The total number of sample
(Gay, 2006: 320)
3. Calculating standard deviation of each total score of pre-test and post-test,
the writer used the following formula:
1
2
12
11
)(
n
xxSS
and
2
2
22
21
)(
n
xxSS
where
x1 = Score of experimental group
x2 = Score of control group
1x = Mean of experimental group
2x = Mean of control group
n1 = Number of subject of experimental group
n2 = Number of subject of control group
SS = Sum of Square
(Gay, 2006: 321)
1. Finding out the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the method, this formula
below was used:
26
2121
21
21
11
2 nnnn
SSSS
XXt
Notation:
T = Test of significance
XC = Mean Score of experimental class
XE = Mean score of control class
SSE = the sum of square of experimental class
nE = the subject of experimental class
nC = the subject of control
(Gay, 2006: 349)
2. To find out the improvement of percentage:
1001
12%
X
XX
( Gay, 1987 )
To decide the significant influence of Word Analogy Technique to
build students’ writing ability, the writer used:
Ttest ≥ Ttable : Having significant influence
H1 : µ
1 > µ
2 or P-value < α 0.05
Ttest ≤ Ttable : Having no significant influence
H2 : µ
1 = µ
2 or P-value > α 0.05
27
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter consists of two sections, the findings of the research and
discussions of the finding.
The result of data analysis found that teaching word analogy technique can
develop the student’s vocabulary mastery in writing at the Eleventh Grade of SMAN
8 Pinrang.
Findings
The data were collected by administering the test, the tests were done twice
namely pre test and post-test, the pre-test was given before the treatment and the
post-test was given after treatment.
1. The improvement of students’ score of Noun and Adjective of pre-test
and post-test
Table 4.1. The students’ mean score in experimental class and control class
Variables indicators
Experimental
Class
Control
Class
Experimental
Class
Control
Class
Pre-test Pre-test Pre-test Post-test Percentage ( % )
Noun
Concrete and
Abstract nouns
5.63 7.3 5.23 6
29.66 14.72
Singular and
Plural nouns
5.63 7.3 5.23 6
Adjective
Predicate
adjective
5.4 7 4.8 5.45
29.62 13.12
Attribute
adjective
5.4 7 4.8 5.45
27
28
Before giving the treatments or pre test in Experimental Class, the
students’ mean score in writing test in term of noun is 5.83 and the students’
mean score in writing test in term of adjective is 5.4. After giving treatments or
in post-test, the students’ mean score in writing paragraph in term of noun is
7.3 and the students’ mean score in terms of adjective is 7. While the
improvement of the students’ ability in writing test in terms of noun is 29.66
% and 29.62 % in term of adjective.
In control class for pre-test, the students’ mean score in writing
paragraph in terms of noun is 5.23 and the students’ mean score in writing test
in term of adjective is 4.8. After giving treatments or in post-test, the students’
means score in writing paragraph in term of noun is 6 and the students’ mean
score in terms of adjective is 5.45. While the improvent of the students’
ability in writing test in terms of noun is 14.72% and 13.12% in terms of
adjective.
Figure 4.1. The students’ percentage in experimental class and control class
29.66% 29.62%
14.72% 13.12%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
Noun Adjective Noun Adjective
Experimental Class
Control Class
29
Table 4.2. The students’ mean score in experimental and controlled class of
pre-test and post-test
Class Pre-test Post-test Improvement %
Experimental 11.03 14.03 27 %
Controlled 10.03 11.43 14 %
The students’ mean score of experimental class in writing test of pre-
test is 11.03 and post-test is 14.03. the srudents’ mean score of controlled
class in writing test of pre-test is 10.03 and in post test is 11.4.
Figure 4.2. The students’ mean score in experimental
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Pree Test Post test
11.03
14.03
10.03
11.43
Mean Score Both Classes
30
Figure 4.3. The improvement of students’score
The students’ mean score of experimental class in writing paragraph of pre-
test is 11.03 and post-test is 14.03 with the improvement is 27%. the srudents’ mean
score of controlled class in writing paragraph in pre-test is 10.03 and in post test is
11.43 with the improvement is 14%.
