CHAPTER IVDATA AND DATA ANALYSIS4.1 Data  In this chapter discusses th translation - CHAPTER IVDATA AND DATA ANALYSIS4.1 Data  In this chapter discusses th Indonesian how to say

CHAPTER IVDATA AND DATA ANALYSIS4.1

CHAPTER IV
DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Data
In this chapter discusses the result of the study. This chapter describes some finding and discussions about the implementation of flashcards to improve vocabulary mastery. The aim of the study is to know whether the use of flashcard can improve students vocabulary mastery or not. The study was conducted in six meetings to both of groups. Six, the writer was conducted pre-test to two groups (control group and experimental group), and then the writer taught control group without using Flashcards in three meetings and also the writer taught experimental group using Flashcards in three meetings. Treatment by using Flashcards were only given to the experimental group. Last, the writer was conducted post-test to two group. Post-test were given to the both groups to see the differences. The two groups were given the same test, pre-test and post-test. The number of the test item was 30.
The data in this study was the scores of the students both in experimental group and control group. The following tables are the result of the pre-test and post-test of the two groups, experimental group and control group.
Tabel. 4.1
The Secore of The Pre-Test and Post-Test by The Students of The Control Group
No Students Initial Name Pre-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2)
1 ADO 63 70
2 DAP 84 86
3 DUA 78 80
4 DAN 60 73
5 DAT 66 68
6 ETK 50 55
7 FJM 36 43
8 FAR 50 56
9 HLF 66 70
10 IWA 76 76
11 IRF 66 66
12 MHI 70 80
13 MFG 70 70
14 MSN 56 66
15 MSI 80 85
16 NRA 40 56
17 NBA 50 63
18 NSA 60 70
19 PNT 60 70
20 PSA 53 70
21 RDR 60 70
22 RAS 80 86
23 STH 50 66
24 SWW 56 73
25 SNM 50 70
26 VRL 50 70
27 YYT 50 60
28 YLA 60 70
29 ZGA 50 66
30 ZLA 40 60
Total S 1780 2064
Mean 59,33 68,80

The table above shows that the total scores of control group in the pre-test was 1780 with the mean score was 59.33, while the total scores in post-test was 2064 with the mean score was 68.80.

Tabel. 4.2
The Score of The Pre-Test and Post-Test by The Students of The Experimental Group
No Students Initial Name Pre-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2)
1 ADO 40 67
2 DAP 40 67
3 DUA 43 67
4 DAN 47 67
5 DAT 47 67
6 ETK 53 70
7 FJM 57 77
8 FAR 60 80
9 HLF 60 83
10 IWA 60 80
11 IRF 60 78
12 MHI 60 100
13 MFG 60 80
14 MSN 60 90
15 MSI 63 87
16 NRA 63 80
17 NBA 63 80
18 NSA 63 82
19 PNT 67 90
20 PSA 67 83
21 RDR 67 80
22 RAS 67 80
23 STH 67 83
24 SWW 60 75
25 SNM 56 70
26 VRL 70 82
27 YYT 50 73
28 YLA 50 75
29 ZGA 50 70
30 ZLA 50 70
Total  1720 2333
Mean 57,33 77,77
The table above, it shows that in experimental group, the total scores of experimental group in the pre-test was 1720 with the mean score was 57.33, while the total scores in post-test was 2333 with the mean score was 77.77.

