CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter the researcher present about the finding of the research.

Therefore, this chapter discusses the description of data, hypothesis testing and

discussion.

A. Findings

The chapter IV presented about find out of the research, it was conducted by

pre-test and post-test. It gave to student in SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung especially on

VIII-F student as a sample. Research on VIII F class that consist 31 students have

twelve female and nineteen male students, but in the field several students did not

join in the class because they are permission for participating as flag raisers, so there

are 24 students could taken as sample. The objectives of this research is find out

whether there is any significant difference between before students learn speaking by

using flashcard and after using flashcard in the class.

Before data counted, there are several criteria as suggested by the English

teacher of SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung . In table below will explain a scoring

categorization.

39
 40

Table 4.1 The Scoring Categorization

Intervals Categorization
81 – 100 Excellent
71 – 80 Good
61 – 70 Enough
41 – 60 Poor
0 – 40 Bad

In data categorization describe if those are some criteria shows in intervals

score. While student get 81 up to 100 score they will be in excellent, 71 up to 80

score categorization is good, 61 until 70 score enough score, 41 until 60 mean teacher

should be concern with student who get that score, and 40 below is bad score from

student. It especially for bad score, teacher will give extra course for student who

obtain that score.

The data were collected by administering test, pre-test and post test. Pretest

and post-test applied in the class, researcher gave clues within flashcard. Researcher

used flashcards more than three times to repeat it and students order to think for

arrange sentences until got a good descriptive text. The researcher obtained two kinds

of data, the scores from pre-test and post test as follows:

Table 4.2 The Pre-Test and Post-Test Score

No Name Pre-Test Post-Test Score Difference (D

Score (X) (Y) =Y-X)

1. AN 58 75 17
2. AE 62 85 23
3. BP 58 80 22
 41

4. DW 58 78 20
5. DD 60 80 20
6. Di D 68 78 10
7. DA 60 85 25
8. EB 62 83 21
9. FN 75 90 15
10. Fr N 65 80 15
11. HS 78 93 15
12. HP 65 80 15
13. LD 70 85 15
14. LH 65 75 10
15. MA 68 83 15
16. Mo A 70 80 10
17. OM 65 78 13
18. PO 75 90 15
19. RC 68 82 14
20. SB 75 85 10
21. SO 75 83 8
22. TH 65 78 13
23. VD 63 80 17
24. WR 60 82 22

Based on scores above can be seen scoring comparison that occur in pre-test

score and post-test, there are some students who good experience development in

their abilities which it shown in result from table data above. In pre-test there are

some students who get a score below 70 and none students who reach 80 score. On

table above especially posttest, they got increasing score after reasearcher did

treatments in the classroom. It more detailed explaination will be discussed in pre-test

and post-test analyzed from data collection in the research.

 42

1. The student’s ability in Speaking of Descriptive Text Before Using

Flashcard (Pre-test score)

Administering pre-test knowed the capabilities students on speaking

descriptive text without using flashcard. The pre-test was speaking achievement test

that were in form of descriptive text with a topic “The real money” which decided by

researcher. The result of students’ speaking score after did in classroom step by step

speaking processing, then analyzed speaking rubric score. Pre-test was administered

for 24 students in VIII F class as sample. Data in the table 4.2 shows the students’

scores obtained at pre-test and post-test. Pre-test data will be calculated using SPSS

16 version to find out descriptive statistics, frequency and interval categories of data

resulting. Pre-test did on the 24th March, researcher given students 45 minutes for to

do a pre-test. The test was intended to know achievement from students before they

getting some treatments.

On data below will be explained from descriptive data which consists of the

mean, median, mode, std. deviation, minimum and maximum scores. Data can be

seen at the table as follows:

 43

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics of the pre-test scores

Statistics

Pre_Test

N Valid 24
Missing 0
Mean 66.17
Median 65.00
Mode 65
Std. Deviation 6.105
Minimum 58
Maximum 78

Table 4.3 calculated descriptive statistic from 24 students as participant in the

classroom. The mean from data above was 66.17, it knowed that students average got

score was 66.17 as pre-test score. Median of pre-test score was 65 and mode was 65.

Student pre-test score had minimum and maximum scores, minimum score result was

58. It score mean in around poor category score and maximum score just got 78. Then

standard deviation measure, student score standard deviation was 6.105.