2. The significance of students’ writing ability and hypothesis testing
a. Significant of students writing ability
Table 4.3. The significance of students’ writing ability in term of noun after
treatment in experimental and controlled class.
Value t-test t-table Conclusion
Post-test 42.98 2.0017 significant
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
experimentalclass
control class
27%
14%
The Improvement of both classes
31
In the t table (see appendix 5) for α = 0,05 df=58 t ratio is 2.017.
Based on the calculation, the value of t-test is greater than the ratio on t-table,
42.98 > 2.0017.
b. hypothesis testing
According to the result that of t-test is greater than the ratio on t-table,
42.98 > 2.0017. It can be concluded that the alternative hypothesis is
accepted. There was a significant difference between students in experimental
and control class.
A. Discussions
After applying word Analogy Technique, the researcher has found that such
strategy was very effective. This assumption is stated with evidence. During the
application process of treatment, the researcher shown that the students were very
interested to the material that the teacher presented. Based on the result of the writing
test, the students’ ability in writing is developed. It is supported by the result of pre-
test and post-test from the components of writing.
The result of the students’ ability in writing in the pretest was still low. The
students did not know how to start in writing because they less of vocabulary
mastery, and they did not know how to make good writing. Beside that they did not
understand how to write their ideas their opinion into sentences, and sometimes they
make some mistakes in choose vocabulary. For example, “work father in the guarden
and work mother work house” (Arni, IPA 1). He wrote like Indonesian style.
Furthermore, (IPA 2), “I am is student in SMA 8 Pinrang, beginning in my school
32
name is SMAN 1 Lembang ”. In this case we don’t understand about the meaning of
the sentences. We could not get its meaning.
The result above also supported with the students’of experimental class mean
score vocabulary in writing, in term of noun is 5.63 and the students’ mean score
vocabulary in writing, in term of adjective is 5.4. After giving treatments or in post-
test, the students’ mean score vocabulary in writing, in term of noun is 7.3 and the
students’ mean score in term of vocabulary is 7. While the improvement of the
students’ ability in writing in term of noun is 29.66% and 29.62% in term of
adjective. In controlled class the students’ mean score vocabulary in writing, in term
of noun is 5.23 and the students’ mean score vocabulary in writing, in term of
adjective is 4.8. After giving treatments or in post-test, the students’ means score in
writing descriptive paragraph in term of noun is 6 and the students’ mean score in
term of vocabulary is5,45. While the improvent of the students’ ability vocabulary
in writing, in term of noun is 14.72% and 13.12% in term of adjective.
Based on the problem before, the researcher gives the treatments to the
students. It make the students’ ability in writing improve. Therefore, the students’
ability of vocabulary in writing through word analogy technique could improve. It
supports by having receive some treatments, the post-test administer to the
experimental and controlled class. These test is intended to measure whether word
analogy technique can help students improve their writing ability especially in
vocabulary. The post-test computation result show that the findings may be conclude
that the two aspects in writing on noun and adjective, have significantly improve
33
(value of t-test 42.98) is greater that the ratio on t-table 2,024. Thus alternative
hypothesis was not rejected which means that there were significant differences
between the experimental and controlled groups’ score after treatment. From the
expalnation above, it can be drawn a conclusion that the students who receive the
treatment have significant improvement mainly in vocabulary specially noun and
adjective.
The improvement of noun can be seen from their writing product. The
experimental score in vocabulary aspect increase significantly. In regard with the
improvements using vocabulary of noun such as common noun, concrete noun,
abstract noun also countable and uncountable noun and using adjective like
descriptive adjective limiting adjective, attribute and predicate adjective. Dealing
with vocabularies, the improvement of the students’ mastery in vocabularies revealed
from the numbers of words they used on pre-test and post-test. On pretest, most
students in both groups use inappropriate vocabulary. After treatments, students in
experimental group show some progression in terms of their vocabulary usage when
they arranged sentences.
