29

CHAPTER III
METHOD OF STUDY

3.1 Location of the Study

This study is conducted in MTsS Mon Malem, Blang Bintang, which is
located on Jalan Sultan Iskandar Muda, Blang Bintang. It is about four kilometers
from the city. It is a dynamic and strategic village. Most of the students came from
the village or the other areas that are not far from the school.

3.2 Population
There were many definitions of population. Mursid Saleh (2002:17) says
that population is group of objects, events or indicators that become targets of the
research. Meanwhile Johnson, D.M (1987:110) states that population is the entire
group of entities or person to which the results of a study are intended to apply.
Brown. A and Dowling. P (1998:33) also say that population is the notional class
of possible subjects and it may be defined at any level of analysis.
The population may be all the individuals of a particular type or more
restricted part of that group. The population in this study was the fsecond year
students of MTsS Mon Malem, Blang Bintang at the academic year 2012/2013
which consists of three classes and each class consist of 30 students.
Figure 2. Students Population of MTsS Mon Malem, Blang Bintang
NO
1.

CLASS
VIII A

Male
14

Female
16

2.

VIII B

13

17

30

3.

VIII C
3

15

18

33
93

3.3 Sample
29

NO. of students
30

30

Sample is a sub group of the population that affects the conclusion which
refers to the result (Johnson. D.M 1987:111). Arikunto (2002:109) says that
sample is a limited number of elements from a population to be representative of
the population.
According to Johnson. D.M (1987:111-113) there are two kinds of
samples, the samples are as follows:
1) Non probability samples consist of two types, they are:
a. A sample of convenience
It contains elements or persons selected because of their accessibility
b. A volunteer sample
It consists of person who volunteers to participate in a study
2) Probability samples also has two types, they are:
a. Simple random sampling
It is one technique designed to ensure that the essential characteristics of
the sample being studied are laid those of the population from which the
sample is drawn. In this case, each element has the same chance or being
selected.
b. Stratified sampling
It involves dividing the population in to strata (levels) and selecting
samples from within each level.
The method of sampling would be used in this study was the random
sampling. According to Brown. A and Dowling P (1998:33) the production of a
random sample involve attempting to ensure that each member of population that
you are sampling has an equal chance or probability of being selected as a

31

subject. As stated by Aron.A and Aron. E.N (1997:85) random selection is the
ideal method of picking out a sample to study. In practice, then, a random sample
is one which ensures that each member of the sampling frame has an equal
probability of being selected.
Here, the writer did not take the sample based on the students individually
but based on the group of students in class with the following reasons:
1) The population in this study consists of the classes which are relatively same.
2) Getting the material based on the curriculum.
3) The students who become the object of the study are in the same level.
4) There is no superior class in the class division.
Finally, the writer took two as the sample of the study the Class VII A that
consist 30 Students and Class VIII B consists of 30 Students. The Class VIII A as
experimental class and Class VIII B as control class.

3.4 Research Design

In this study, several procedures would be used in order to get the
empirical data required. The research would be conducted in three ways are as
follows:
1) Observation
This method would be used to observe the teaching-learning process and
the students activities.
2) Experimental Teachcing
After conducting the pretest, the writer did the experimental treatment.
The writer taught three times a week for experimental group by using

32

Multimedia facilities. On the other hand, the control group was taugt
without using Multimedia facilities..
3) Test
This study would be carried out through two time test. The writer did the
pre-test for both group before appliyed the treatment and did the post-test
after experimental treatments and questionnaire for both group.