4.2 Data Analysis
4.2.1 Testing the Reliability of The Test
To obtain the reliability of the test, the writer used Kuder-Richardson formula 21 as follows :
KR21 =K/(K-1) [1-(M(k-M))/〖ks〗^2 ]
where :
r = coefficient reliability
K = the number of item in the test
M = the mean of the test score
S2 = the variance of the scores (standard deviation)

And the level of the reliability can be seen as follows :
0.00 – 0.20 = the reliability is very low
0.21 – 0.40 = the reliability is low
0.41 – 0.60 = the reliability is fair
0.61 – 0.80 = the reliability is high
0.81 – above = the reliability is very high
The result of the realibility computation was r = 0.64, based on the level of realibility above it can be calculated that realibility of the test was high. ( see appendix B )
4.2.2 Testing Hypothesis
The result of the test is calculated by using t-test formula as follows :
After the data have been collected (see appendix C), it is obtain that :
The data that will be collect by administering the pre-test and post-test and post-test were statistically analyze by applying the t-test formula. The use this formula is aimed to find out the difference of the result of the conducted pre and post-test in both control and experimental group, before and after the treatment.
t=(Me-Mc)/√(((〖de〗^2+〖dc〗^2)/(ne+nc-2))(1/ne+1/nc) )
Where :
Me = the sum in experimental group
Mc = the sum of squared scores in control group
del = the sum of squared scores in experimental group
dc2 = the number of sample in control group
ne = the number of sample in experimental group
nc = the number of sample in control group
After the data have been collected ( see appendix C ), it is obtain tahat :
Me = 20 .44
Mc = 9.47
De =13336.40
Dc = 1182.06
Ne = 30
Nc = 30

The result of computation by using t-test is called t-observed. In this study, the result of computation by using t-test was 6.33 and the calculation of the score by using t-test for degree of freedom (df) 58 (Ne + Nc – 2 = 58) at level of significance 0.05 that the critical value was 2.021 (2.02).
The result of computation by using t-test showed that t-observed (t-obs) was higher than t-table. It can be seen as follows :
t-obs>t-table (p=0.05) with df 58
6.33>2.02 (p=0.05) with df 58
It is means that alternative hypothesis was accepted.

4.3 Research Findings
After analyzing the data, it is find that the lowest score of pre-test in control group was 40 and the highest score was 70. Then after the post-test was administered the lowest score was not significantly improve, the 40 improves to 43 (43-40=3), it meant that the difference of the score was 3. The highest score was not significantly improves too, the 70 improves to 86 (86-70=16), it meant that the difference of the score was 16. The mean score of the pre-test was 59.33 and the post-test was 68.80 (68.80-59.33=9.47). It can be concluded that the students in the control group, which was taught by using common strategies was not significantly different.
The lowest score of pre-test in the experimental group was 40 and the highest was 67. The lowest score of post-test in the experimental group was 67 and the highest was 100. The lowest score improves significantly, the 40 improves to 67 (67-40=27), it meant that the difference of the score was 27. It also happened to the highest score, the 70 improves to 100 (100-70=30). It means that the difference of the score was 30. The mean of the pre-test was 57.33 and the post-test 77.77 (77.77-57.33=20.44). It can be concluded that the student in the experimental group which was taught by using flashcards was significantly different. Since 20.44 > 9.47.
Based on the explanation above, it can be concluded that the students were good in vocabulary mastery by using flashcards.
0/5000
From: -
To: -
Results (Indonesian) 1: [Copy]
Copied!
CHAPTER IVDATA AND DATA ANALYSIS4.1 Data In this chapter discusses the result of the study. This chapter describes some finding and discussions about the implementation of flashcards to improve vocabulary mastery. The aim of the study is to know whether the use of flashcard can improve students vocabulary mastery or not. The study was conducted in six meetings to both of groups. Six, the writer was conducted pre-test to two groups (control group and experimental group), and then the writer taught control group without using Flashcards in three meetings and also the writer taught experimental group using Flashcards in three meetings. Treatment by using Flashcards were only given to the experimental group. Last, the writer was conducted post-test to two group. Post-test were given to the both groups to see the differences. The two groups were given the same test, pre-test and post-test. The number of the test item was 30. The data in this study was the scores of the students both in experimental group and control group. The following tables are the result of the pre-test and post-test of the two groups, experimental group and control group. Tabel. 4.1The Secore of The Pre-Test and Post-Test by The Students of The Control GroupNo Students Initial Name Pre-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2)1 ADO 63 702 DAP 84 863 DUA 78 804 DAN 60 735 DAT 66 686 ETK 50 557 FJM 36 438 FAR 50 569 HLF 66 7010 IWA 76 7611 IRF 66 66
12 MHI 70 80
13 MFG 70 70
14 MSN 56 66
15 MSI 80 85
16 NRA 40 56
17 NBA 50 63
18 NSA 60 70
19 PNT 60 70
20 PSA 53 70
21 RDR 60 70
22 RAS 80 86
23 STH 50 66
24 SWW 56 73
25 SNM 50 70
26 VRL 50 70
27 YYT 50 60
28 YLA 60 70
29 ZGA 50 66
30 ZLA 40 60
Total S 1780 2064
Mean 59,33 68,80