Looking at the comparison of the students’ score from the result of pre-test
and post-test, the researcher can conclude that there is an improvement of students’
ability in writing after giving the treatment material.
34
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
This chapter consists of two sections, the first section deals with the conclusion of
the finding of the research and the other one deal with suggestion.
A. Conclusion
Based on the finding and discussion in the previous chapter in this study, the
researcher concludes that:
1. The use of word analogy technique is effective to improve vocabulary in
terms of noun.
2. The use of word analogy technique is effective to improve vocabulary
mastery in terms of adjective
3. The result of data analysis that t-test value 42.98 is greater than t-table value
2.0017. Based on the result, hypothesis test showed that H0 was rejected and
H1 was accepted.
B. Suggestions
Based on the result of the data analysis and conclusion, the researcher
suggests as follows:
1) Word analogy technique may be used for the teacher to improve the
students’ writing ability in learning proces. The teacher should be able to
select various kinds of vocabulary students’ needs and interests. Literature
Word analogy technique may be used for the other skills of English.
34
35
2) Word analogy technique may be use for the other aspects like course of
English
3) For the next researcher should have capability in designing and presenting
the materials to the students. As the result, the students will be more
interested and easier in comprehending the materials.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen,Virgina F .1997. Technique in Teaching Vocabulary. Oxford; Oxford
University Press.
Arikuto, Suharsimi. 1993. Procedure Penelitian. Edisi Revisi; Cet IX; Jakarta: PT.
Rineka Cipta.
Asik, Nur (2004). Standar English Vocabulary and New X-Y Theory.Yayasan Fatiya.
Barrera, Rule. (1999)- (2001).Using Form and Function Analogic, (online),
( http//www.britanica.com/article/analogy/html.24 juni 2013)
Carter, Ronald and Mc Carthy,Michael. 1947. Vocabulary and Language Teaching.
Dalan James Nattinger, Some Current Trends in Vocabulary Teaching (pp
62-64). London; Longman Publishing.
Dannial, Mano. (2000). Solving Analogic, (online),
(http://www.coleradoart.com 20 juni 2013)
Dell, Diana. (1999). Analogies, (online),
(http://www.quai.com. 20 juni 2013)
Depdikbud, 1985. Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Mengajar Proses Belajar dan Petunjuk
Pelaksanaan System Penilaian . Jakarta ; Depdikbud.
Gay, LR. 1981. Education Resarch . New York: Graw Hill book Company.
Harmer, Jeremy.1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching new. London;
Cambridge
Haycraf, Jhon.1978. An Introduction English Language Teaching, London :
Longman Group Limited.
Holt, Rinchart and Winston.(1963). Word Analogies, (online),
(http://www.teachervision.fen.com 20 juni 2013)
Jeananda Col (1993) Part of Speech (online)
(http://www.enchantedlearning.com/grammar/partsofspeech/ 28 October
2013)
Jumiaty. 2003. Improving the Students’ Vocabulary Mastery by Using Vocabulary
Cards. Thesis. Faculty of Language and Arts UNM.
Marks, Bench. (1996) .An Analogy. The Internet Article, (online),
(http://www.psvctitest.com. 21 juni 2013)
Masurah, H. Idris (2003). Increasing the Vocabulary achievement of the second Year
Students of SMK 1 Makassar by Using Imitation Drill. Thesis. Makassar .
UNM.
Nattinger, J.R. (1991). Some Current Trends in vocabulary Teaching. In Carter. R. &
Mc Carthy, M (eds).Vocabulary and Language Teaching. Longman.
Rackner, Ann. (1999). More Analogies, (online),
(http://www.Factmonster.com/spot analogy. 21 juni 2013)
Sokmen, A. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In
N.Schmiit & M,Michael (F,ds.) (1997. Vocabulary: Description, acquisition
and pedagogy (pp.237-257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Suryaningsih. 2005. Improving the Students English Vocabulary by Using
Whispering Games. Thesis. Faculty of Language and Arts UNM.
