MEI AFRIANI 12250084 PDF. - Decrypted
MEI AFRIANI 12250084 PDF. - Decrypted
MEI AFRIANI 12250084 PDF. - Decrypted
UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
By:
Mei Afriani
NIM. 12250084
Alhamdulillah, all the praise is to Allah SWT, within His blessing, the
writer could finish this thesis. The thesis was written based on the research that
the writer conducted in English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah
Palembang. This thesis was written to fulfill one of the requirements to obtain
Sarjana Degree (S1) in English Education Study Program, Tarbiyah and Teaching
Faculty of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.
Palembang
The researcher,
Mei Afriani
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................... i
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... v
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background ............................................................................................ 1
1.2. Problem(s) of the Study ......................................................................... 6
1.3. Objective(s) of the Study ....................................................................... 7
1.4. Significance of the Study ....................................................................... 7
REFFERENCES
APPENDICES
ABSTRACT
The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between
classroom environment and academic achievement of English Education Study
Program students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang by conducting correlational
research. 366 students of English majors of the second, fourth, and sixth semester
took part in the study as the sample by using convenience sampling. The data of
this study were collected by administering a questionnaire of College and
University Classroom Environment Inventory (CUCEI) to assess classroom
environment of the students and and the students’ cumulative GPA was also used
to get the students’ academic achievement score. Pearson Product Moment and
regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Therefore, the r was 0.296 and
it was higher than than r-table (0.1059) and the level of probability (p)
significance (sig.2-tailed) was 0.000. It means that H0 was rejected and H1 was
accepted. Additionally, the regression analysis showed that classroom
environment contributed only 8,8 % to academic achievement. Finally, the result
indicated that there was significant correlation between classroom environment
and academic achievement and classroom environment influenced academic
achievement.
APPENDIX 6 Documentation
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents (1) the background, (2) the research questions, (3) the
1.1 Background
diplomacy, and scientific research (Brown, 2001, p. 118). For this reason, English
established its position as the global lingua franca beyond any doubt; along with
this status, it has become one of the symbols of our time, together with
is essential in many parts especially education (Lauder, 2008, p.11). It can be seen
that English has been taught from the early education up to higher. It is also
academic because the students are needed to be prepared for a better life in this
globalization era. Brockman and Russell (2012) consider, that academic success is
directly linked to the successful outcomes and values for youth in society.
Furthermore, Musthaq and Khan (2012) argue that, the social and economic
Maiyo, 2015). Hisken (2011) defines academic achievement as the level of actual
career and also to allow students to enter competitive fields. It also plays an
important role in producing the best quality graduates who will become great
leader and manpower for the country thus responsible for the country’s economic
and social development (Ali, Mokhtar & Kamaruzaman, 2009). This fact clearly
shows that beside skills, academic achievement is one of the things that should be
key criterion in order to judge students’ true potentials and capabilities (Daulta,
2008 & Nuthanap, 2007), which can help students in all areas of their lives.
difference in students achievement. This is caused by’ different factors that affect
the academic achievement of students. Some factors which may affect students’
(Mushtaq & Khan, 2012), age, peer influences, course assessment, class
interest influences the behaviour of others. Vygotsky (1978, as cited in Wei &
Elias, 2011, p. 240) says that classroom environment is the culture that can be the
refers to the feeling, a type of classroom that has to do with interactions in the
classroom.
