8.

FINDINGS
In this research, maximal improvement towards the spelling problem of the
participants had been shown. This research had also confirmed that the use of drilling
dice was able to improve spelling problem among Year 4 pupils. This statement
could be interpreted based from the findings below;
Participant A
The data below shows the reduction of spelling mistakes from pre-test to post-test.
Category
Number of
spelling
mistakes

Pre-test
13

Intervention I
10

Intervention II
6

Post-test
0

Table 9: The spelling mistakes of Participant A

Number of mistakes
14
12
10
8
Number of mistakes

6
4
2
0

Graph 3: The spelling mistakes of participant A.

38

From the data above, it showed that participant A had decreased in spelling
mistakes from pre-test to post-test. It could be supported with the data collected
during observation and checklist done as below:
Time
taken to
answer
the test
Pre- test
50
observation minutes
Observation
46
for
minutes
intervention
44
I and II
minutes
session
Post-test
41
observation minutes

Confidence
level

Motivational
level

Disturbance
behaviour

Attention/
interest

Body
posture

Low

Low

No

No

Bad

Low

High

No

Yes

Good

Low

High

No

Yes

Good

High

High

No

Yes

Good

Table 10: The observation result of participant A.

Through observation and checklist, participant A showed the improvement in
the behaviour like the time taken to answer had shortened, the confidence level had
increased, the motivation became high and the interest and attention was better after
the intervention. All of these showed that participant A had improved after the
intervention had been done. Other than that, this statement could be supported with
the data collected during the interview. The data could be seen as follow:

39

Number of oral spelling mistakes

16
14
12
10

Number of oral spelling

mistakes

8
6
4
2
0
Before the intervention

Intervention II

Graph 4: The oral spelling mistakes done by participant A.

From the data above, it showed that participant A had improved in spelling
whereby there were no mistakes at all during the interview done after the
intervention. It could be concluded that participant A had improved in spelling
problem after this intervention session. This data had proven that the drilling dice
technique was successful.
The same result goes to participant B. The result was shown below:
Category
Number of
spelling
mistakes

Pre-test
13

Intervention I
10

Intervention II
5

Post-test
0

Table 11: The spelling mistakes of participant B.

40

Number of mistakes
14
12
10
8
Number of mistakes

6
4
2
0

Graph 5: The spelling mistakes of participant B.

From the data above, it could be seen that the spelling mistakes of participant B had
decreased from pre-test to post-test. It could be supported with the data collected
during observation and checklist done as below:
Time
taken to
answer
the test
Pre- test
56
observation minutes
Observation
50
for
minutes
intervention
46
I and II
minutes
session
Post-test
42
observation minutes

Confidence
level

Motivational
level

Disturbance
behaviour

Attention/
interest

Body
posture

Low

Low

No

No

Bad

Low

High

No

Yes

Good

Low

High

No

Yes

Good

High

High

No

Yes

Good

Table 12: The observation result of participant B.

41

Through observation and checklist, participant B showed the improvement in his

behaviour like the time taken to answer were less, the confidence level increased, the
motivation become high and the interest and attention was better after the
intervention. All of these showed that participant B had improved after the
intervention had been done. Other than that, this statement could be supported with
the data collected during the interview. The data could be seen as follow:

Number of oral spelling mistakes

16
14
12
10

Number of oral spelling

mistakes

8
6
4
2
0
Before the intervention

Intervention II

Graph 6: The oral spelling mistakes done by participant B.

42

From the data above, it showed that participant B had improved in spelling whereby
there were no mistakes at all during the interview done after the intervention. It could
be concluded that participant B had improved in spelling problem after this
intervention session. This data had proven that the drilling dice technique was
successful.

Category
Number of
spelling
mistakes

Pre-test
15

Intervention I
10

Intervention II
4

Post-test
0

Participant C

Table 13: The spelling mistakes of participant C.

Number of mistakes
16
14
12
10
8
6

Number of mistakes

4
2
0

43

Graph 7: The spelling mistakes of participant C.

From the data above, it could be seen that the spelling mistakes of participant C had
decreased from pre-test to post-test. It could be supported with the data collected
during observation and checklist done as below:

Time
taken to
answer
the test
Pre- test
49
observation minutes
Observation
45
for
minutes
intervention
44
I and II
minutes
session
Post-test
40
observation minutes

Confidence
level

Motivational
level

Disturbance
behaviour

Attention/
interest

Body
posture

Low

Low

Yes

No

Bad

Low

High

No

Yes

Good

High

High

No

Yes

Good

High

High

No

Yes

Good

Table 14: The observation result of participant C.

