You are on page 1of 8

Chapter 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the results and discussions of the study. The results are

presented in tables and carefully interpreted by the researchers.

The Pretest Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Groups

The pre-test mean scores of the kindergarten pupils in the experimental and

control groups were shown in Table 1. In the pre-test, the experimental group have 25

respondents while the control group have 17 respondents. The experimental group

have a pre-test mean score of 4.00 with a p-value of 1.55, while the control group have

a pre-test mean score of 3.29 with a p-value of 1.31.

Table 1 The pretest mean score of the experimental and control groups

Group Number of Mean Score Standard

students Deviation

Experimental 25 4.0000 1.55456

Control 17 3.2941 1.31171

Based on the pre-test mean scores, we could see that the experimental group

have higher score than the control group. Yet, the pre-test mean scores of both groups

have almost the same level. However, both groups have a little difference in standard

deviation. In other words, the experimental and control group have almost the same

range of scores between lowest to highest scores.


The Posttest Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Groups

The posttest mean scores of the kindergarten pupils in the experimental and

control groups were shown in Table 2. The posttest mean score obtained by the

control group is 5.05 with standard deviation of 1.29, while the experimental group has

4.72 with standard deviation of 1.10.

Table 2 The posttest means scores of the experimental and control groups

Group Number of Mean Score Standard Deviation

students

Experimental 25 4.7200 1.10000

Control 17 5.0588 1.29762

The result tells us that in the post test the control group perform higher than the

experimental group. This result implies that pupils in the control group who were taught

in a traditional method, with the use of traditional instructional materials such as big

book and pictures perform higher than those pupils who were taught using educational

videos. This result may occur because in the actual teaching in the control group, the

teacher gave immediate feedback on the pupils in the discussion such as asking for

inquiries if there are parts of the discussion are not clear or simply guiding the pupils to

repeat what had just said. In doing that, there will be a two-way process of learning

occur wherein the teacher and the pupils interact with each other to achieve a certain

learning goal with the use of feedback. On the other hand, in the experimental group,

the teacher utilized educational videos as a tool in the whole discussion part of the
lesson. The teacher let the pupils watch series of videos from day 1 to 3 including story

video and interactive Video entitled “Kikay”. In contrast, similar research indicates that

mere exposure (to video) is not sufficient for students to acquire significant visual or

media literacy. Rather, explicit instruction is required to equip young people with the

critical discrimination skills they need (Messaris, 2001). Further to this, the value of

video relies on how it is implemented in the classroom. Reviews and meta-analysis of

the research indicates that positive learning and affective outcomes are greatly

enhanced and extended when the video is integrated into the rest of the lesson (CPB,

2004; Mares, 1996).

Difference between the Pretest and Posttest of the Experimental and the

Control Groups

Displayed at Table 3 is the difference between pretest and posttest of the

experimental and control groups, and the pretest and posttest of separated group. The

period indicated in the table shows the significant difference of pretest and posttest in

both group. The p value is .001 which is less than  = 0.05. The present study tested

the null hypothesis claiming that there is no significant difference between the pretest

and posttest in control and experimental group. Result rejected the hypothesis because

the present study claims that there is a significant difference between the pretest and

posttest in both groups. Hence, an improvement in the performance of both groups

from their pretest and posttest scores was shown.


The Period*Group stated in the table 3 represents the difference between

pretest and posttest in separated groups. The p value for the pretest and posttest in

separated groups is 0.033 which is greater than  = 0.05. This means that there is no

significant difference between the pretest and posttest of separated groups. The scores

of separated groups in the pretest and posttest show that their performance is of the

same level.