3.5 Experimental Treatment

3.5.1 Pre-test at Control Group and Experimental Group
Pre-test was the first activity before the teacher did the teaching-learning
activities and a post test. The students would perform the dialogue. Their voices
would be recorded by the teacher. Because it was the first meeting, the writer
introduced herself to students.
a. Planning
1. Making lesson plan based on the teaching-learning activity
2. Preparing the test instrument (a series of dialogues consists of four
different dialogues)
3. Preparing teaching facilities (Laptop, loud Speaker System, disc)
4. Preparing hand-rolled paper and assessments sheets.
5. Preparing students attendance list

b. Acting
1. Teacher introduced herself to students
2. Teacher called the students name

33

3. Teacher explained her aim in conducting an action research in the

classroom
4. Teacher introduced the dialogues.
5. Students listen the dialogues
6. Teacher asked students to work in pairs, listen the dialogues and
practice the dialogues.
7. Teacher recorded the test, analyzed the result of the test and gave
scores to the students.
c. Observing
1. Observing the students activities
2. Observing the students cooperation in their groups
d. Reflecting
In this step, I evaluated the steps in pre-test and discussed the results of the
observation for the improvement in post test. The result of pre test can be seen in
Appendix 1.

3.4.2 Teaching-learning Activity in Experimental Class

A. First Meeting
In teaching-learning activity I, the writer would present the video of
dialoge by multimedia facilities. In order to make the teaching learning process
effective, it was necessary for each member of the class to participate. And the
writer conducted the pre-test to measure the student listening ability before
applying multimedia, the result of pre-test can be seen in Appendix I. In the first
meeting the writer conducted some procedures as follows:

34

a. Planning
1. Choosing the teaching material: introducing
2. Arranging a lesson plan based on the teaching material.
3.

Preparing the test instrument

4. hand-out consists of a series of dialogues

5. Preparing teaching facilities (Laptop, Loud Speaker System and
tape recorder)
6. Preparing observation sheets
7. Preparing students attendance list
b. Acting
1. Teacher switch on the dialogue to the students
2. Teacher repeat the dialogue
3. Students listened and repeated the teacher
4. Teacher drilled the students
5. Teacher divided the class into group of four (each group consists of
four persons).
6. Students practiced the dialogue until they memorized the dialogues
7. Students performed the dialogue in front of the class
c.

Observing
1. Observing the students activities
2. Observing the students cooperation in their groups
3. Observing the teaching learning process

B. Second Meeting

35

Basically, the teaching learning activity II is just the same as in teaching

learning activity I. The writer still used multimedia facilities teaching as the
method with improvements during the teaching learning process. The following
procedures were as follows:
a. Planning
1) Choosing the teaching material: Hobbies
2) Arranging a lesson plan based on the teaching material
3) Preparing the test instrument
4) Hand-out consists of series of dialogues
5) Video that was appropriate to the teaching material
4) Preparing teaching facilities (Laptop, Loud Speaker System, and tape
recorder)
5) Preparing observation sheets
6) Preparing students attendance list
b. Acting
1) Teacher show on some video to students
2) Teacher asked the students about those video
3) Teacher asked the students about their activities in spare time
4) Teacher repeat the dialogues
6) Students listened to the teacher
7) Teacher read the dialogue sentence by sentence
8) Students imitated the teacher
9) Teacher drilled the students
10) Teacher divided the students into group of four

36

11) Students read the whole dialogue

12) Students performed the dialogue in group
13) Students performed the dialogue in front of the class
c. Observing
1) Observing the students activities
2) Observing the students co operation in their groups
3) Observing the teaching learning process

C. Third Meeting
The writer still used multimedia facilities teaching as the method with
improvements during the teaching learning process. The following procedures
were as follows:
a. Planning
1) Choosing the teaching material: Hobbies II
2) Arranging a lesson plan based on the teaching material
3) Hand-out consists of series of dialogues
4) Video that was appropriate to the teaching material
5) Preparing teaching facilities (Laptop, Loud Speaker System, and tape
recorder)
6) Preparing observation sheets
7) Preparing students attendance list
b. Acting
1) Teacher show on some video to students
2) Teacher asked the students about those video

37

3) Teacher asked the students about their activities in spare time

4) Teacher repeat the dialogues
6) Students listened to the teacher
7) Teacher read the dialogue sentence by sentence
8) Students imitated the teacher
9) Teacher drilled the students
10) Teacher divided the students into group of four
11) Students read the whole dialogue
12) Students performed the dialogue in group
13) Students performed the dialogue in front of the class
c. Observing
1) Observing the students activities
2) Observing the students co operation in their groups
3) Observing the teaching learning process

3.4.2 Teaching-learning Activity in Control Class

The process of teaching-learning activity in the control class in conducted
without using multimedia facilities, the researcher just appliyed the traditional
process and always used the hand-out book. In the first meeting the writer also
conducted the pre-test to measure the student ablity in the control group and after
three times meeting the teaching learning process the writer conducted the posttest as the end of test to know the students ability in control group.