Tuckman Bruce W. (1999) Conducting Educational Research Fifth Edition Tokyo .The Ohio State University Wallace, Michael J. (1989). Teaching vocabulary .London: Oxford University Press.
Wilkins D. (1972). Linguistics and Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold
Percentage of Pretest and Post-test
a. Percentage in term noun of experimental class
b. Percentage in term adjective of experimental class
29.62
Percentage of Pretest and Post-test
a) Percentage in term noun of controlled class
b) Percentage in term adjective of controlled class
13.12
The Significance Different
1. The significant different on pre-test in experimental and controlled class
SS1 = 2
12
1n
Where: SS2 =
2
22
2n
SS1 = 2
30
166925 SS2 =
2
30
5.15025.668
SS1 = 30
27556925 SS2=668.25
30
25.22650
SS1 = 925 918.53 SS2 =668.25 755.1
SS1 = 6.47 SS2 = -86.85
1X 30.83 SS1 = 6.47
2X 22.27 SS2 = - 86.85
a) t-Test
t =
2121
21
21
11
2 nnnn
SSSS
t =
30
1
30
1
23030
)85.86(47.6
27.2283.30
t =
60
2
58
38.80
56.8
t = 03.038.1
56.8
t =67.0
56.8
ttest = -12.77
t-Table
For level of significance (α) = 0.05
Degree of freedom (df) = (N1 + N2) -2 = (30 + 30) – 2 = 58
t – Table = 2.0017
2. The significant different on post-test in experimental and controlled class
SS1 = 2
12
1n
Where: SS2 =
2
22
2n
SS1 = 2
30
2151543 SS2 =
2
30
5.17125.987
SS1 = 30
462251543 SS2 = 987.25
30
25.29412
SS1 = 1543 1540.9 SS2 = 987.25
SS1 = 4.1 SS1 = 6.85
1X 7.16 SS1 = 4.1
2X 5.71 SS2 = 6.85
a. t-Test
t =
2121
21
21
11
2 nnnn
SSSS
t =
30
1
30
1
23030
85.61.4
71.416.7
t =
60
2
58
95.10
45.2
t = 3.0189.0
45.2
t =057.0
45.2
ttest = 42.98
b. t-Table
For level of significance (α) = 0.05
Degree of freedom (df) = (N1 + N2) -2 = (30 + 30) – 2 = 58
t – Table = 2.0017
Critical t values (full table)
The t values are for the two tail test. The same t value is used for half the alpha value
in a one tail test.
For example, at 20 degrees of freedom, the t value of 2.086 is critical for α=0.05(2
tail) and α=0.025(1 tail). With the same degrees of fredom, 1.725 is critical for
α=0.1(2 tail) and α=0.05(1 tail).
α (1 tail) 0.05 0.025 0.01 0.005 0.0025 0.001 0.0005
α (2 tail) 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.001
df
1 6.3138 12.7065 31.8193 63.6551 127.3447 318.4930 636.0450
2 2.9200 4.3026 6.9646 9.9247 14.0887 22.3276 31.5989
3 2.3534 3.1824 4.5407 5.8408 7.4534 10.2145 12.9242
4 2.1319 2.7764 3.7470 4.6041 5.5976 7.1732 8.6103
5 2.0150 2.5706 3.3650 4.0322 4.7734 5.8934 6.8688
6 1.9432 2.4469 3.1426 3.7074 4.3168 5.2076 5.9589
7 1.8946 2.3646 2.9980 3.4995 4.0294 4.7852 5.4079
8 1.8595 2.3060 2.8965 3.3554 3.8325 4.5008 5.0414
9 1.8331 2.2621 2.8214 3.2498 3.6896 4.2969 4.7809
10 1.8124 2.2282 2.7638 3.1693 3.5814 4.1437 4.5869
11 1.7959 2.2010 2.7181 3.1058 3.4966 4.0247 4.4369
12 1.7823 2.1788 2.6810 3.0545 3.4284 3.9296 4.3178
13 1.7709 2.1604 2.6503 3.0123 3.3725 3.8520 4.2208
14 1.7613 2.1448 2.6245 2.9768 3.3257 3.7874 4.1404
15 1.7530 2.1314 2.6025 2.9467 3.2860 3.7328 4.0728
16 1.7459 2.1199 2.5835 2.9208 3.2520 3.6861 4.0150
17 1.7396 2.1098 2.5669 2.8983 3.2224 3.6458 3.9651
18 1.7341 2.1009 2.5524 2.8784 3.1966 3.6105 3.9216
19 1.7291 2.0930 2.5395 2.8609 3.1737 3.5794 3.8834
20 1.7247 2.0860 2.5280 2.8454 3.1534 3.5518 3.8495
α (1 tail) 0.05 0.025 0.01 0.005 0.0025 0.001 0.0005
α (2 tail) 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.001
df
21 1.7207 2.0796 2.5176 2.8314 3.1352 3.5272 3.8193
22 1.7172 2.0739 2.5083 2.8188 3.1188 3.5050 3.7921
23 1.7139 2.0686 2.4998 2.8073 3.1040 3.4850 3.7676
24 1.7109 2.0639 2.4922 2.7970 3.0905 3.4668 3.7454
25 1.7081 2.0596 2.4851 2.7874 3.0782 3.4502 3.7251
26 1.7056 2.0555 2.4786 2.7787 3.0669 3.4350 3.7067
27 1.7033 2.0518 2.4727 2.7707 3.0565 3.4211 3.6896
28 1.7011 2.0484 2.4671 2.7633 3.0469 3.4082 3.6739
29 1.6991 2.0452 2.4620 2.7564 3.0380 3.3962 3.6594
30 1.6973 2.0423 2.4572 2.7500 3.0298 3.3852 3.6459
31 1.6955 2.0395 2.4528 2.7440 3.0221 3.3749 3.6334
32 1.6939 2.0369 2.4487 2.7385 3.0150 3.3653 3.6218
33 1.6924 2.0345 2.4448 2.7333 3.0082 3.3563 3.6109
34 1.6909 2.0322 2.4411 2.7284 3.0019 3.3479 3.6008
35 1.6896 2.0301 2.4377 2.7238 2.9961 3.3400 3.5912
36 1.6883 2.0281 2.4345 2.7195 2.9905 3.3326 3.5822
37 1.6871 2.0262 2.4315 2.7154 2.9853 3.3256 3.5737
38 1.6859 2.0244 2.4286 2.7115 2.9803 3.3190 3.5657
39 1.6849 2.0227 2.4258 2.7079 2.9756 3.3128 3.5581
40 1.6839 2.0211 2.4233 2.7045 2.9712 3.3069 3.5510
α (1 tail) 0.05 0.025 0.01 0.005 0.0025 0.001 0.0005
α (2 tail) 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.001
df
