1. A COMPARISON OF USING DIGLOT WEAVE TECHNIQUE AND STUDENT TEAM ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION ON STUDENT’S VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT
Indonesian Education and Culture Ministry’s director general for secondary education, Muhammad (2012) interviewed by Jakarta Post stated that: “as our local communities are becoming more global, coupled with our country’s booming economy, learning and mastering English has become a must.”
Is there any significant difference in students’ vocabulary achievement between students who will be taught using DWT and those who will be taught STAD?”
“Which group will gain the higher score between male and female in vocabulary achievement after using DWT and STAD?”
1. To know the female and male students’ score of vocabulary after using student team achievement divisions (STAD) and Diglot Weave Technique.
2. To compare the students’ score of vocabulary achievement between those who will be taught using Diglot Weave Technique (DWT) and Student Team Achievement Divisions (STAD)
Scope and limitation:
This research focused on two classes of grade 8B and 8C at SMPN 1 Parongpong, Bandung Barat. Each class consisted of 37 Students.
This research has been conducted at SMPN 1 Parongpong. It was started on 11 January until 14 February And the researcher have taught for 40 hours.
Nur Ayu Sitompul

2. Diglot Weave Technique The Diglot Weave, from the Greek ‘di’, meaning ‘two’, and ‘glot’, meaning ‘language’, is a breakthrough in language learning. Diglot weave is related to code-mixing and code-switching. According to Leon the term 'diglot weave' was coined by Dr. Robert Blair.
Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD)
STAD, one of the most straightforward approaches to cooperative learning, was devised by Robert Slavin and his partner at Johns Hopkins University (Slavin, 1978) and four or five students from different performance, gender and ethnicity combined in a small group and they work together to accomplish the work.

3. Conceptual Framework Pilot Test at SMPN 3 Parongpong Grade 9
POPULATION = Grade 8
SMPN 1 Parongpong
SAMPLE = Grade 8
Pre-Test
Grade 8B
Using Diglot Weave Technique
Grade 8C
Using Student Team Achievement Division
RESULT
Post-test

4. Research Methodology
This research used the quantitative method. It is comparative design.
Population and Sample
In this research, the population was all grades 8 VIII in SMPN 1 Parongpong in academic year
And the sample was two classes at SMPN 1 Parongpong.
Instrument of research
The vocabulary test was multiple choices of questions with a total number of 50 questions.
Pre-Test:
Pre-test has been conducted to diagnose the students’ prior ability in vocabulary and it is conducted before the researcher gives the treatment.

5. DATA GATHERING AND PROCEDURES
1. Organizing Teaching Procedures 2. Pilot Test 3. Pre-test 4. Giving Treatments 5. Post-Test
The researcher prepared the lesson plan and different material for every meetings. The materials were taken from text book.
Analyse of Pilot Test:
The pilot-test has been conducted to measure the validity, reliability, discrimination, and difficulty level of the instrument.
Post-test has been conducted after giving the treatments.

6. Diglot Weave Technique Steps:
Teacher presented the lesson. The text was read to the students to present the L2 equivalents. A text in which new words from L1 had been inserted was read to the students.
Then, material sheet was distributed to the students. Students read a native language text with second language vocabulary and grammatical structures were increasingly embedded within text.
As the class moves ahead during the lesson in question, the teacher weaved more and more English words into Indonesia sentences, until almost all the sentences were uttered in English.
The teacher might even ask comprehension questions to check the students’ grasp of the new words; for example the teacher would address the students with questions.
The teacher could also encourage students to use the technique in answering such questions to promote student’s ability in producing the words in question.
Afterwards, students were asked to underline the word which is in open words classes; noun, adjectives, verbs, or adverbs.
Test has been given to the students according to the new vocabularies that they have found on the reading passage.

7. STAD’ steps:
The teacher presented the lesson. The lesson is was by specifying the goals. Teachers should explain how cooperative learning works and the specific rules to be followed.
Students were divided into four or five a group. Then they were given materials what they needed to learn and teacher explained what the outcome that they would achieve.
Students were given an outline of what they would be learning and why.
Team work: Students were given the worksheet. These worksheets should guide them through the materials and show them how they can help one another. Teacher gave the learners sufficient time or work together to understand the ideas.

8. 5. Students had worksheet and answered sheet in their teams to practice the skill being taught and to assess themselves and their team mates 6. Teacher gave an individual test, or called ‘quizzes’ to the students to see whether they have learned what the teacher wanted them to learn. 7. The quizzes’ score was shown and students were given a chance for an improvement score. This improvement score is based on the degree to which the quiz score exceeds the learner’s past average on similar quizzes. Teacher would add the individual improvement score to give a team score. 8. The last step was the rewards are given to group achievement.

9. Result of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Normalized Gain
GROUP
Diglot Weave Technique (DWT)
Student Team Achievement Division (STAD)
Mean
Standard Deviation
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Gain Score
0.8105
0.7214
Group
Kolmogorov-Smirnova
Statistic Df
Sig.
Gain
DWT
.134 37
.092
Ho is accept ed
STAD
.200*
Since data was normally distributed and homogeneous, then Independent Sample T-Test was conducted
Levene Statistic
df1
df2
Sig.
.225 1 72
.637

10. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances F
Sig. t df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Value
Equal variances assumed
.225
.637
2.145 72
.035
Equal variances not assumed
71.476
It shows that the <𝟎.𝟎𝟓 Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted. Thus, there is significant difference between student who taught by using Diglot Weave Technique group and student who taught by using Student Team Achievement Division group on student’s vocabulary achievement.

11. Second question: Which group will gain the higher score between female and male?
Result of Female and Male’ Gain Score
Group
Diglot Weave Technique
Student Team Achievement Division
Mean
St. Deviation
Female’ Gain Score
0.8223
0.7161
Male’ Gain Score
0.7827
0.7171
The data describes that in DWT class, male’s score were higher than female.
In the contrary, in STAD class, female’ score got higher than male.
Concerning about female and male got higher score:
Pana and Afghari (2015) stated that “females usually employ social strategies which promote communicative competence whereas males do not use social strategies actively. A summary of studies on sex differences also shows that male students use translation strategies more often than female students.” (p, 258).

12. Conclusion
Ha is accepted. 1. It is therefore concluded that DWT is higher than STAD in improving student’ vocabulary achievement in learning English. 2. According to the descriptive explanantion, male’ score in DWT is higher than female, yet female’ score in STAD is higher than male.