3.5.

Post-test

38

After the experiment was conducted, the writer conducted the posttest. The
writer conducted the test at the same time. The writer and the English teacher
administered the experiment and control group together.
In this test, the students performed the dialogue that given in the three
previous meeting and fill up the questionnaire. The teacher recorded the students
voices and distributed the questionnaire. The result of the posttest can be seen in
appendix II

3. 6 Scoring System
Testing listening requires the subjective judgments on the part of the
raters, thus, teacher perception of oral assessment and oral assessment rating
scales affect the testing process substantially (Weir, 1990). To minimize subjective
judgments, the writer and the teacher score the students used rating scales
developed by David P. Harris modified by Walter Bartz and then the score divided
by two.
In this study, the writer gave oral test to the students and analyzed their
scores to measure the improvement and gave scores on pronunciation, grammar,
vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. In order for the raw scores to become
more meaningful numerical data, they should be converted to numerical data,
which had been processed to the scale of 0 to 100, so the scores of the students
was multiply by 4. Then, the processed scores could be used as a basic to make
decisions. If all students, scores were arranged from the highest to the lowest, it
would be easier to know the position of a student in his/her group.

39

The measurement of the students' achievement that is suggested by Harris

(1969: 134) could be interpreted with the following table.
Table Students' achievement
Criteria of Mastery

Grade

91-100

Excellent

81-90

Very good

71-80

Good

61-70

Fair

51-60

Poor

Less than 50

Very poor

CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

40

4.2 The Result of the Study

This study was conducted in four activities. The two activities were
teaching-learning activity. The first activity was pre-test and held in September,
10th 2012. The second activity was held in September, 17th 2012. The third
activity was held in September, 19th 2012. The last activ ity was post-test and
done in September, 24th 2012.

4.2 Data Analysis

Analysis means the categorizing, ordering, manipulating, and summarizing
of data obtain answers to research questions (Kerlinger, 1988:125). The purpose
of analysis is to reduce data to be intel ligible and interpretable so that the relation
of research problem can be studied.
In scoring the test, the students called out in turn and the writer tested
them by giving the dialogues relating to the material. In giving scores, the writer
followed rating scale developed by Walter Bartz (Bartz cited in Valette,
1983:150). It showed four items that were important to be scored: fluency, quality
of communication, amount of communication, and effort to communicate. But in
this study, I did not give score on amount of communication because the students
did not create the dialogue. They only memorize the given dialogues.

4.3 Data Processing

48

4.3.1 Mean (X1) and Standard Deviation (S1) of The Pre Test

41

The highest score of the pre-test was 50, and the lowest score was 25.
Thus, the range is 50 25 = 25. So the range is 25. Next, the amount of classes
(K) are found by using formula as follows:
K = 1 + 3.33 log n (n = number of sample units)
= 1 + 33.33 log 30
= 1 + 4.998
= 5.998 6
So, many classes are 6.