41 1.6829 2.0196 2.4208 2.7012 2.9670 3.3013 3.5442
42 1.6820 2.0181 2.4185 2.6981 2.9630 3.2959 3.5378
43 1.6811 2.0167 2.4162 2.6951 2.9591 3.2909 3.5316
44 1.6802 2.0154 2.4142 2.6923 2.9555 3.2861 3.5258
45 1.6794 2.0141 2.4121 2.6896 2.9521 3.2815 3.5202
46 1.6787 2.0129 2.4102 2.6870 2.9488 3.2771 3.5149
47 1.6779 2.0117 2.4083 2.6846 2.9456 3.2729 3.5099
48 1.6772 2.0106 2.4066 2.6822 2.9426 3.2689 3.5051
49 1.6766 2.0096 2.4049 2.6800 2.9397 3.2651 3.5004
50 1.6759 2.0086 2.4033 2.6778 2.9370 3.2614 3.4960
51 1.6753 2.0076 2.4017 2.6757 2.9343 3.2579 3.4917
52 1.6747 2.0066 2.4002 2.6737 2.9318 3.2545 3.4877
53 1.6741 2.0057 2.3988 2.6718 2.9293 3.2513 3.4838
54 1.6736 2.0049 2.3974 2.6700 2.9270 3.2482 3.4800
55 1.6730 2.0041 2.3961 2.6682 2.9247 3.2451 3.4764
56 1.6725 2.0032 2.3948 2.6665 2.9225 3.2423 3.4730
57 1.6720 2.0025 2.3936 2.6649 2.9204 3.2394 3.4696
58 1.6715 2.0017 2.3924 2.6633 2.9184 3.2368 3.4663
59 1.6711 2.0010 2.3912 2.6618 2.9164 3.2342 3.4632
60 1.6706 2.0003 2.3901 2.6603 2.9146 3.2317 3.4602
APPENDIX D.1: DATA OF PRE-TEST
Students
Pre-Test Experimental Class
TOTAL
X1
X2
Score
Word Analogy
noun adjective
S-01 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-02 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-03 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-04 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-05 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-06 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-07 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-08 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-09 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-10 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-11 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-12 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-13 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-14 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-15 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-16 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-17 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-18 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-19 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-20 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-21 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-21 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-23 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-24 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-25 5 5 10 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-26 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-27 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-28 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-29 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-30 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
169 163 331 166 925
5.63 5.4 11.03 5.53 30.83
Students
Pre-Test Controlled Class
TOTAL
X1
X2
Score
Word
Analogy
noun
adjective
S-01 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-02 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-03 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-04 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-05 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-06 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-07 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-08 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-09 6 4 10 5 25 Poor
S-10 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-11 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-12 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-13 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-14 5 5 10 5 5 Poor
S-15 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-16 5 5 10 5 5 Poor
S-17 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-18 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-19 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-20 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-21 4 5 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-21 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-23 5 4 9 4.5 20.25 Poor
S-24 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-25 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-26 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-27 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-28 6 5 11 5.5 20.25 Poor
S-29 5 5 10 5 5 Poor
S-30 5 5 10 5 5 Poor
157 144 301 150.5 668.25
5.23 4.8 10.03 5.01 22.27
APPENDIX D.2: DATA OF P0ST-TEST
Students