The table above shows that the total scores of control group in the pre-test was 1780 with the mean score was 59.33, while the total scores in post-test was 2064 with the mean score was 68.80.

Tabel. 4.2
The Score of The Pre-Test and Post-Test by The Students of The Experimental Group
No Students Initial Name Pre-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2)
1 ADO 40 67
2 DAP 40 67
3 DUA 43 67
4 DAN 47 67
5 DAT 47 67
6 ETK 53 70
7 FJM 57 77
8 FAR 60 80
9 HLF 60 83
10 IWA 60 80
11 IRF 60 78
12 MHI 60 100
13 MFG 60 80
14 MSN 60 90
15 MSI 63 87
16 NRA 63 80
17 NBA 63 80
18 NSA 63 82
19 PNT 67 90
20 PSA 67 83
21 RDR 67 80
22 RAS 67 80
23 STH 67 83
24 SWW 60 75
25 SNM 56 70
26 VRL 70 82
27 YYT 50 73
28 YLA 50 75
29 ZGA 50 70
30 ZLA 50 70
Total  1720 2333
Mean 57,33 77,77
The table above, it shows that in experimental group, the total scores of experimental group in the pre-test was 1720 with the mean score was 57.33, while the total scores in post-test was 2333 with the mean score was 77.77.

4.2 Data Analysis
4.2.1 Testing the Reliability of The Test
To obtain the reliability of the test, the writer used Kuder-Richardson formula 21 as follows :
KR21 =K/(K-1) [1-(M(k-M))/〖ks〗^2 ]
where :
r = coefficient reliability
K = the number of item in the test
M = the mean of the test score
S2 = the variance of the scores (standard deviation)

And the level of the reliability can be seen as follows :
0.00 – 0.20 = the reliability is very low
0.21 – 0.40 = the reliability is low
0.41 – 0.60 = the reliability is fair
0.61 – 0.80 = the reliability is high
0.81 – above = the reliability is very high
The result of the realibility computation was r = 0.64, based on the level of realibility above it can be calculated that realibility of the test was high. ( see appendix B )
4.2.2 Testing Hypothesis
The result of the test is calculated by using t-test formula as follows :
After the data have been collected (see appendix C), it is obtain that :
The data that will be collect by administering the pre-test and post-test and post-test were statistically analyze by applying the t-test formula. The use this formula is aimed to find out the difference of the result of the conducted pre and post-test in both control and experimental group, before and after the treatment.
t=(Me-Mc)/√(((〖de〗^2+〖dc〗^2)/(ne+nc-2))(1/ne+1/nc) )
Where :
Me = the sum in experimental group
Mc = the sum of squared scores in control group
del = the sum of squared scores in experimental group
dc2 = the number of sample in control group
ne = the number of sample in experimental group
nc = the number of sample in control group
After the data have been collected ( see appendix C ), it is obtain tahat :
Me = 20 .44
Mc = 9.47
De =13336.40
Dc = 1182.06
Ne = 30
Nc = 30

The result of computation by using t-test is called t-observed. In this study, the result of computation by using t-test was 6.33 and the calculation of the score by using t-test for degree of freedom (df) 58 (Ne + Nc – 2 = 58) at level of significance 0.05 that the critical value was 2.021 (2.02).
The result of computation by using t-test showed that t-observed (t-obs) was higher than t-table. It can be seen as follows :
t-obs>t-table (p=0.05) with df 58
6.33>2.02 (p=0.05) with df 58
It is means that alternative hypothesis was accepted.