While interval (i) =

=

R
K

25
6

= 4.16 4
So, interval class (i) is 4
Table 4.1 Distribution of Pre-Test Scores of Experimental and Control Group
Class
Interval
47-50
43-46
39-42
35-38
31-34
27-30
23-26

F
7
2
0
0
0
9
12
30

Experimental Group
X
FX
FX2
24
168
4032
20
40
800
16
0
0
12
0
0
8
0
0
4
36
144
0
0
0
244
4976

F
2
2
8
11
0
5
2
30

Control Group
X
FX
12
24
8
16
4
32
0
0
-4
0
-8
-40
-12
-24
8

FX2
288
128
128
0
0
320
288
1152

42

fx .i

__

Xe x

244
.4
30

= 24.5 +

= 24.5 (8.13 x 4)
= 24.5 + 32.52
= 57.02

fx .i

__

X c x

8
.4
30

= 36.5 +

= 36.5 + (0.26 x 4)
= 36.5 + 1.04
= 37.54

Se =

fx

fx

=4

4976 244

30 30

=4

165.86 (8.13) 2

=4

165.86 66.09

=4

99.77

43

= 4 x 9.98
= 39.92

Sc =

fx

fx

=4

1152 8

30 30

=4

38.4 (0.26) 2

=4

38.4 0.0676

=4

38.33

= 4 x 6.19
= 24.76

X 1 X 2
t

S12 S 22

n1 n 2
57.02 37.54

39.92 2 24.76 2
30

30

19.48
1593.6 613.05

30
30

44

19.48
15.12 20.43

19.48
73.55

19.48
8.57

= 2.27
From statistical analysis, it is found that the t-score of pre-test of both
groups is 2.27. The critical value of t-score for degree of freedom 60 is 1.67 at the
level of significance 0.05. The result indicates that t-score is bigger than 1.67.

4.3.2

Mean (X2) and Standard Deviation (S2) of The Post Test

The highest score of the post-test was 100, and the lowest score was 35.

Thus, the range is 90 35 = 55. Therefore, interval class (K) is:

So, range is 65
K = 1 + 3.33 log n (n = number of sample units)
= 1 + 33.33 log 30
= 1 + 4.998
= 5.998 6

So, interval (i) =

R
K

45

55
6

= 9.1 9
In the following, we turn to compare the post-test scores of both groups.
It can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.2 Distribution of Post-Test Scores of Experimental and Control
Group
Class
Interval
82-90
73-81
64-72
55-63
46-54
37-45
28-36

__

X e x

F
9
0
9
12
0
0
0
30

Experimental Group
X
FX
FX2
27
243
6561
18
0
0
9
64
576
0
-0
0
-9
0
0
-18
0
0
-27
0
0
307
7137

fx .i
n

307
.9
30

= 59 +

= 59 + (10.23 x 9)
= 59 + 92.07
= 151.07

F
0
0
0
2
7
16
5
30

Control Group
X
FX
45
0
36
0
27
0
18
36
9
63
0
0
-9
-45
54

FX2
0
0
0
648
567
0
405
1620

46

fx .i

__

X c x

54
.9
30

= 41 +

= 41 + (1.8 x 9)
= 41 + 16.2
= 57.2

fx

Se = i

fx

30

7137 307
= 9

30

=9

237.9 (10.23) 2

=9

237.9 104.65

=9

133.65

= 9 x 11.54
= 103.86

Sc =

fx

fx

1620 54
= 9

30

30

47

=9

54 (1.8) 2

=9

54 3.24

=9

50.76

= 9 x 7.12
= 64.08

X 1 X 2
t

S12 S 22

n1 n 2
151.07 57.2

103.86 2 64.08 2
30

30

93.87
10786.89 4106.24

30
30

93.87
359.56 136.87

93.87
496.43

93.87
22.28

= 4.21
From the statistical analysis, it is found that the post-test t-score of both
group is 4.21. The critical value of t-score for the degree of freedom 60 is 1.67 at

48

the level of significance 0.05. The result indicates that t-score is bigger than 1.67
It means that there is significance different between the two groups.

4.4 Discussion
After conducting the research, it can be seen clearly the result found in
the field of research. The result of the study shows there is no significant
difference between two groups before using multimedia facilities. It is logical
because the students in control group have not been treated by using multimedia
facilities. After, the writer applied the multimedia facilities to experimental group,
there is a significant different between the two-groups. It is proved that the t-score
of post-test is bigger than t-table.
Based on fact, it is underlined that in this research the hypothesis is
accepted and well proved, the teaching listening by using multimedia facilities has
the possitive influence.