Post-Test Experimental Class
TOTAL
X1
X2
Score
Word Analogy
noun adjective
S-01 8 8 16 8 64 Good
S-02 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-03 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-04 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-05 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-06 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-07 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-08 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-09 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-10 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-11 8 8 16 8 64 Good
S-12 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-13 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-14 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-15 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-16 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-17 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-18 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-19 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-20 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-21 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-21 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-23 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-24 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-25 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-26 6 7 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-27 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-28 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-29 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
S-30 7 7 14 7 49 Fairly good
220 210 430 215 1545
7.3 7 14.33 7.16 51.5
Students
Post-Test Controlled Class
TOTAL
X1
X2
Score
noun
adjective
S-01 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-02 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-03 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-04 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-05 8 7 15 7.5 56.25 Fairly good
S-06 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-07 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-08 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-09 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-10 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-11 7 5 12 6 36 Fair
S-12 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-13 5 6 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-14 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-15 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-16 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-17 7 6 13 6.5 42.25 Fair
S-18 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-19 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-20 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-21 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-21 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-23 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
S-24 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-25 5 5 10 5 25 poor
S-26 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-27 5 5 10 5 25 Poor
S-28 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-29 6 5 11 5.5 30.25 Poor
S-30 6 6 12 6 36 Fair
180 163 343 171.5 987.25
6 5.43 11.43 5.71 32.90
Number of Students
Pree Test Post Test
Noun Adjective Noun Adjective
Concrete and Abstract Noun
Singular and Plural Noun
Predicate Adjective
Attribute Adjective
Concrete and Abstract Noun
Singular and Plural Noun
Predicate Adjective
Attribute Adjective
1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
3 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 6
4 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
5 6 6 5 5 8 8 7 7
6 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
7 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 6
8 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
9 6 6 4 4 6 6 6 6
10 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
11 5 5 5 5 7 7 5 5
12 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
13 6 6 5 5 5 5 6 6
14 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
15 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
16 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
17 5 5 4 4 7 7 6 6
18 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
19 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
20 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
21 4 4 5 5 6 6 5 5
157 157 144 144 180 180 163 163
157 + 157 30
