ASSIGNMENT 6

Please make up your data and analyze correlations or relationships of two predictor variables and
one criterion variable simultaneously. A predictor variable is a characteristic assigned different
values used to predict other variable. While, criterion variable is a characteristic assigned
different values and predicted by the predictor variables.
An Example:
A. PROBLEM
A language teacher taught reading comprehension the seventh grade students in the Junior
High School. She taught descriptive text of a person using Jig Saw Reading Technique. She
wanted to test the relationships of the predictor variables, namely: vocabulary mastery and
content knowledge and the criterion variable, namely reading comprehension. In other words,
she wanted to see direction and magnitude of relationships of vocabulary mastery and content
knowledge and the students’ reading comprehension .

B. VOCABULARY MASTERY AND READING COMPEREHNSION DATA

Vocabulary Mastery Content Knowledge Reading Comprehension

(n1.1 = 10) (n1.2 = 10) (n.1.3=10)
80 70 80
70 70 70
60 60 60
50 60 75
40 60 60
40 50 75
40 50 60
30 50 70
30 40 60
30 40 60

C. DATA ANALYSIS

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

reading 67.0000 7.88811 10

vocabulary 47.0000 17.66981 10

content 55.0000 10.80123 10

Model Summaryb

Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Model R R Square Square Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 .537a .289 .085 7.54375 3.210

a. Predictors: (Constant), content, vocabulary

b. Dependent Variable: reading

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 161.642 2 80.821 1.420 .304b

Residual 398.358 7 56.908

Total 560.000 9

a. Dependent Variable: reading

b. Predictors: (Constant), content, vocabulary

D. INTERPRETATION
1. There were ten seventh grade students in the Junior High School taught reading using
Jig Saw Technique. The students’ vocabulary mastery and content knowledge were
measured using T-score as well as their reading comprehension. Descriptively, the
students’ vocabulary mastery and content knowledge mean scores are 47.00 and
55.00 respectively. Their reading comprehension mean score is = 67.00.
2. When analyzed inferentially and simultaneously, the resulting multiple correlation
coefficient R = 0.537 or positive and moderate relationships of vocabulary mastery
and content knowledge and the students’ reading comprehension. Therefore, the one-
tailed test or directional hypothesis, saying that the relationships of vocabulary
mastery and content knowledge and the students’ reading comprehension, is non-
significant since accepted the alpha level exceeds 0.304.

E. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, there is no significant multiple relationships of vocabulary mastery and
content knowledge and reading comprehension.
ASSIGNMENT 4 B
Please make up your own data and conduct a hypothesis testing, that is, testing two-sample
independent case.

An Example:
A. PROBLEM
A language teacher taught reading to two different classes of the seventh grade in the Junior
High School. She taught descriptive text of a person using Jig Saw Reading Technique. She
wanted to test the effect of such a technique in the students’ reading competency. In the
two classes. Therefore, she wanted to test the hypothesis as to whether to accept or reject
it at 0.01 level of significance. After teaching the reading text, she administered a reading test
with 25 multiple choice items.

B. READING COMPETENCY DATA

Two Sample Case Independent

Class A Class B
(n1.1 = 10) (n1.2=10)
80 80
70 70
60 60
60 75
60 60
70 75
80 60
60 70
70 60
70 60

C. DATA ANALYSIS

Group Statistics
Std. Std. Error
GROUP N Mean Deviation Mean
CLASS 1.00 10 68.0000 7.88811 2.49444
2.00 10 67.0000 7.88811 2.49444
 Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval
Mean Std. Error
of the Difference
Sig. (2- Differenc Differenc
F Sig. t df tailed) e e Lower
CLASS .147 .706 .283 18 .780 1.00000 3.52767
.283 18.000 .780 1.00000 3.52767

D. INTERPRETATION
1. There were twenty seventh grade students altogether in Class A and Class B in the
Junior High School taught reading using Jig Saw Technique. Their reading
competencies were scored 0 to 10 or using Statine. When compared descriptively, the
students’ reading competencies of descriptive text are: Class A -= 68.00 and Class B
= 67.00.
2. When compared statistically, the result shows no significant difference between the
two mean reading competency scores (α = 0.05; df=18). Therefore, the null
hypothesis was accepted.

E. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Jig Saw Technique was not effective in improving the students’ mean
reading competency scores in both classes.