Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 98 DEVELOPING STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY BY USING MAGIC BOXGAME AT SMPN 8 PALOPO 1Riri Yanti Sarhang, 2Dewi Furwana 1,2.3Institut Agama Islam Negeri Palopo (IAIN Palopo), Palopo, Indonesia ririyanti142@gmail.com1 *dewi_furwana@iainpalopo.ac.id2 ABSTRACT This reseach about Developing Students’ Vocabulary by Using Magic Box Game at the Eighth-grade of SMPN 8 Palopo. The research question of this research was Does The Use of Magic Box Game Develop Students’ English Vocabulary at SMPN 8 Palopo. The objective of this research was to find out whether or not the use of magic box game can develop students’ English vocabulary. This research applied quasi-experimental. The population of this research was the eighth-grade students of SMPN 8 Palopo. The number of population was 283 students. the sample were class VIII 2 consisted of 30 students as experimental group and class VIII 9 consisted 30 students as control group. The sampling technique in this research was purposive sampling. The instrument of the research was vocabulary test. The researcher gave pretest and posttest to the students. As a result, there were a significant difference in vocabulary achievement between the students who are taught by using magic box game and those who are taught by non using magic box game. Based on the result of this research, the researcher concluded that magic box game develops the students’ vocabulary. Key Words: English Language Teaching, Magic Box Game, Teaching Vocabulary INTRODUCTION Vocabulary is list or collection of words arranged in alphabetical or explained, a dictionary or lexicon, in a whole single a work's author, a branch of science. Vocabulary is a list of words with their meanings, especially one that accompanies a textbook in a foreign language (A.S. Hornby, 1995). Vocabulary is the important thing. Proficiency in other aspect is not enough to guarantee that someone can master the English language with limited of vocabulary, for example, because grammar can make the sentence grammatically right. Even, we can say the sentences are right grammatically and another is wrong grammatically. However, limited of vocabularies are mastered, we just can make simple sentence and limited sentence. Then, in using the language, we use thousands of words to communicate every day (Wiraldi, Jufriadi, 2020). Besides limited several of sentences, less of vocabularies hamper comprehension in communication. A useful convention is to cover all for example by talking about vocabulary “items” rather than “words.” (Penny Ur, 1996). Vocabulary means that all of the words in the word which registered (John, M, Echols and mailto:ririyanti142@gmail.com Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 99 Hasan Shadily, 1995), Vocabulary is a core component of language proficiency and provides much of the basis for how well learners speak, listen, read, and write. Without an extensive vocabulary and strategies for acquiring new vocabulary, learners often achieve less than their potential and may be discouraged from making use of language learning opportunities around them such as listening to the radio, listening native speakers, using the language in different contexts, reading, or watching television (Richards Jack and Renandya Willy A, 2002, Anwar et al., 2020).Vocabulary is seeing an incidental to the main purpose of language teaching, namely the acquisition of grammatical knowledge about the language. Vocabulary is necessary to give students something to hang on to when learning structures, but was frequently not a focus for learning itself (Jeremy Harmer, 1992). Magic box is a game of guessing objects, learning mention the name of the object that the teacher is considering. In this game need, one box filled with several objects. The teacher takes one of the objects from the box and shows the students than the students mention the noun correctly, then students get points. If one of these elements is wrong, then the students do not get points. Such regulation requires students to try to name noun correctly. This research was in line with previous researches (Marilyn S Rosenthal and Dr. Dimitri Protopsaltou) who found that the magic box game could improve the students’ ability and the class situation. The class will become enjoyable, creative, interactive, and innovative. The attitude study was doing in two parts, a “taking” subtest, and a “giving” subtest. Each subtest represented a series of attitude questions designed to elicit evaluations and attitudes or personal preference toward the speakers of the two varieties. Each subtest also forced a behavioral choice of taking a present from or giving one to one of the magic boxes. The presents were identical boxes of crayons placed on a shelf in the boxes and could be obtained by reaching inside the box through a hole surrounded by cloth at the top. The children were not tool what the presents were or that each box had the same presents. The directions, speech stimulus, and attitude questions for this subtest appear. In the “giving” subtest, the children were given two small pads of paper and were tool that one was for them and that one was for them to give to the magic box of their choice. Again, they listened to each box talk (this time, each magic box voice said why it wanted the present), responded to another set of attitude questions, and made the behavioral response of giving the pad of paper to one of the magic boxes (https://web.