314 30
10.47
10.47 2
5.23
144 + 144 30
288 30 9.6
9.6 2
4.8
180 + 180
30 360 30 12
12 2 6
163 + 163
30 326 30
10.87
10.87 2
5.43
22 5 5 4 4 6 6 5 5
23 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
24 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
25 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
26 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
27 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
28 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
29 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
30 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
Number of
Students
Pree Test Post Test
Noun Adjective Noun Adjective
Concrete and Abstract Noun
Singular and Plural Noun
Predicate Adjective
Attribute Adjective
Concrete and Abstract Noun
Singular and Plural Noun
Predicate Adjective
Attribute Adjective
1 7 7 6 6 8 8 8 8
2 5 5 4 4 8 8 7 7
3 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
4 6 6 5 5 8 8 7 7
5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7
6 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
7 5 5 6 6 8 8 7 7
8 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
9 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7
10 5 5 5 5 8 8 7 7
11 6 6 5 5 8 8 8 8
12 5 5 5 5 8 8 7 7
13 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
14 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 7
15 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7
16 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7
17 5 5 6 6 8 8 7 7
18 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 7
19 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
20 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7
21 6 6 6 6 8 8 7 7
22 5 5 5 5 7 7 6 6
23 5 5 5 5 8 8 7 7
24 6 6 6 6 8 8 7 7
25 5 5 5 5 7 7 6 6
26 5 5 5 5 6 6 7 7
27 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7
28 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
29 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 7
30 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7
169 169 163 163 220 220 210 210
169 + 169 30
338 30
11.67
11.67 2
5.83
163 + 163 30
326 30
10.8
10.8 2
5.4
220 + 220
30 440 30
14.6
14.6 2
7.3
210 + 210
30 420 30 14
14 2 7
number of students
pree test post test
noun adjective noun adjective
concrete and absract noun
singular and plural noun
predicate adjective
attribute adjective
concrete and absract noun
singular and plural noun
predicate adjective
attribute adjective
1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
3 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 6
4 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
5 6 6 5 5 8 8 7 7
6 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
7 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 6
8 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
9 6 6 4 4 6 6 6 6
10 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
11 5 5 5 5 7 7 5 5
12 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
13 6 6 5 5 5 5 6 6
14 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
15 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
16 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
17 5 5 4 4 7 7 6 6
18 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
19 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
20 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
21 4 4 5 5 6 6 5 5
22 5 5 4 4 6 6 5 5
23 5 5 4 4 6 6 6 6
24 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
25 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
26 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
27 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
28 6 6 5 5 6 6 5 5
29 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5
30 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6
THE OBJECT OF THE RESEARCH
No Experimental class Controlled class
1 Dian Hardian Fitriani
2 Hariani Mariani
3 Hartika Nirwana has
4 Hasna H Nur asmi
5 Haslinda Marsuka
6 Hasni Maryam
7 Arni Mawar
8 Ayu Lestari Elviana
9 Desi Hastuti
10 Hadiah Muliati
11 Harfika Neon permata sari
12 Juita Nur hikmah
13 Maizin Nurasida
14 Ulandari Al Mukarramah
15 Risdayanti Hanifa
16 Yusmita Israyanti
17 Arva Damayanti Nurul Syafiqha
18 St. Hardianti Sitti nurhani
19 Aslant jufri Sukmawati H
20 Ahmad busaery Tahira
21 Ahmad taufik N Irmawati
22 Ardiansyah Yusuf
Masni
23 Hendra
Nurfadila
24 Armansyah Darwis noviandi
25 Agung Tripurnomo Al Muslihuddin
26 Alimuddin Budi setiawan
27 Abduh Sulkifli
28 Abdullah Bin Nursiati Muh. Arfan
29 Irwan Effendi Al Ghifary anas Ahmad
30 Sahrul supardi