Table 3 The difference between the pretest and posttest of the experimental and

control group

Within Subjects Effects


Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p
Period 31.236 1 31.236 27.735 < .001
Period ✻ Group 5.522 1 5.522 4.903 0.033
Residual 45.049 40 1.126
Note. Type III Sum of Squares

Pupils need explicit instruction in phonemic awareness to understand phonics

(Adams, 1996). When developing phonemics awareness skills, children are able to hear

the initial and final sounds in words. In the traditional way of teaching, pupils are given

many opportunities to practice their skills in phonics recognition which results why

pupils in the control group improved in their performance. On the other hand, videos

are also effective in developing skills. Learners are generally enthusiastic about

incorporating video in their learning (Tatsuki, 2000). This implies the improvement of

the performance of the pupils taught with the use of educational videos. Thus, the
result tells us that direct and explicit instruction is important in teaching phonics, and

videos are also effective in literacy learning.

The result also shows that there is no significant difference between the pretest

and posttest of separated groups which tells that pupils in the control and experimental

group improved on the same level. This result can be interpreted in several ways. The

teaching strategy may be considered. Pupils in the control group are given many

opportunities to practice their understanding of the relationship between letters and

sounds. On the other hand, pupils in the experimental group are only taught with the

use of educational videos without teacher’s full support in the discussion of the lesson.

Pupils only viewed and listened to the videos and right after they were given quiz to

check their understanding. Videos should be used to make a connection on the concept

being studied in class (Western Governors University, 2014). Pupils in the experimental

group did not show higher improvement in their performance because the videos are

not used as a teaching aid but rather a replacement of the teacher discussing the

lesson. Effectively integrating video into classroom instruction involves preparation and

activities before, during and after viewing (National Teacher Training Institute,

undated). This just shows that videos cannot replace the teacher in the teaching and

learning process but it should be an aid to enhance learning to maximize its

effectiveness. Furthermore, it may be that the testing effects have greatly affect the

result of the scores of the pupils. The test was developed by the researcher and

validated by the (3) three validators. The test was established according to the learning

objectives of the (3) three days demonstration teaching and to the specific skill (phonics
recognition) that the researcher would want the pupils involve to improved. The test

was composed of six items multiple choice test which is way too easy for the pupils. As

the researchers did the testing, posttest specifically, many pupils in both groups would

tell that they already done answering the test, referring to the pretest they had before

the researcher conducted the (3) days demonstration teaching.

Difference between the Posttest of the Experimental and Control Group

Table 4 shows the result of the difference between the posttest of the

experimental and control group. The p value is 0.598 which is greater than  = 0.05.

This means that there is no significant difference between the posttest of the

experimental and control group.

Table 4 The test difference between posttest of the experimental and control group

Between Subjects Effects

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p

Group 0.682 1 0.682 0.283 0.598

Residual 96.461 40 2.412

Note. Type III Sum of Squares

When teaching phonics, direct and explicit instruction is needed (National

Reading Panel, 2000). This supports why pupils taught about letter Kk and its sound

using only books and pictures improved in their performance. During the teaching and

learning process, the pupils were given different activities which help them practice

their skill in phonics recognition. The teacher guides the pupils and gives immediate
feedback on their performance every during the activity. On the other hand, the pupils

who were taught using educational videos in teaching about letter Kk and its sound also

improved in their performance. This supports that technology can also enhance learning

(Schmid et al., 2014). Pupils become more attentive in listening about the lesson when

videos are being presented which results to the good results of their scores in the test.

This supports on the study of Islam, B., Islam, K., Ahmed & Shamsuddin which tells

that animation deeply affects children’s minds and increased their performance. Thus,

the result tells that pupils show positive outcome in their performance and learning

even when taught traditionally or taught using educational videos.

Graph 1 shows the performance of the experimental and control group. The

graph shows that there is significant difference in pretest and posttest of the control

group and experimental for each of them shows improvement in their posttest scores.

This means that those pupils taught using educational videos and those pupils taught

using only books and pictures both improved significantly in their performance. The

graph also shows that the control group improved more rapidly from the pretest and

posttest scores than the experimental group. However, it does not show a significant

difference in their scores on their performance.


Graph 1. Performance of the experimental and control group

Therefore, the statistical data and analysis proved that using educational video

can improve the performance of learners in phonics recognition. However, it does not

show a significant difference in the performance of the pupils taught only traditionally.