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/rosenthal1974.pdf) Magic Box has it been potential as a tool box for innovating interactive media, be able to motivate students, especially the passive one in the whole teaching learning process and also trigger the students to be more creative in innovating interactive media to improve their vocabulary. METHODS Quasi-experimental methods that involve the creation of a comparison group are most often use when it is not possible to randomize individuals or groups to treatment and control groups. This is always the case for ex-post impact evaluation designs. Quasi- Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 100 experimental research involves the manipulation of an independent variable without the random assignment of participants to the conditions or orders of conditions. Among the important types are nonequivalent group designs, pretest-posttest, and interrupted time- series designs. Quasi-experimental research eliminates the direction problem because it involves the manipulation of the independent variable. It does not eliminate the problem of confounding variables, however, because it does not involve random assignment to conditions. For these reasons, quasi-experimental research is generally higher in internal validity than correlation studies but lower than true experiments. This research would apply quasi-experimental methods, whether the magic box game can develop vocabulary especially about the vocabulary of the eighth-grade students in SMPN 8 Palopo. Population and Sample The population of this research was the eighth-grade students of SMP Negeri Palopo. It consists of nine classes and each class consisted of 30, 31, and 32 students. The total number was 283 students. The researcher took two classes as a sample, i.e. VIII 2 and VIII 9 in academic year 2017/. There were 60 students (30 students of experimental class and 30 students of control class). The technique sampling was total sampling. The researcher believes that the students can be a representative population. Instruments of the Research The instruments of this research were written test. In this research, the researcher gave a test about vocabulary with pretest and posttest. The pretest is used to find out the prior knowledge of the students about vocabulary and the posttest is used to find out the prior knowledge of the students after learning vocabulary by using the magic box game. RESULTS The findings of the research are show to describe the result of the data that analyzed statically and tabulated data. The comparison between the student score in pretest and posttest, classification percentage of students score in pretest and posttest from experimental group and control group. The Analysis of Students’ Score of Experimental Group and Control Group In this part, the researcher reported the result of each group by comparing the pretest and posttest and the result of both groups by comparing the pretest and posttest of both groups. Students’ Score of Experimental Group In this classification, the researcher presented the percentage of the students pretest and posttest of the experimental group. It showed the students score in the experimental group before giving treatment by using magic box game and after the treatment. Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 101 Table 1. The Pretest and Posttest Score of Experimental Group Pretest Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 62,00 1 3,3 3,3 3,3 64,00 1 3,3 3,3 6,7 66,00 2 6,7 6,7 13,3 70,00 1 3,3 3,3 16,7 72,00 1 3,3 3,3 20,0 74,00 3 10,0 10,0 30,0 78,00 4 13,3 13,3 43,3 80,00 3 10,0 10,0 53,3 82,00 1 3,3 3,3 56,7 86,00 3 10,0 10,0 66,7 88,00 1 3,3 3,3 70,0 90,00 3 10,0 10,0 80,0 92,00 3 10,0 10,0 90,0 94,00 1 3,3 3,3 93,3 96,00 1 3,3 3,3 96,7 98,00 1 3,3 3,3 100,0 Total 30 100,0 100,0 Posttest Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 92,00 3 10,0 10,0 10,0 94,00 3 10,0 10,0 20,0 96,00 2 6,7 6,7 26,7 98,00 7 23,3 23,3 50,0 100,00 15 50,0 50,0 100,0 Total 30 100,0 100,0 Table 2. The Rate Percentage of Students’ Pretest and Posttest No. Classification Score Pretest Posttest F P F P 1 Excellent 90-100 9 30% 30 100% 2 Good 80-89 8 26,6% 0 0% 3 Adequate 70-79 9 30% 0 0% 4 Inadequate/unsatisfactory 60-69 4 13,3% 0 0% 5 Failing/unacceptable Below 60 0 0% 0 0% Total 30 100 30 100% Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 102 Table 4.2 showed that most of students in experimental group are classified adequate and excellent before giving the treatment. There were nine students or 30% were in adequate classification, 4 students, or 13, 3% were in inadequate/unsatisfactory classification, 8 students, or 26, 6% were in good classification, 9 students or 30% were excellent, and none of them was in failing/unacceptable classification. After gave the treatment, 30 students or 100% were in excellent classiffication and none of them were in good classification, adequate classification, inadequate/unsatisfactory classification and failing/unacceptable classification. Table 3. The Mean Score and Standard Deviation of Students’ Pretest and Posttest Table 4.3 showed that there was a difference between the mean score of pretest and posttest in the experimental group. The mean score of posttest was higher than the mean score of pretest (97.8667>81.2000). It means that there was an improvement after giving the treatment by using magic box game. The standard deviation of posttest was lower than the standard deviation of pretest (2.77592<10.00138). It means that the score range of posttest was closer than the score range of pretest to the mean score. Students’ Score of Control Group The following table is the data obtained from the control group before and after treatment by using cooperative strategy. Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Pretest 30 62,00 98,00 81,2000 10,00138 Posttest 30 92,00 100,00 97,8667 2,77592 Valid N (listwise) 30 Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 103 Table 4. The Pretest and Posttest Score of Control Group Pretest Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 24,00 1 3,3 3,3 3,3 32,00 1 3,3 3,3 6,7 34,00 4 13,3 13,3 20,0 42,00 2 6,7 6,7 26,7 44,00 3 10,0 10,0 36,7 46,00 3 10,0 10,0 46,7 48,00 6 20,0 20,0 66,7 50,00 9 30,0 30,0 96,7 52,00 1 3,3 3,3 100,0 Total 30 100,0 100,0 Posttest Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 66,00 1 3,3 3,3 3,3 68,00 1 3,3 3,3 6,7 70,00 1 3,3 3,3 10,0 76,00 1 3,3 3,3 13,3 80,00 1 3,3 3,3 16,7 84,00 4 13,3 13,3 30,0 86,00 8 26,7 26,7 56,7 88,00 1 3,3 3,3 60,0 90,00 6 20,0 20,0 80,0 92,00 4 13,3 13,3 93,3 94,00 1 3,3 3,3 96,7 96,00 1 3,3 3,3 100,0 Total 30 100,0 100,0 Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 104 Table 5. The Rate Percentage of Students’ Pretest and Posttest No. Classification Score Pretest Posttest F P F P 1 Excellent 90-100 0 0% 12 40% 2 Good 80-89 0 0% 14 46,6% 3 Adequate 70-79 0 0% 6,6 6,6% 4 Inadequate/unsatisfactory 60-69 0 0% 6,6 6,6% 5 Failing/unacceptable Below 60 30 100% 0 0% Total 30 100 30 100% Table 4.5 showed that most of students in control group were classified Failing/unacceptable before giving treatment there were 30 students or 100% were in Failing/unacceptable classification, and none of them were in adequate classifacation, good classification, and inadequate/unsatisfactory. The result posttest showed none Failing/unacceptable classification. Result of students in control group rise 14 students or 46, 6% were in good classification, 12 students or 40% were in excellent classification, 2 students Or 6, 6% were in adequate classiffication, and two students were in inadequate/unsatisfactory classification. However, table 4.2 showed that result students after treatment by using magic box in experimental group far higher than in control group after treatment by using cooperative strategy. Table 6. The Mean Score and Standard Deviation of Students’ Pretest and Posttest Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Pretest 30 24,00 52,00 44,5333 7,04534 Posttest 30 66,00 96,00 85,6667 7,27932 Valid N (listwise) 30 Table 4.6 showed that mean score of pretest was higher than the mean score of pretest in control group (85.67>44.53) and the standard deviation in pretest lower than the standard deviation of posttest (7.04<7.27). It means that there was improvement of the students’ score in control. The Calcualtion of t-test Pretest and Posttest The data showed in the Table 4.7 below indicated the students’ score of experimental group and control group. Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 105 Table 7. The Pair Samples Test the Gain Group Experimental Group and Control Group Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t df Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Gain- Group -, 69378 ,59179 ,07640 -,84666 - ,54090 -9,081 59 .000 Table 4.7 indicated that the statistical hypothesis based on statistic test of gain group. In probability value (significant 2-tailed), probability value is lower than alpha (0.00 < 0.05). It means that there was a statistically significant of gain group the result successful. Students’ Score Achievement The tabulated data for the students’ score achievement is seeing as follows: Table 8. Students’ Vocabulary Achievement Pretest posttest Experimental Control Experimental Control Respondents 30 30 30 30 Mean 81,20 44,53 97,86 85,66 SD 10,00 7,04 2,77 7,27 Table 4.8 above showed that the total number of respondents for each group which experimental group were 30 students and control group were 30 students. The mean score and standard deviation showed difference in pretest and posttest to both groups. From the data showed in the table 4.8, the mean score pretest of experimental group and control groups was statistically the same before giving the treatment. After giving the treatment, the posttest score of both groups; experimental and control groups showed a difference mean score. The discussion deals with argument and father interpretation of the research finding in students’ score both pretest and posttest results of experimental and control groups. DISCUSSION After the calculation of SPSS from quantities data obtained when research, the researcher looked a considerable influence from the used of magic box game to develop students vocabulary. Thus is show the result of the t-test result of the mean score between pretest and posttest were significant in the experimental group. SPSS calculations of quantitative data were caries out on the result of the pretest and posttest control group. Based on the result of the t-test in appear that there was a significant average difference Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 106 between the pretest in the control group.Based on the result of independent pretest t-test calculations, there were change in the experimental group and the control group. Thus, there was no significant score in the pretest experimental group and pretest control group score. This