Moreover researcher measure pretest score in frequency data, it will show at

table 4.4 which had detail explaination about pretest score. That presented as follows:
 44

Table 4.4 Frequency Score of Pre-Test

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 58 3 12.5 12.5 12.5
60 3 12.5 12.5 25.0
62 2 8.3 8.3 33.3
63 1 4.2 4.2 37.5
65 5 20.8 20.8 58.3
68 3 12.5 12.5 70.8
70 2 8.3 8.3 79.2
75 4 16.7 16.7 95.8
78 1 4.2 4.2 100.0
Total 24 100.0 100.0

As mentioned at the table 4.4 after data analyzed, it shows pre-test in

frequency data that 3 students (12.5%) got 58 score, 3 students (12.5%) got 60, 2

students (8.3%) got 62, 1 student (4.2%) got 63, 5 students (20.8%) got 65, 3 students

(12.5%) got 68, 2 students (8.3%) got 70, 4 students (16.7%) got 75, 1 student (4.2%)

got 78. In frequency data some students who had more than 70 was 5 students only in

the classroom.

Researcher also put pretest result in interval score, it was report all of students

in pretest score. Students who have good and bad criteria will show at table 4.5

below. Interval score gave categorization form where researcher can be found

comparison speaking skill from students.

 45

Table 4.5 Intervals Score of Pre-Test

Intervals Frequency Categorization Percentage

81 – 100 0 Excellent 0%
71 – 80 5 Good 20.83%
61 – 70 13 Enough 54.17
41 – 60 6 Poor 25%
0 – 40 0 Bad 0

Table 4.5 shows the appropriateness of assessment interval in pre-test, some

students got poor predicate. There are 5 (20.83%) who had good predicate, 13

(54.17%) students were enough predicate and 6 (25%) students were poor predicate.

The scores based on five part of speaking such as pronounciation, grammar,

vocabulary, fluently, comprehension. That can be seen many students are unable to

speak sentences clearly. In this regard not suprising that they are still having confuse

to speak because they are still hesitant to speak something correctly and it difficult to

remember vocabularies for spontaneous speech.

2. The Student’s ability in Speaking of Descriptive Text After Using

Flashcard (Post-test score)

The post-test applied after students got treatments, student data score in post-

test can be seen in appendix. Descriptive statistic of post-test which analyzed mean,

median and mode. Descriptive statistic will be counted by using SPSS16 and show up

below at table 4.6 as follows:

 46

Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistic of Post-test Score

Statistics
Post_Test

N Valid 24
Missing 0
Mean 82.00
Median 81.00
Mode 80
Std. Deviation 4.540
Minimum 75
Maximum 93

Table 4.6 showed that there were 24 students as subjects of the research, mean

of student score in post-test was 82. According data above, student mean was 82 that

nice score for student. Then result from minimum score was 75 that knowed after

student got treatmens minimum score increase and maximum score was 93. Median

of the data was 81, it means that in centre score of post-test was 81 from 24 students.

Then measured mode this research was 80 which there were 6 students who got 80

score. Last analyzed from descriptive statistic is standard deviation score of the post-

test based on table above was 4.540.

In the next measuring is frequency score from posttest. There was different

result from pretest more detail researcher displayed it at table 4.7.

 47

Table 4.7 Frequency Score of Post-Test

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 75 2 8.3 8.3 8.3
78 4 16.7 16.7 25.0
80 6 25.0 25.0 50.0
82 2 8.3 8.3 58.3
83 3 12.5 12.5 70.8
85 4 16.7 16.7 87.5
90 2 8.3 8.3 95.8
93 1 4.2 4.2 100.0
Total 24 100.0 100.0

After accepting treatments into the class, students havine good improvement

in speaking score. It seen from table 4.7 they were 2 students (8.3%) got 75 score, 4

students (16.7%) got 78, 6 students (25%) got 80, 2 student (8.3%) got 82, 3 students

(12.5%) got 83, 4 students (16.7%) got 85, 2 students (8.3%) got 90, 1 students

(4.2%) got 93.

In table 4.8 presented interval score from post test, based on the table there

were several students had excellent categorization it was 12 students got excellent

category and a half other got good category. It mean that students indicated different

before they taught without using flashcards.

 48

Table 4.8 Intervals Score of Post-Test

Intervals Frequency Categorization Percentage

81 – 100 12 Excellent 50%
71 – 80 12 Good 50%
61 – 70 0 Enough 0%
41 – 60 0 Poor 0%
0 – 40 0 Bad 0%

The result after getting treatments by using flashcard, students score increased

significantly. Can be seen in interval above, the score had a good increasing who

indicated an excellent predicate a half from students in the class and none students get

enough, poor, and bad predicate. Comparing between pre-test and post-test, in pre-

test there was who got ≥85 score (0%), while in post-test percentage of sample who

got ≥ 85 increased by 29.2%. Moreover, pretest highest score only 78 and posttest

highest score was 93, pretest lowest score is 58 and posttest lowest score was 75. This

finding indicated that after using Flashcard, the students skill in speaking were

increased by the progress of score showed from pre-test and post-test.

B. Data Analysis

Data analysis usefull to investigate whether Flashcard is effective on the

students’ score by speaking descriptive text, the researcher taken result of pretest and

posttest by using Paired Sample Test in IBM SPSS Statistics 16. The minimum and

maximum score, mean and standard deviation from speaking pre-test and post-test

showed on table 4.9 Descriptive Statistics of pre-test and post-test.

 49

Table 4.9 Descriptive Statistics Comparison of pre-test and post-test.

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Pre_Test 24 58 78 66.17 6.105
Post_Test 24 75 93 82.00 4.540
Valid N (listwise) 24

Table 4.9 showed mean of post-test scores (82) was higher than pre-test scores

(66.17). It explained that using Flashcard made students score better than previous

score in pretest, meanwhile pretest standard deviation was 6.1 and posttest standard

deviation was 4.540. So, we can be concluded that score increased after being taught

by using flash card toward students’ speaking skill.

Further whether Flashcard was significant in students speaking skill,

researcher tested the result of pre-test and post-test by using Paired Sample Test in

IBM SPSS Statistic 16.0. Two hypothesis mentioned previously at chapter 1 in this

study there are (1) Null Hypothesis stating that there is no significant difference in

students speaking before and after using Flashcard and (2) Alternative Hypothesis

stated that there is any significant difference score of students before and after being

taught using flashcard. Testing was done to know whether the null hypothesis could

be rejected or not. Table 4.10 showed the result of the paired sample correlation.
 50

Table 4.10 Paired Sample Correlation

Paired Samples Correlation

N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 Pre_Test & Post_Test 24 .654 .001

In the table above, output Paired Sample Correlation described score

correlation between pretest and postest, where score from correlation was 0.654 and

significance score was 0.001. The interpretation of probability achievement that was:

a. If the probability > 0.050, so the null hypothesis (Ho) is accepted.

b. If the probability < 0.050, so the null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected.

Significant numerical was 0.001 smaller than 0.050 (0.001 < 0.050). It means

that the Null Hypothesis (Ho) was rejected. The researcher made decision there is any

significant difference in speaking score of students before and after being taught by

using flashcard at eight grade of SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung. Moreover for detailed if

there were any significance in finding can be seen Paired Sample Test.

Table 4.11 Paired Sample Test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Std. Interval of the
Deviati Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean on Mean Lower Upper T df tailed)
Pair Pre_Test
1 - -
-15.833 4.650 .949 -17.797 -13.870 23 .000
Post_Tes 16.681
t
 51

Based on the table 4.11 Paired Sample Test output clearly showed that any

different mean score from pre-test and post-test was -15.833. From that table a

standard deviation was 4.650. The standard error mean was 0.949, lower different

was -17.797 and upper different was -13.870. The result of t was -16.681 with df was

23 and significance (2-tailed) was 0.000.

The table 4.11 showed Sig.(2-tailed) was less than 0.05 (0.000 < 0.05). Thus,

there was enough evidence indicating that the null hypothesis could be rejected. It

could be concluded that using Flashcard was effective on the students’ speaking score

in descriptive text.

C. The Result Of Normality

This part researcher discuss about result from normality and homogeneity

testing. Normality testing is determination conduct whether get a data normal

distribution or not. It was used by SPSS 16 One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnove Test

that score of significance (α) = 0.050. The result can be seen below.
 52

Table 4.12 Normality Testing

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Pre_Test Post_Test
N 24 24
Normal Parametersa Mean 66.17 82.00
Std. Deviation 6.105 4.540
Most Extreme Differences Absolute .159 .170
Positive .159 .170
Negative -.134 -.106
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .779 .834
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .578 .490
a. Test distribution is Normal.
`

Normality Testing above referred to significance score from pre-test is 0.578

and post test is 0.490. Both of them were higher than 0.05, taken conclusion for

normal distribution was normal data. That data for t-test as one of parametric testing

was choosen for data analysis previously.

D. Hyphotesis Testing

This study has purpose for examine whether there is any significant different

ability at eight grade students from SMP Negeri 1 Tanggunggunung in speaking skill

of descriptive text. Researcher presented the data result, to find out a hypothesis

testing by using T-test formula from the result of computation. T-test formula made it

data and analyzed it by using SPSS.16 version. The result of Sig. (2-tailed) or

probability from data paired samples test was less than 0.05 (0.000<0.05).
 53

The null hypothesis (Ho) in this research was there is no significant different

in speaking score of students before and after being taught using flash card rejected.

Then, the alternative (Ha) in this research there is any significant different in

speaking score of students before and after being taught by using flash card accepted.

So, the flashcard was effective toward students speaking skill at eight grade of SMPN

1 Tanggunggunung in academic year of 2018/2019.

E. Discussion

Based on the objectives this study are find out the score of speaking from the

students at eight grade SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung. The result indicated the score

post-test were significantly better than pre-test score at the end of the study. Creswell

(2013:242) defines teaching and learning process was devided into three steps are

administering of pre-test, giving treatments, and administering of post-test. In this

study, first step was administering pre-test on speaking before the researcher do

treatments.

This study have two variables, those are dependent variable and independent

variable. Students’ ability in speaking descriptive text as a dependent variable.

Independent variable in this study is teaching using flashcard to students’ at eight

grade in SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung. Researcher gave twice test for students in the

classroom, there are pre-test and post-test. After students got test, researcher would

analyzed students’ capabilities while they spoke descriptive text without researcher

applied flashcard in the class and when they learnt speaking by using flashcard.
 54

The result pre-test showed there are many students got troubles to speak

clearly. They felt difficult and confuse about speaking in the classroom. Then, the

researcher gave treatments by using flashcard as a media, they interested to speak

something based on the pictures. The material in syllabus which are about people,

animal, and wonderful places. The students during treatments felt enjoy, active,

interesting, and enthusiastic to learn english especially speaking skill. The last step, it

did a administering post-test. The post-test gave after they got treatments to know

speaking scores from students. The result post-test seemed to be better than the pre-

test. That means post-test score was higher, it seen from mean of post-test was 82 and

the mean of pre-test was 66.17. The Sig. (2-tailed) was 0.000 it mean significance of

this research less than 0.005. So, researcher concluded that alternative hypothesis was

accepted. It was to indicate about flashcard related with speaking proficiency based

on result finding in this research.

Referring to post-test showed a flashcard media had influential toward

teaching and learning speaking skill from students. Using flashcard to learn media

was effective and students more interested toward speaking lesson in the classroom.

The score of research in the classroom make students motivated when they learn to

speak English. The flashcard is a media for effective learning card containing images,

text or symbols that are to help remind or direct students for think something about it

and that can be measured by previous analytical data. The researcher as English

teacher explained detail about flashcard and how to speak clearly and try some

students practicing their speaking in the classroom. Early the students confused and
 55

shy to say something when they looked at the picture, the researcher motivated them

until spoke by their own word.

Based on previous chapter that flashcard can be applied on seventh grade for

teaching vocabulary, but that flashcard also can be applied at eight grade of SMPN 1

Tanggunggunung for teaching speaking. So flashcard for teaching is good to any

level in the school start from elementary school until university. In university

flashcard using more interesting tools to teaching with this media it is digital

flashcard. According Colbran digital flashcard in coorporating multimedia, data

analytic and spaced repetition system that time the repeat access to cards so as

maximize memory retention (Colbran 2015:04).

Finally, based on this chapter, the researcher made decision flashcard as a

learning media was effective toward students speaking skill at eight grade of the

SMPN 1 Tanggunggunung.