A Comparative Study on Math-Science and Social Students Concerning Their Passive Voice Mastery: A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of State Senior High School 6 of Palembang
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31851/esteem.v1i1.4825Keywords:
Comparative Study, Math-Science Students, Social Students, Passive, Voice MasteryAbstract
Abstract: The main problem of this study was “Is there any significant difference in passive voice mastery between the eleventh grade students in math-science and social major of State Senior High School 6 of Palembang?†Thus, the main objective of this study was to find out whether or not there is significant difference in passive voice mastery between the eleventh grade students in math-science and social major. In conducting the study, the writer used causal-comparative analysis. To obtain the data, the writer used two instruments; passive voice test and questionnaire. The data of passive voice test was analyzed through Standard Deviation (SD) finding which is combined to the Degree of Freedom finding (DF), and used the T-Test formula with Separated Variance Pattern. In analyzing the questionnaire, the writer calculated the percentage of each item. Based on the analysis, the average score of passive voice test obtained by math-science students was 88.2 while social students got 80.9. Furthermore, the result of questionnaire showed that math-science students gave 75% of positive perceptions toward English class, on the other hand, social students only gave 25%. The calculation of comparative analysis showed that tobservation was lower than ttable (0.184<1.995). It indicates that Ho was accepted and Ha was rejected. In other words, there was no significant difference in passive voice mastery between the eleventh grade students in math-science and social major of State Senior High School 6 of Palembang.
Â
References
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education, Sixth Edition.
New York, USA: Routledge.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, Eighth Edition. New York, USA: McGraw- Hill.
Hariyono, R., & Mc. Carthy, A. (2008). ABC Plus English Grammar (Accurate, Bright, Clear).
Surabaya: Gitamedia Press.
Hinkel, E. (2002). Why English Passive is Difficult to to Teach (and Learn). In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching (pp. 233-260). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hornby, A. S. (2010). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. International Student’s Edition (New 8th ed.). New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
Jaya, A. 2017. The Influence of Teachers’ Questioning Strategies on the Eleventh Grade Students’ Speaking Achievement at SMKN 1 Palembang.Jambi-English Language Teaching. 2 (1).
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2007). Shorter Articles and Notes the Interpretation of the Passive Voice.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20(1), 69-73.
Junaidi. (2010). Titik Persentase Distribusi t. Retrieved from http://junaidichaniago. wordpress.com
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. (2013). Peminatan Peserta Didik. Indonesia: Pusat Pengembangan Tenaga Kependidikan. Badan pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan dan Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan.
Leech, G. (2006). A Glossary of English Grammar. UK: Edinburgh University Press.
Leung, F. K .S., & Park, K. (2014). Comparing Educational Achievements. In Bray, M, Adamson, B, & Mason, M (Eds.), Comparative Education Research: Approaches and Methods, Second Edition (pp. 387-414). Hong Kong, China: Springer International Publishing.
Purpura, J. E. (2004). Assesing Grammar. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Purpura, J. E. (2013). Assesing Grammar. In Kunnan, A. J (Ed.), The Companion to Language Assessment, First Edition (pp. 109-124). USAL John Wiley & Sons, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/9781118411360.wbcla147.
Sugiyono. (2015). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
UCOL Student Experience Team (SET) Library and Learning Services. (2015). A guide to the APA 6th ed. referencing style. USA: Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.
Uluc, T. F. (2013). Comparing the Language Skills and Grammatical Competences of German Language Teacher Trainees. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70(2013), 1740- 1747.
Wang, F. (2010). The Necessity of Grammar Teaching. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 78-81. Wang, Y. (2010). Classification and SLA Studies of Passive Voice. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research, 1(6), 945-949.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