4.3 Research Findings
After analyzing the data, it is find that the lowest score of pre-test in control group was 40 and the highest score was 70. Then after the post-test was administered the lowest score was not significantly improve, the 40 improves to 43 (43-40=3), it meant that the difference of the score was 3. The highest score was not significantly improves too, the 70 improves to 86 (86-70=16), it meant that the difference of the score was 16. The mean score of the pre-test was 59.33 and the post-test was 68.80 (68.80-59.33=9.47). It can be concluded that the students in the control group, which was taught by using common strategies was not significantly different.
The lowest score of pre-test in the experimental group was 40 and the highest was 67. The lowest score of post-test in the experimental group was 67 and the highest was 100. The lowest score improves significantly, the 40 improves to 67 (67-40=27), it meant that the difference of the score was 27. It also happened to the highest score, the 70 improves to 100 (100-70=30). It means that the difference of the score was 30. The mean of the pre-test was 57.33 and the post-test 77.77 (77.77-57.33=20.44). It can be concluded that the student in the experimental group which was taught by using flashcards was significantly different. Since 20.44 > 9.47.
Based on the explanation above, it can be concluded that the students were good in vocabulary mastery by using flashcards.
Being translated, please wait..
Results (Indonesian) 2:[Copy]
Copied!
BAB IV
DATA DAN ANALISIS DATA 4.1 data Dalam bab ini membahas hasil penelitian. Bab ini menjelaskan beberapa temuan dan diskusi tentang pelaksanaan flashcards untuk meningkatkan penguasaan kosa kata. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah penggunaan flashcard dapat meningkatkan penguasaan kosakata siswa atau tidak. Penelitian ini dilakukan di enam pertemuan untuk kedua kelompok. Enam, penulis dilakukan pre-test untuk dua kelompok (kelompok kontrol dan kelompok eksperimen), dan kemudian penulis diajarkan kelompok kontrol tanpa menggunakan Flashcards dalam tiga pertemuan dan juga penulis mengajar kelompok eksperimen menggunakan Flashcards dalam tiga pertemuan. Pengobatan dengan menggunakan Flashcards hanya diberikan kepada kelompok eksperimen. Terakhir, penulis dilakukan post-test untuk dua kelompok. Post-test yang diberikan kepada kelompok kedua untuk melihat perbedaan. Kedua kelompok diberi tes yang sama, pre-test dan post-test. Jumlah item tes adalah 30. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah nilai siswa baik dalam kelompok eksperimen dan kelompok kontrol. Tabel berikut adalah hasil dari pre-test dan post-test dari kedua kelompok, kelompok eksperimen dan kelompok kontrol. Tabel. 4.1 The Secore The Pre-Test dan Post-Test oleh Siswa The Control Group No Siswa Nama awal Pra-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2) 1 ADO 63 70 2 DAP 84 86 3 DUA 78 80 4 DAN 60 73 5 DAT 66 68 6 ETK 50 55 7 FJM 36 43 8 FAR 50 56 9 HLF 66 70 10 76 76 IWA 11 IRF 66 66 12 70 80 MHI 13 MFG 70 70 14 56 66 MSN 15 MSI 80 85 16 40 56 NRA 17 NBA 50 63 18 60 70 NSA 19 PNT 60 70 20 53 70 PSA 21 RDR 60 70 22 80 86 RAS 23 STH 50 66 24 56 73 SWW 25 SNM 50 70 26 50 70 VRL 27 YYT 50 60 28 60 70 YLA 29 ZGA 50 66 30 40 60 zla Jumlah S 1780 2064 Berarti 59,33 68,80 Tabel di atas menunjukkan bahwa total skor dari kelompok kontrol dalam pre-test adalah 1.780 dengan skor rata-rata adalah 59,33, sedangkan total skor di post-test adalah 2064 dengan skor rata-rata adalah 68,80. Tabel. 4.2 Skor dari The Pre-Test dan Post-Test oleh Siswa The Experimental Grup No Siswa Nama awal Pra-Test (Y1) Post-Test (Y2) 1 ADO 40 67 2 DAP 40 67 3 DUA 43 67 4 DAN 47 67 5 DAT 47 67 6 ETK 53 70 7 FJM 57 77 8 FAR 60 80 9 HLF 60 83 10 60 80 IWA 11 IRF 60 78 12 60 100 MHI 13 MFG 60 80 14 60 90 MSN 15 MSI 63 87 16 63 80 NRA 17 NBA 63 80 18 63 82 NSA 19 PNT 67 90 20 67 83 PSA 21 RDR 67 80 22 67 80 RAS 23 STH 67 83 24 60 75 SWW 25 SNM 56 70 26 70 82 VRL 27 YYT 50 73 28 50 75 YLA 29 ZGA 50 70 30 50 70 zla Jumlah  1720 2333 Berarti 57,33 77,77 Tabel di atas, hal itu menunjukkan bahwa dalam kelompok eksperimen, total skor dari kelompok eksperimen dalam pre-test adalah 1720 dengan skor rata-rata adalah 57,33, sedangkan total skor di post-test adalah 2.333 dengan skor rata-rata adalah 77,77. 