Through observation and checklist, participant C showed the improvement in her

behaviour like the time taken to answer were less, the confidence level increased, the
motivation become high and the interest and attention was better after the
intervention. All of these showed that participant C had improved after the
intervention has been done. Other than that, this statement could be supported with
the data collected during the interview. The data could be seen as follow:
44

Number of oral spelling mistakes

16
14
12
10

Number of oral spelling

mistakes

8
6
4
2
0
Before the intervention

Intervention III

Graph 8: The oral spelling mistakes done by participant C.

From the data above, it showed that participant C had improved in spelling whereby
there were no mistakes at all during the interview done after the intervention. It could
be concluded that participant C had improved in spelling problem after this
intervention session. This data had proven that the drilling dice technique was
successful.

45

Participant D
Category
Number of
spelling
mistakes

Pre-test
13

Intervention I
10

Intervention II
8

Post-test
3

Table 15: The spelling mistakes of participant D.

Number of mistakes
14
12
10
8
6

Number of mistakes

4
2
0

Graph 9: The spelling mistakes of participant D.

From the data above, it showed that participant D had decreased in spelling mistakes
from pre-test to post-test. It could be supported with the data collected during
observation and checklist done as below:

46

Time
taken to
answer
the test
Pre- test
55
observation minutes
Observation
50
for
minutes
intervention
45
I and II
minutes
session
Post-test
42
observation minutes

Confidence
level

Motivational
level

Disturbance
behaviour

Attention/
interest

Body
posture

Low

Low

Yes

No

Bad

Low

Medium

No

Yes

Good

Low

Medium

No

Yes

Good

High

High

No

Yes

Good

Table 16: The observation result of participant D.

Through observation and checklist, participant D had showed the improvement in her
behaviour like the time taken to answer were less, the confidence level increased, the
motivation become high and the interest and attention was better after the
intervention. All of these showed that participant D had improved after the
intervention had been done. Other than that, this statement could be supported with
the data collected during the interview. The data could be seen as follow:

47

Number of oral spelling mistakes

16
14
12
10

Number of oral spelling

mistakes

8
6
4
2
0
Before the intervention

Intervention II

Graph 10: The oral spelling mistakes done by participant D.

From the data above, it showed that participant D had improved in spelling whereby
there were little mistakes at all during the interview done after the intervention. It
could be concluded that participant D had improved in spelling problem after this
intervention session. This data had proven that the drilling dice technique was
successful.
Based on the data above, it enforces that the drilling dice techniques was the best
method to improve spelling problem among students. It is supported by Matthews,
Spratt, and Dangerfield 1991, in their research that states drills were used usually at
the controlled practice stage of language learning so that students have the
opportunity to accurately try out what they have learned. Drilling session helps

48

students to develop quick, automatic responses using a specific formulaic expression

or structure, such as a tag ending, verb form, or transformation.

This research also in accordance to Doff 1990, repetition drills was useful for
familiarizing pupils quickly with a specific structure or formulaic expressions. In this
research, the researcher was able to help those four students who have spelling
problem with action verb in correcting their spelling of action verbs through drillings
dice sessions.
In addition, Robertson& Richard, 2009 in a research entitles Approach and Method
in Language Teaching stated that Drilling dice technique was one of the ways that
was used in teaching English spelling where the students were suggested to be
familiar or used to the target language technique and the students were emphasized to
do more practices. This statement supported the research done since the research give
the chances to the participant to get familiar with the spelling of action verb through
drilling. It gives the positive effect whereby based from the data collected, 90% of
the participants had mastered the spelling of the words drilled by the researcher.
Riswanto, Endang Haryanto, 2012 in their research, Improving Students
Pronunciation through Communicative Drilling Technique says that drilling
technique is a way of teaching or learning spelling by repeating exercise. By
applying this technique ESL learners were more confident to spell words accurately
and enjoyable. This statement could be supported by the evidence given by the
researcher whereby those four participants had increased their confidence to spell
words accurately. Through the statement supported by the other researches, it can be

49

concluded that drilling dice technique was the best technique to improve spelling of
action verbs among students.
The researcher had proven that drilling dice was able to improve spelling problem
among Year 4 pupils. In conclusion, the findings show that this research had
answered the research questions and research objectives.

50