& Elias, 2011, p. 240), students’ learning development can be determined by the
classroom environment because students spend their time to learn mostly in the
classroom, although learning can take place in other venues, classroom still
Nuevaespana, 2014). Moreover Yan (2006, p.5) said that, for foreign language
learners, classroom is the main place where they are frequently exposed to the
target language because, EFL students have little chance to use the target
students feel easy and eager to involve themselves into the classroom activities.
important. Therefore, students who fail some subject is probably because they do
Ziegler, Cheryan, Plaut and Metzoff (2014) shows, the physical classroom
environment such as inadequate lighting, noise, low air quality, and deficient
too cold and too hot classrooms, students feel uncomfortable. According to
psychological problems and people work more slowly apply much efforts and
Physical environment is not only the main problem that caused poor
each other and teachers. It is the place where the interaction between student and
Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang, some students enjoy
studying because they felt that classroom is already well-structured, clean enough,
conducive lighting, and they felt comfortable with air temperature, because every
class already has two air-conditioners. But the problem starts when the electricity
stop working, the temperature of the classroom is going to be hot and dark
especially for students who sit on the back. In such those situations the students
start feel sleepy, and made some of them lost their focus to gain the lecture as
well. Students also said that they were dissatisfied with their academic
achievement because the class sometime seems boring so they did not participate
in the class as well. And the interaction within the class influences their feeling.
affected the classroom learning environment. In the study, Ziegler et.al (2014),
found that the building’s structural facilities influence students achievement. But,
one study did not find this relationship between structural condition and student
environment as perceived by the students is, the better their achievement will be. As
motivates the students to perform better and encourage the learning process. So,
the researcher is interested in conducting the study to find out whether or not there
It is expected that this study provide a meaningful contribution for; (1) The
sensitize the lectures to help creating a better interaction in the classroom and also
providing conducive learning atmosphere. (2) For the students, it is hope that this
study can help them to build a positive interaction among themselves in classroom
(3) For other researcher who will conduct the research that concern about
classroom environment, and bring this to be one of the resources (4) Finally, this
study is useful for the researcher to increase knowledge about the importance of
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter presents: (1) the correlational study, (2) the concept of
previous study, (6) the hypotheses, and (7) criteria of testing hypotheses.
Simon and Goes (2011), claims that in the correlation research, some of the
extent to which the characteristics vary together. Usually some of the researcher
and one or more quantitative dependent variables. However, the main purpose of a
variables are related.Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun (2012, p. 340) said that when
coefficient moves toward either -1 or +1, the relationship gets stronger until there
is a perfect correlation at the end points. The significant difference between
Table 1
Correlation Coefficient
process occurs. Akubue (2001) defined the classroom as a base forall types of
activities. It holds students together and offers them the opportunities of achieving
the student develops what they want their future to look like, as well as
knowledge of the skills needed to reach that goal.The classroom environment also
environment (Fraser & Pickett, 2010). In addition, the classroom is a place for
interaction amongteachers, materials and students in order to create students
behavior.
school work and classroom behavior. Classroom rules and discipline plans
tell someone visiting the classroom exactly how their grades are
determined. Assignments that are often repeated, like book reports, should
completed quickly so that students have feedback from which they can
When you walk into a classroom and see the students engaged in
what is going on, learning is taking place. Teachers who are able to have
students involved and working have the best chance of success. One way
student. In a classroom where the teacher does little more than stand in
front of the class and talk, there is a much greater chance of losing student
interest. Lessons should be developed with the students, their interests, and
abilities in mind.
e. Instruction is varied
playing exercises can help keep students involved in the curriculum while
between what they are learning about and real life. By making these
students often lose focus, complaining that they just don't see why they
need to learn the topic being taught. Therefore, try to fit how what you are
This is not a feel-good implication, but really crucial for the whole
learning process to work. The role of curiosity has been studied (and
prospects for meaningful interaction with texts, media, and specific tasks
are bleak.
that if good questions should lead the learning, there would be value
placed on these questions. And that means adding currency whenever
pages on the classroom walls), or simply praise and honest respect. See if
Ideas for lessons, reading, tests, and projects the fiber of formal
learning should come from a variety of sources. If they all come from
narrow slivers of resources, you’re at risk of being pulled way off in one
credibility.
flipped classroom, and on and on the possibilities are endless. Chances are
none are incredible enough to suit every bit of content, curriculum, and
to be radically repackaged to make sense in the “real world,” but starts and
better understand their Uncle Eddie and they might depending on that kind
design may not be the best idea. Plan on this kind of transfer from the
beginning.