4.2 Analisis Data 4.2.1 Pengujian Keandalan The Uji Untuk mendapatkan keandalan tes, penulis menggunakan Kuder-Richardson rumus 21 sebagai berikut: KR21 = K / ( K-1) [1- (M (kM)) / 〖ks〗 ^ 2] di mana: r = koefisien reliabilitas K = jumlah item dalam tes M = mean dari skor tes S2 = varians dari skor (standar deviasi) dan tingkat reliabilitas dapat dilihat sebagai berikut: 0,00-0,20 = reliabilitas sangat rendah 0,21-0,40 = keandalan rendah 0,41-0,60 = keandalan adil 0,61-0,80 = keandalan yang tinggi 0.81 - di atas = reliabilitas sangat tinggi Hasil perhitungan reliabilitas adalah r = 0,64, berdasarkan tingkat reliabilitas di atas dapat dihitung bahwa realibility tes tinggi. (Lihat lampiran B) 4.2.2 Pengujian Hipotesis Hasil tes dihitung dengan menggunakan rumus t-test sebagai berikut: Setelah data telah dikumpulkan (lihat lampiran C), itu adalah mendapatkan bahwa: Data yang akan mengumpulkan oleh pemberian pra-tes dan post-test dan post-test secara statistik menganalisis dengan menerapkan rumus t-test. Penggunaan formula ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui perbedaan hasil pra dilakukan dan post-test di kedua kontrol dan kelompok eksperimen, sebelum dan setelah perawatan. t = (Me-Mc) / √ (((〖de〗 ^ 2 + 〖dc〗 ​​^ 2) / (ne + nc-2)) (1 / ne + 1 / nc)) Dimana: Me = jumlah dalam kelompok eksperimen Mc = jumlah skor kuadrat dalam kelompok kontrol del = yang jumlah skor kuadrat dalam kelompok eksperimen DC2 = jumlah sampel di kelompok kontrol ne = jumlah sampel dalam kelompok eksperimen nc = jumlah sampel di kelompok kontrol Setelah data telah dikumpulkan (lihat lampiran C), itu adalah mendapatkan tahat : Me = 20 .44 Mc = 9.47 De = 13.336,40 Dc = 1.182,06 Ne = 30 Nc = 30 Hasil perhitungan dengan menggunakan t-test yang disebut t-diamati. Dalam penelitian ini, hasil perhitungan dengan menggunakan t-test adalah 6.33 dan perhitungan skor dengan menggunakan t-test untuk derajat kebebasan (df) 58 (Ne + Nc - 2 = 58) pada tingkat signifikansi 0,05 bahwa nilai kritis adalah 2,021 (2,02). Hasil perhitungan dengan menggunakan t-test menunjukkan bahwa t-diamati (t-obs) lebih tinggi dari t-tabel. Hal ini dapat dilihat sebagai berikut: t-obs> t-tabel (p = 0,05) dengan df 58 6.33> 2.02 (p = 0,05) dengan df 58 . Hal ini berarti bahwa hipotesis alternatif diterima 4.3 Hasil Penelitian Setelah menganalisis data, itu menemukan bahwa skor terendah dari pre-test pada kelompok kontrol adalah 40 dan nilai tertinggi adalah 70. Kemudian setelah post-test diberikan skor terendah tidak secara signifikan meningkatkan, 40 meningkatkan ke 43 (43-40 = 3 ), itu berarti bahwa perbedaan skor itu 3. Rata tertinggi tidak secara signifikan meningkatkan juga, 70 meningkatkan ke 86 (86-70 = 16), itu berarti bahwa perbedaan skor adalah 16. Rata-rata pra-test adalah 59,33 dan post-test adalah 68,80 (68,80-59,33 = 9,47). Dapat disimpulkan bahwa siswa pada kelompok kontrol, yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi umum tidak berbeda secara signifikan. Rata terendah pre-test pada kelompok eksperimen adalah 40 dan tertinggi 67. Rata terendah post-test pada kelompok eksperimen adalah 67 dan tertinggi adalah 100. Rata termurah meningkatkan secara signifikan, 40 meningkatkan ke 67 (67-40 = 27), itu berarti bahwa perbedaan skor itu 27. Hal ini juga terjadi pada nilai tertinggi, 70 meningkatkan ke 100 (100-70 = 30). Ini berarti bahwa perbedaan skor adalah 30. Mean dari pre-test adalah 57,33 dan post-test 77,77 (77,77-57,33 = 20,44). Dapat disimpulkan bahwa siswa dalam kelompok eksperimen yang diajar dengan menggunakan flashcards berbeda secara signifikan. Sejak 20,44> 9,47. Berdasarkan penjelasan di atas, dapat disimpulkan bahwa siswa yang baik di penguasaan kosakata dengan menggunakan flashcards.






























































































































