Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th

# FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION by hjsrisundari

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 4

This chapter with the findings and discussion of the research findings. The findings of the research cover the description of the result of data collected through the reading test and the discussion reveals the interpretation of findings

• pg 1
```									                                                                                            1

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter with the findings and discussion of the research findings. The

findings of the research cover the description of the result of data collected through

the reading test and the discussion reveals the interpretation of findings :

A. Findings

This part presents the result of the students’ reading comprehension

achievements.

1.     Rate percentage of the students’ score

Students’ score of pre-test and post-test were classified into some criteria

and percentage as follows :

Table 1. The result of students’ pre-test and post-test

No. Classification       Score               Pre-test                    Post-test
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1.    Excellent        8.1 - 10        0               0%        14           46.66 %

2.    Good             6.1 – 8.0       17         56.66 %        15             50 %

3.    Fair            4.1 - 6.0        13         43.33 %         1            3.33 %

4.    Less             2.1 – 4.0       0               0%         0                 0%

5.    Poor             0.0 – 2.0       0               0%         0                 0%

Total                     30         99.99 %        30            100 %
2

Table 1 indicates there were 13 students (43.33 %) got fair score, 17

students (56.66 %) got good score. It means that the ability of the students to

comprehend the text. But after giving treatment the table shows that out of 30

students there were students who got excellent score, 14 students (46.66 %) got

excellent score, 15 students (50 %) got good score, 1 students (3.33 %) got fair

score. It can be concluded that the rate percentage good and excellent in the

post-test was greater than that of in the pre-test

2. The mean score and standard deviation of the pre-test and post-test

Test                 Mean score           Standard deviation

Pre-test                    6.42                      0.84

Post-test                   7.90                      0.97

Table 2 shows that the mean score that students’ obtained was 6.42 and post-

test was 7.90. The standard deviation of pre-test was 0.84 and standard deviation

of post-test was 0.97. the mean score of the students’ post-test was higher than the

mean score of the pre-test and the standard deviation of students’ post-test was

higher than the standard deviation of the students’ pre-test.

3. T-test value

In order to know whether or not the difference between the mean score of

test and post-test is statistically significant the t-test statistical analysis for non
3

independent sample was employed. The result of the t-test is shown in the

following table.

Table 3. The t-test of students’ comprehension achievement

Variable                    t-test value             t-table value

X2 – X1                        11.30                     1.699

The value of the t-test is greater than t-table (11.70 > 1.699). it can be

concluded that there is a significant difference between the result of the students’

pre-test and post-test.

4. Hypothesis Testing

The result of the statistical analysis at the level significance 0.05 with degrees

of freedom (df) = n – 1, where df = 30 – 1 and df = 29 indicated that there was

significant difference between the mean score of the post-test and pre-test. The

mean score of the pre-test was 6.42 and mean score of the post-test was 7.90. in

addition the t-test value was greater that the t-table value (11.30 > 1.699).

It means that there is significant difference between the students’ reading

comprehension before and after using communicative tasks in teaching reading.

This also means that null hypothesis (H0) was rejected, while the alternative

hypothesis (H1) was accepted.
4

B. Discussion

The description of the data collected through the

communicative task described in the previous section shows that the students’

reading comprehension has improved. It was supported by the frequency and rate

percentage of the result of the students’ score of pre-test and post-test. The students’

score after presenting in teaching reading through communicative tasks is better than

before the treatment was given to the students. The students were also very interested

in learning reading by communicative tasks as shown on the table.

In the pre-test there were 13 students (43.33 %) who got fair score, and 17

students (56.66 %) who got good score. It shows that none of them got excellent

score. In the post-test, it shows that there were 14 students (46.66 %) who got and

excellent score, 15 students (50 %) who got good score, and 1 students (3.33 %) who

a got fair score. It show that none of them less and poor score.

The mean score of the students’ pre-test was 6.42 that is classified as good score

and post-test was 7.90 that are classified as excellent score. It shows that the mean

score of students’ post-test is greater than the pre-test. The mean score of gain (d) is

44.38. it shows that there is a development of students’ reading comprehension after

treatment.

The value of the t-test is greater than t-table (11.30 > 1.699). based on the result

of the t-test, the researcher found that there were a significant difference between the

result of pre-test and post-test. In the other words, communicative tasks is effective in

developing the students’ reading comprehension.

```
To top