Personalized learning is likely the future, but for now the onus for
plan for by a variety of criteria not just assessment results or reading level,
pace, entry points, and rigor accordingly, you’ll have a better chance of
is, the more you’re going to separate the “good students” from the “good
thinkers.” And the “clinical” idea has less to do with the format of the test,
and more to do with the tone and emotion of the classroom in general.
Why are students being tested? What’s in it for them, and their future
not to you, your colleagues, or the expert book on your shelf, but the
students themselves.
collaboration, revision, and even the classic Habits of Mind are all great
places to start. So often what students learn from those around them is less
which are made up of the relationshipbetween the teachers and the students and
concept, social norms and expectations (Li &Yin, 2010). Sun (2010) also believed
temperature, ventilation system, size of the room, floor, walls, desks, chairs, rugs,
instructional materials and teacher interaction. It also refers to the extent the
teachers and thestudents perceive the classroom environment and how they want
it to look like. Moreover the both aspects of physical and socio psychological
a. Physical environment
student learning and achievement. It has been suggested that assessing the
includes:
a. Lighting
b. Acoustics
heating and ventilation units. Classrooms with greater external noise are
even more serious concern for students with hearing loss or attention
deficits.
c. Temperature
U.S School.
d. Air Quality
color and low income students are disproportionately likely to have low air
quality.
For foreign language learners,classroom is the main place where they are
Krashen (1981, as cited in Yi, 2010) considers that EFL students have little
chanceto use the target language in daily life, they have to depend entirely on
environment for learning in the class will really helpful for English Foreign
Learner.
the most important things a teacher can do. This becomes even more crucial as
students enter classrooms with their cell phones, pagers, and beepers.
Additionally, many students are tardy for class, leave early, or may not appear in
first class meeting. Everything a teacher does on Day One will set the stage for the
attendance and participation, and explaining the “rules of the road” are just the
&Varble, 2006)
academic study are important indicators of ability and productivity when those
individuals look for their first jobs. Moreover, the quality of student experiences
semester is represented by Grade Point Average (GPA) that achieve at the end of
their college. Normally, university’s students finish their school at least on 5 years
(10 semesters) and they will get get their cummlative GPA. Before finish their
school, they will get GPA for each semester. Grade (GPA) are given at the end of
University, the grade poin average (GPA) is a numerical index that summeries
0-4).
dividing the total number of grade points received by the number of credits
attempted(TheFreeDictionary, 2012).Cumulative GPA obtained by having score
from each subject from the whole semester that already take. At the end of
semester, learners would get score for each subject. When the GPA only present
the current semester, the cummulative GPA present the whole score of students
that already take. Both GPA and Cummulative GPA have a similiarities in scoring
scored will be added and the total score will be divided with the number of
Table 2
Source: Buku Panduan Akademik Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Raden
Fatah Palembang
been shown by many researchers in recent years (Sulleman & Hussain, 2014;
(Mokhtar, 2003).
ignored. Because,students will perform better and have more positive attitudes in
because the students who have the positive perception of their classroom
environment will have a high interest with the lesson and it may increase their
grades.
There are two previous studies that related to this study. The first studywas
environment in Punjab. This study was aimed at finding out the academic
selected. This study revealed that there exist a positive relationship between
academic achievement and classroom environment among adolescents of schools
of Ludhiana District.
whichconsist of Lagos, Ogun, Osun, Oyo and Ekiti State. The sample for this
study comprised one 1050 senior secondary school students from three states, out
of the six states in the South West Geo-politicalzone. The sample were taken from
the three states, such as are Osun, Ondo and Ekiti. The result showed that there
2.7 Hypotheses
The hypotheses of this study are proposed in the forms of null and research
hypotheses below:
METHOD OF RESEARCH
This chapter presents: (1) research design, (2) research variable, (3)
operational definition, (4) the population and sample, (5) data collection,
pattern for two (or more) variables or two sets of data to vary consistently.