Being translated, please wait..
 
Other languages
The translation tool support: Afrikaans, Albanian, Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Azerbaijani, Basque, Belarusian, Bengali, Bosnian, Bulgarian, Catalan, Cebuano, Chichewa, Chinese, Chinese Traditional, Corsican, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Detect language, Dutch, English, Esperanto, Estonian, Filipino, Finnish, French, Frisian, Galician, Georgian, German, Greek, Gujarati, Haitian Creole, Hausa, Hawaiian, Hebrew, Hindi, Hmong, Hungarian, Icelandic, Igbo, Indonesian, Irish, Italian, Japanese, Javanese, Kannada, Kazakh, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Klingon, Korean, Kurdish (Kurmanji), Kyrgyz, Lao, Latin, Latvian, Lithuanian, Luxembourgish, Macedonian, Malagasy, Malay, Malayalam, Maltese, Maori, Marathi, Mongolian, Myanmar (Burmese), Nepali, Norwegian, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Persian, Polish, Portuguese, Punjabi, Romanian, Russian, Samoan, Scots Gaelic, Serbian, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovak, Slovenian, Somali, Spanish, Sundanese, Swahili, Swedish, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turkish, Turkmen, Ukrainian, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnamese, Welsh, Xhosa, Yiddish, Yoruba, Zulu, Language translation.

Copyright ©2024 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: