4.1 Findings

To decide the sample of the research, researcher tabulates the first English daily test score (formative test score) at first semester in 2007/2008 academic years (in Appendix 1) and finds that:

(1) Those classes are normally distributed. The calculation is in Appendix 2, 3, and 4. The result is showed at the table below:

Table 4.1 L0 and Ltable Values of First English Formative Test Score of 1st Classes at First Semester at SMP 4 Jambi 2007/2008 Academic Years

Class L0 Ltable

1 A

1 B

1 C 0.1145

0.1156

0.1013 0.1367

0.1321

0.1401

L0 value is compared with Ltable value, it shows that all of classes have L0 < Ltable, it means that the population are normally distributed.

(2) Those classes are homogeny. From the calculation (Appendix 5), is gotten ratio2 = 0.4969 while table2 = 2.92 for significance () at the 0.05 level. So, ratio2 < table2 which means that all of the population have the homogeny variance at 95% belief level.

(3) Those classes have the same ability for English subject. From the calculation (Appendix 6) is gotten Fratio = 0.000002627, Ftable = 3.0708 with = 0.05. So, Fratio < Ftable, it means that the English ability of the populations is not difference.

After calculating the normality, homogeneity, and analysis of variance, is found that class 1A, class 1B, and class 1C can be chosen as the subject of the research because they are normally distributed, homogeny, and have the same English ability.

Then the samples are chosen by using roll of papers. After lottery the roll of papers is gotten class 1A as the first group with portfolio assessment and class 1B as the second group with traditional assessment.

From the observation for a semester that started on 30th of August 2007 until 30th of December 2007, it could be found that class 1A and class 1B have the same teacher. The teacher gave the same material and the same process of learning except the process of assessment. Teacher used portfolio assessment during teaching and learning process for class 1A and used traditional assessment during teaching and learning process for class 1B.

To find how learning achievement in class with portfolio assessment and traditional assessment is and how the difference between those classes is, researcher analyzed the documentation of final test scores. The final test score can be seen at Appendix 7.

From the study, researcher get the mean ( X ) and standard deviation (s) of final test score both of the class with traditional assessment and the class with portfolio assessment. The mean and standard deviation of the score can be seen at the Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Average and Standard Deviation of Final Test Score of The Class With Traditional Assessment and Class With Portfolio Assessment

Class 1A

With Portfolio Assessment Class 1B

With Traditional Assessment

N

Σ x

Σ x2

X

s

s2 42

2953

220109

70.3095

17.4503

304.5117 45

2700

173970

60

16.4938

272.0455

Explanation:

N = the number of the students

Σ x = the sum of the score

Σ x2 = the sum of the score’s square

X = mean

s = standard deviation

s2 = standard deviation’s square

It can be seen that there is difference between students’ learning achievement with portfolio assessment and traditional assessment. Mean of the students’ achievement with portfolio assessment is higher than mean of the students’ achievement with traditional assessment.

Final Test Score of Class 1A with Portfolio Assessment and Class 1B with Traditional Assessment is represented in Appendix. Researcher finds that in Class 1A there are 13 students (30.95 %) get scores below 5.9 (unsatisfactory score), 14 students (33.33 %) get scores in range 6.0 – 7.9 (adequate score), and 15 students (35,72 %) get scores in range 8.0 – 100 (good score). While in Class 1B there are 21 students (46.67 %) get scores below 5.9 (unsatisfactory score), 17 students (37.78 %) get scores in range 6.0 – 7.9 (adequate score), and 7 students (15.55 %) get scores in range 8.0 – 100 (good score).

From the percentages of the score of each class, the scores of Class 1A is in balance, but the scores of Class 1B is still low because almost 50% of the students in Class 1B get unsatisfactory scores.

To analyze how the difference between them is, whether there is a significant difference or not, researcher using t-test method. The calculating of t-test is in Appendix 8.

After analyzing the data by using t-test at the level of significance () 0.05, is got tratio is bigger than ttable, that is tratio = 2.833 > ttable = 1.992, it shows that there is a significant difference between the students’ learning achievement with traditional assessment and portfolio assessment.

4.2 Discussion

The differences of student’s learning achievement between the class with portfolio assessment and the class with traditional assessment are caused by the difference of assessment process at those classes. At class with traditional assessment, teacher and students do not make documentation of student’s score and do not record the student’s work. While, at class with portfolio assessment, teacher and students always make documentation of student’s score and record the student’s work, so both teacher and students know the student’s learning progress time to time.

Portfolio is usable for teacher, students, and parent. Teacher can use portfolio to analyze which material that should be explained again and which instruments that should be repaired. Teacher can send portfolio to parents to show the students’ learning progress, so parents know how to help the students to learn at home. Besides, portfolio is very important for student it self. Students can see their score time to time. Students can find feedback of their effort in learning. Dimyati and Mudjiono (2002:48) stated that students would be more motivated in learning if the students know the result of their work as a feedback.

Besides, at the class with traditional assessment teacher never asks the students to make revision of their work. Students never do self or peer-assessment so they do not realize what their weakness in learning English is. While at the class with portfolio, teacher asks the students to make revision of their work, so the students are accustomed to make a best work. Because of the students’ work are documented, the students can see their work time to time, so they know what their weakness is, and it will motivates them to study hard and better. Self and peer-assessment in portfolio assessment process also give important role in motivating the students, because this is one of a good way to convince them about what they can do or what they cannot do in learning English. Then, it will be a tool for teacher and parents to help the students in learning English when the students meet a difficulty.

At class with portfolio, students were asked to make creativity and join in some positive activities. It will have certain score. After check-out the students work, teacher ask the students at class with portfolio assessment to make revision of their work and put the revision work on “Majalah Dinding”.

Teacher also asks the students at class with portfolio assessment to do self and peer-assessment. The result of self and peer-assessment shows what they can do and what they cannot do in learning English. From this kind of assessment teacher can know what the students’ difficulty is.

These findings are in lines with the opinion from Gronlund (in Rusoni, 2001) that portfolio have some advantages.

Based on the explanation above, researcher come to the conclusion that the students at class with portfolio will be prompted to have intrinsic motivation to learn English hard and better because they get enough feedback from the works that are documented in a file, so their learning achievement are better than the students’ learning achievement at class with traditional assessment.

Although there are some strength of portfolio assessment have been extolled in a number of sources, but it also has weakness, they are:

(1) Students need more time in doing the work;

Teacher gives many kinds of task in order the students become more creative in using English in real life. Besides, students should correct the errors in their work and make revision of the work. It needs more time consuming for the students to do all the work.

(2) Teacher needs more time in completing portfolio of the students;

In portfolio assessment process, students’ work should be given feedback as a motivation for the students. Therefore, teacher needs more time to check over the students’ work and give feedback to each work. Teacher also should assess students’ attitude in class. What should be done by the teacher is out of proportion to the number of the students in class and the salary of the teacher.

(3) School’ parties need more cost to give portfolio to each student.

To record the student’s work needs a kind of folder for each student.

Portfolios can fail if objectives are not clear, if guidelines are not given to students, or if systematic periodic review and feedback are not present.