Correlation research design was used to find out the correlation between
design as follow :
Figure I
Research Design
X Y
X = Classroom environment
The procedures in this study were; to get the perception from the
Average). Moreover, to find the correlation among those two variables, the
data of questionnaire and students’ GPA distributed into SPSS version 16.
this study, there were three variables. There were two kind of variables,
There were terms that need to be defined in this study. First, the
students’ study from all the courses they have taken starting from the first
3.4.1 Population
generalize the sample results (Jhonson & Christensen, 2012, p.218). The
Table 3.
Distribution of Population
1 II 144
2 IV 120
3 VI 102
4 VIII 75
5 X 139
Total 580
3.4.2 Sample
plans to study for generalizing about the target population (Creswell, 2012,
p. 142). In this study, convenience sampling were used to get the sample.
available to be studied.
The consideration for taking the sample were the students who are
still active in the lectures and classroom. The eight and tenth semester
students have already finished all of the lectures in the class and they are
working with their thesis. For those reasons, only the second, fourth and
Therefore, there were about 366 students. The distribution of the sample
Table 4.
Distribution of Sample
1 II 144
1 IV 120
2 VI 102
Total 366
3.5.1 Questionnaire
in Table 5.
Table 5
Items Number
Scale
Positive Negative of items
Personalization 1,8,15,22, 29,36,43 7
Involvement 9,23,37 2, 16, 30, 44 7
Student cohesiveness 10,17,,38, 3, 24,31, 45 7
Total Items 25 24 49
and missing case is scored 3. In this research, the researcher will divide the
classroom environment into three categories. The categories were high,
average, and low. In deciding the interval between points on the scale, the
formula is used; range of the score divided by the number of level. Since
the total items were 49, the possible highest scores would be 245, and the
environment, the calculation was 245 minus 49 which 196. Then the score
196 was divided by 3 which was 65. It means that the interval between
scores was 65. From the calculation, the researcher used score interval as
presented in table6.
Table 6
The Categories of Classroom Environment Scale
49 - 113 Low
3.5.2 Documentation
(Source: Buku Panduan Akademik Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Raden
Fatah Palembang)
means that validity test is used to measure whether the instruments are
(1986).The CUCEI first has 12 item of each scale with total of items were
84,were assessed with a sample of 372 Australian and American
validity showed that 35 items (5 items in each scale were eliminated) and
(Treagust et al., 1986). The result showed that the CUCEI had good
internal consistency, with the alpha coefficient ranging from .70 to .90.
While in negative statement is scored in reverse manner. After the the data
of questionnaire was obtained, the score of which item is added up. Since
the total number of CUCEI questionnaire are 49 items, the possible highest
score was 245 (in which the students get 5 for each statement) and the
possible lowest score will be 49 (in which the students get 1 for each
categories. Score 180 to 245 were in high categories, score 114 to 179
were in average categories, and the score 49 to 113 were in low categories.
After the data was obtained, the students’ cumulative GPA were
categorized enough.
whether the data was normal for each variable and linear between two
variables.
In this study, normality test was used to find out whether the data
In this study, linearity test was conducted to know whether the data
linear or not. If the score is higher than 0.05, the two variables are linear.
After all of data find normal and linier, the analysis will do. The
result from the instruments of both questionnaire and students’ GPA were
less than r data. When the result shows positive r value, it means that there
after research are conducted and the correlation are found, linier regression
This chapter presents (1) research finding, (2) statistical analyses, and (3)
interpretations.
There arefive kinds of research findings in this study: (1) the result of
ahievement.
In this study, the total active students in the English education study
program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang were 366 students. 345 students
participated in this study, and the others were absent whenthis study was
environment.
scales that had to be chosen by the students based on their own perception about
(disagree), and SD (strongly disagree). Because there were positive and negative
statements in the questionnaire, the both type of statement were valued in reverse
manner. Inthe positive statements, SA has 5 point, A has 4 point, D has 2 point,
SD has 1 point. While in negative statements were given point in reverse manner.
Then invalid statement (the students didn’t give the check or check twice in one
statement)has point 3.After the questionnaire was distributed to the students, then
the students chose the responses, the point was written beside the response. After
all,the result would be analyze by adding up the answer and wrote the total.
below. The maximum score is 220, and the lowest score is 103. The mean of the
classroom environment scores for the participants is171.74 and the standard
deviation is18.047.
Table 8
Descriptive Analysis of Classroom Environment
Descriptive Statistics
It was revealed that from the questionaire, the three levels of classroom
environment all perceived by the students with different numbers. In the table
(CUCEI) the result showed that 115 students (33.3 %) were in high category, 208
students (60.3 %) whose score belonged to average category, thus in the low
participants is shown below. The maximum score is 4.00, and the lowest score is
1.45. The mean of academic achievement for the participants is3.4503, and the
Table 10
Descriptive Statistics
Valid N (listwise)
345
Table 11
There were three statistical analyses that the researher applied in this
study:
Normality test and linearity test were conducted prior to data analysis
correlation and regression were used in this research, it was fundamental to see if
the distribution of data were normal for each variable and linear between
variables.
The dataare interpreted normal if p> 0.05.If p< 0.05, it means the data are
not normal. Kolmogorov-smirnov was used to see the normality. The results of
normality test is shown in table below indicated that both of the data variable were
normalwith coeficients .192 for classroom environment and .058 for academic
achievement.
Table 12
Normality Test
Classroom_Envir Academic_Achie
onment vement
N 345 345
Normal Parametersa Mean 171.7391 3.4503
Std. Deviation 18.04682 .28468
Most Extreme Differences Absolute .058 .072
Positive .029 .053
Negative -.058 -.072
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.083 1.332
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .192 .058
a. Test distribution is Normal.
The normal Q-Q plot of each variable is illustrated in the following
environment show that the dissemination of the score straight in the line, from
lower to higher. It can be inferred that the students’ classroom environment score
show normal.
show that the dissemination of the score also straight in the line, from lower to
higher. It can be inferred that the students’ academic achievement score show
normal.
Figure 3. Distribution of Academic Achievement Data
Normal Q-Q Plot of Academic Achievement
than .05, the two variables are linear. The results showed that, the deviation from
sum up, all the data were linear for each correlation and regression.
Table 13
Linearity Test
ANOVA Table
Sum of Mean
nt * Groups
Linearity 2.442 1 2.442 33.416 .000
Classroom_Environm
Deviation from
ent 5.558 71 .078 1.071 .343
Linearity
indicated that there was slight relationship between classroom environment and
higher than r-table (0.1059). Then the level of probability (p) significance (sig.2-
tailed) was .000. It means that p (.000) was lower than .05. Thus, there
academic achievement.
Table 14
Correlation between Classroom Environment and Academic Achievement
Correlations
Classroom Academic
Environment Achievement
N 345 345
N 345 345
academic achievement with tvalue(5.739) was higher than ttable(1.967) with sig.
value (.00) was lower than probability (.05). Therefore, there was an influence
Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. It means that there
Table 15
Coefficientsa
Standardized
Classroom_Environment
.005 .001 .296 5.739 .000
revealed that the R Square (R2) was .088 or 8%.. It means thatclassroom
Model Summary
Model Summary
Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1
.296a .088 .085 .27232
4.5. Interpretation
In order to strengthen the value of this study the interpretations are made
based on the result of data analyses.According to the findings, there was a positive
Palembang.
environment were perceived by the students with different numbers. There are
115 students (33.3 %) who score belonged to high category, 208 students (60.3 %)
study program students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang was high enough.
summa cumlaude category, while 152 students (44 %) were in cumlaude category,
175 students (50.7%) were in very good category, 12 students (3.5 %) were in
good category, 3 students (0.9 %) were in enough category. From the data, it can
line with Fraser (1998) who stated that the quality of the classroom environment
style, class environment, family education background (Mushtaq & Khan, 2012),
age, peer influences, course assessment, class attendance, class size and entry
Home environment may affect individual since the parents are the first
and context of a child affect his reaction to life situations and his level of
academic achievement. Since no nation can rise above the level of education of
not only environment and the personal characteristics of learners that play an
important role in their academic success. Socioeconomic status is one of the most
that the socioeconomic status of learners affects the quality of their academic
(2006, p.1) focused that student performance is affected by different factors such
as learning abilities because new paradigm about learning assumes that all
students can and should learn at higher levels but it should not be considered as
constraint because there are other factors like race, gender, sex that can affect
student’s performance. Therefore, the influence of classroom environment toward
In short, based on the data analysis researcher found that the total
and slight influences.Finally, this study found there was relationship and influence
This chapter presents: (1) conclusions, and (2) suggestions bassed on the
5.1 Conclusions
(.296) was higher than r-table (0.1059), it means thatthe result indicated that there
the students, the lower their academic achievement would be. Second, the findings
Raden Fatah Palembang. It was shown that classroom environment gave only 8 %
hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted.
5.1 Suggestions
Based on the conclusion above, suggestions in this study are provided forthe
students, teachers and other researchers who are interested in further research.
1) For the students
The lecturers need to pay attention and find the information on classroom
learning atmosphere.
For future researchers who have interest on this study, the researcher
Akomolafe, C.O, & Adesua, V.O. (2015). The classroom environment: A major
motivating factor towards high academic performance of senior secondary
school students in south west Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6
(34), 17-21
Bucholz, J.L., & Sheffler, J.L. (2009). Creating a warm and inclusive classroom
environment: Planning for all children to feel welcome. Electronic Journal
for Inclusive Education, 2(4).
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education
(6th ed). New York, NY: Routlege.
Dewey, T. O. (2006). Infant and child in the culture of today. New York , NY:
Harper and Row.
Farooq, M. S., Chaudhry, A. H., Shafiq, M., & Berhan, G. (2011). Factors
affecting students’ quality of academic performance: A case of secondary
school level. Journal of Quality and Technology Management, 7(2), 1-14.
Fraser, B., & Pickett, L. (2010). Creating and assessing positive classroom
learning environments. Childhood Education, 3. Retrieved from
http://www.highbeam.com
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N.E., Hyun (2012). How to design and evaluate: research
in education (8th ed). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Li, Z. B., & Yin, H. A. (2010). The effect of classroom environments on the
autonomous learning of the students in Hongkong: From “teacher-centered”
or “students-centered” perspectives. Educational Review of Beijing
University, 2(1), 70-82.
Mauranen, A., & Ranta, E. (Eds.). (2009). English as a lingua franca: Studies and
findings. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Picus, L. O., Marion, S. F., Calvo, N., & Glenn, W. J. (2005). Understanding the
relationship between student achievement and the quality of educational
facilities: Evidence from Wyoming. Peabody Journal of Education, 80, 71-
95.
Siahi, E.A, & Maiyo, J.K. (2015). Study of the relationship between study habits
and academic achievement of students: a case of Spicer higher secondary
school, India. International Journal of Educational Administration and
Policy Studies, 7(7), 134-141
Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2011). Correlation research. Seattle, WA: Disertation
Success LLC.
Talton, E.L, & Simpson R.D (1987). Relationship of attitude toward classroom
environment with attitude toward achievement in science among tenth grade
geography students. Journal of research in science teaching, 24, 507- 526.
Treagust, D.F. & Fraser, B, J. (1986).Validity and use of a classroom environment
instrument for higher education. National Association for Research in
Science Teaching, San Francisco.
Yan, Xiao. (2006). Teacher talk and EFL in university classrooms. Dissertation,
Chongqing Normal University & Yangtze Normal University, China.
Yi, Fan. (2010). EFL Classroom management: Creating a positive climate for
learning. Retrieved from
https://www.google.co.id/?gws_rd=ssl#q=EFL+Classroom+Management:+
Creating+a+Positive+Climate+for+Learning
Name : Class :
NIM : Date :
This questionnaire assesses your opinion about what this class is actually like.
Indicate your opinion about each questionnaire statement by giving the tick ( ) only
one option in the blank, with the scale :
No
Item Statements of Classroom Environment SA A D SD
of item
1 The instructor considers students' feelings.
2 The instructor talks rather than listens.
The class is made up of individuals who don't know
3
each other well.
4 The students look forward to coming to classes.
Students know exactly what has to be done in our
5
class.
6 New ideas are seldom tried out in this class.
All students in the class are expected to do the same
7
work, in the same way and same time.
8 The instructor talks individually with students.
9 Students put effort into what they do in class.
Each student knows the other members of the class
10
by their first names.
Students are dissatisfied with what is done in the
11
class.
Getting a certain amount of work done is important
12
in this class.
New and different ways of teaching are seldom
13
used in this class.
14 Students are generally allowed to work at their own
pace.
The instructor goes out of his/her way to help
15
students.
16 Students 'clockwatch' in this class.
17 Friendships are made among students in this class.
After the class, the students have a sense of
18
satisfaction.
The group often gets sidetracked instead of sticking
19
to the point.
The instructor thinks up innovative activities for
20
students to do.
21 Students have a say in how class time is spent.
The instructor helps each student who is having
22
trouble with the work.
Students in this class pay attention to what others
23
are saying.
Students don't have much chance to get to know
24
each other in this class.
25 Classes are a waste of time.
26 This is a disorganized class.
Teaching approaches in this class are characterized
27
by innovation and variety.
Students are allowed to choose activities and how
28
they will work.
The instructor seldom moves around the classroom
29
to talk with students.
30 Students seldom present their work to the class.
It takes a long time to get to know everybody by
31
his/her first name in this class.
32 Classes are boring.
Class assignments are clear so everyone knows
33
what to do.
The seating in this class is arranged in the same
34
way each week.
Teaching approaches allow students to proceed at
35
their own pace.
36 The instructor isn't interested in students' problems.
There are opportunities for students to express
37
opinions in this class.
38 Students in this class get to know each other well.
39 Students enjoy going to this class.
40 This class seldom starts on time.
The instructor often thinks of unusual class
41
activities.
There is little opportunity for a student to pursue
42
his/her particular interest in class.
The instructor is unfriendly and inconsiderate
43
toward students.
44 The instructor dominates class discussions.
Students in this class aren't very interested in
45
getting to know other students.
46 Classes are interesting.
Activities in this class are clearly and carefully
47
planned.
Students seem to do the same type of activities
48
every class.
It is the instructor who decides what will be done in
49
our class.
(Source : Treagust, D.F. & Fraser, B, J. (1986). Validity and Use of a classroom
environment instrument for higher education. National Association for Research
in Science Teaching, San Francisco)
APPENDIX 4
Students’ Cumulative GP
Valid N (listwise)
345
Academic_Achievement
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.45 1 .3 .3 .3
2.27 1 .3 .3 .6
2.29 1 .3 .3 .9
2.8 1 .3 .3 1.2
2.81 1 .3 .3 1.4
2.85 1 .3 .3 1.7
2.9 1 .3 .3 2.0
2.96 1 .3 .3 2.3
2.98 1 .3 .3 2.6
3 6 1.7 1.7 4.3
3.02 1 .3 .3 4.6
3.04 1 .3 .3 4.9
3.05 5 1.4 1.4 6.4
3.06 4 1.2 1.2 7.5
3.08 1 .3 .3 7.8
3.09 6 1.7 1.7 9.6
3.1 5 1.4 1.4 11.0
3.11 2 .6 .6 11.6
3.12 1 .3 .3 11.9
3.13 4 1.2 1.2 13.0
3.14 3 .9 .9 13.9
3.15 4 1.2 1.2 15.1
3.16 4 1.2 1.2 16.2
3.17 1 .3 .3 16.5
3.18 5 1.4 1.4 18.0
3.19 2 .6 .6 18.6
3.2 1 .3 .3 18.8
3.21 3 .9 .9 19.7
3.22 1 .3 .3 20.0
3.24 4 1.2 1.2 21.2
3.25 2 .6 .6 21.7
3.26 4 1.2 1.2 22.9
3.27 5 1.4 1.4 24.3
3.28 5 1.4 1.4 25.8
3.29 5 1.4 1.4 27.2
3.3 5 1.4 1.4 28.7
3.31 3 .9 .9 29.6
3.32 3 .9 .9 30.4
3.33 2 .6 .6 31.0
3.34 3 .9 .9 31.9
3.35 8 2.3 2.3 34.2
3.36 6 1.7 1.7 35.9
3.37 1 .3 .3 36.2
3.38 4 1.2 1.2 37.4
3.39 3 .9 .9 38.3
3.4 4 1.2 1.2 39.4
3.41 3 .9 .9 40.3
3.42 5 1.4 1.4 41.7
3.43 5 1.4 1.4 43.2
3.44 4 1.2 1.2 44.3
3.45 11 3.2 3.2 47.5
3.46 3 .9 .9 48.4
3.47 7 2.0 2.0 50.4
3.48 7 2.0 2.0 52.5
3.49 2 .6 .6 53.0
3.5 6 1.7 1.7 54.8
3.51 1 .3 .3 55.1
3.53 2 .6 .6 55.7
3.54 3 .9 .9 56.5
3.55 29 8.4 8.4 64.9
3.56 5 1.4 1.4 66.4
3.57 1 .3 .3 66.7
3.58 1 .3 .3 67.0
3.59 3 .9 .9 67.8
3.6 2 .6 .6 68.4
3.62 1 .3 .3 68.7
3.63 2 .6 .6 69.3
3.64 26 7.5 7.5 76.8
3.65 1 .3 .3 77.1
3.66 4 1.2 1.2 78.3
3.67 2 .6 .6 78.8
3.68 4 1.2 1.2 80.0
3.69 4 1.2 1.2 81.2
3.7 1 .3 .3 81.4
3.71 1 .3 .3 81.7
3.72 2 .6 .6 82.3
3.73 23 6.7 6.7 89.0
3.75 2 .6 .6 89.6
3.76 1 .3 .3 89.9
3.77 1 .3 .3 90.1
3.79 2 .6 .6 90.7
3.81 2 .6 .6 91.3
3.82 13 3.8 3.8 95.1
3.83 1 .3 .3 95.4
3.84 1 .3 .3 95.7
3.86 1 .3 .3 95.9
3.88 1 .3 .3 96.2
3.91 9 2.6 2.6 98.8
3.94 1 .3 .3 99.1
4 3 .9 .9 100.0
Total 345 100.0 100.0
Tests of Normality
Classroom_Envir Academic_Achie
onment vement
N 345 345
Tests of Linearity
Cases
Academic_Achievement *
344 99.7% 1 .3% 345 100.0%
Classroom_Environment
ANOVA Table
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Measures of Association
Academic_Achievement *
.296 .088 .540 .292
Classroom_Environment
Correlation Result
Correlations
Classroom Academic
Environment Achievement
N 345 345
N 345 345
Standardized
Classroom_Environment
.005 .001 .296 5.739 .000
Model Summary
Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1
.296a .088 .085 .27232
DOCUMENTATION
Maret 2017