showed that both groups have the same initial ability and there was a significant difference between the result of the posttest experimental group and posttest control group. The used of magic box game to develop students vocabulary was enough to invite students attention, especially in saturated condition in the last hours of learning activities. The response of students to the magic box game was very positive. Thus can be seen of the enthusiasm of students during the game, all active learning to compete in a healthy and positive manner so that the learning atmosphere become interactive. This facilitated the achievement of student’s goal without fear, pressure, time, and value. As in this research, it can be concluded from the presentation of the result that the used of magic box game can develop students vocabulary. Based on the result of the from the pretest experimental group some students show that before giving treatment R1 students answer 31 questions from the whole problem of part A and B with score of 62, R2 answer 33 questions score of 66, R3 answer 37 questions with score of 74, and R4 answer 30 questions with score of 58. After the treatment, the results of the posttest experimental group of R1 answer 47 questions with score of 94, students R2 answer 50 questions with score of 100, and students R3 answer 48 questions with score of 96, students R4 answer 50 with score of 100.Based on the results of the data from the pretest control group several students showed that by using cooperative strategies. R1 answer 33 questions with score of 66, R2 answer 32 questions with score of 64, and R3 answer 34 with score of 68. When giving posttest students R1 answer 33 questions with score of 66, R2 answer 35 questions with score of 70, R3 answer 34 with score of 68. Based on explained above, the result of the pretest and posttest the reseacher concluded that magic box game can develop students’ vocabulary about transportations, fruits, animals, things in the home and things in the class. CONCLUSION The reseacher concluded that the using magic box game is effective in teaching vocabulary of the eighth-grade students in SMPN 8 Palopo. Based on the result of pretest and posttest experimental group, the mean score pretest is 81.20 and the mean score of posttest is 97.87, the result of pretest and posttest control group, the mean score pretest is 44.53 and the mean score posttest is 85.67. Then, based on the findings and the discussions in previous chapter, it showed the result that t0 (tcount =3.350) is greater than tat (t table = - 9.081), t0 >tat, so that the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. It concluded that the there was significant difference in teaching vocabulary before and after using magic box game. Therefore, by using magic box game is effective to develop the students’ vocabulary at the eighth-grade students of SMPN 8 Palopo. Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 107 REFERENCES Anwar, L., Furwana, D., & Iksan, M. (2020). Developing Reading Worksheet for Tenth Grade Students of SMA Negeri 4 Palopo. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v1i1.2 Wiraldi, Jufriadi, M. I. (2020). Improving Vocabulary Mastery Of The Seventh Year Students Using Scattergories Game In SMP Negeri 8 Palopo. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(2), 159–167. Collie. (1971), The Key to English Vocabulary. London: Macmillan. Creswell John W., (1994) “Research Design Qualitative &QuantitativeApproaches, Landon NewDelhi:Sage Publication Internasional Educational andProfessional Publisher Thousand Oaks. Dibdyaningsih,Haris. Efffect of Magic Box Innovating Interactive Media and TeachingVocabulary.STKIPALHIKMAHSurabaya.Online:Journal.Ikkippgrimadiun.ac.id /index. Echols, Jhon M., & Hasan Shadili. (1995), KamusInggris-Indonesia.Jakarta : PT. Gramedia Pustaka. Gay L.R and dkk, (1981). Education Research, tenth edition, US H. Brown Douglas.(2003), Language Assesmen: Principle and Classroom Practieces. San Fransisco, California: Person Longman. Hornby, A.S. (1995), the advanced learners dictionary of current English. 5th Ed; NewYork: Oxford University Press. Harmer, Jeremy. (1992). The practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman Publishing. https://opentextbc.ca/researchmethods/chapter/quasi-experimental-research/Inesz.pdf. http://jerman.upi.edu/germania/2014/2014.03.1006028. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320012961_Vocabulary_Teaching_and_Learni ng_Principles_in_Classroom_Practices http://repository.upi.edu/14197/9/S_JRM_1006028_Bibliography.pdf. Jack, Richards., &Renandya Willy A. (2002) Methodology in Language Teaching an Anthology of Current Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 108 Kitao, Kenji. & S. Kathlen Kitao. (2002). Testing Vocabulary. Online: http://www.:mifi.gof/parnershipforreading/publishings/readingfirstvocab.html Accessed on September 10th. Kramer,Wolfgangr,(2017).Blog.http://www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/WhatIsaGame.s html.Accessed at juni 07th. Mansher, Martin. (1995). Oxford Dictionary. New Edition; New York: Oxford University Press. Nunan, David. (1991), Language Teaching Methodology, A Test Book for Teacher. New York: Percentile Hall Internasional. Rivers, Wilga. (1981). Teaching Foreign language. 2nd: Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Rosenthal Marilyn S,” The magic boxes: pre-school children’s black and standard English”york college, city Univercity of New York. Rosenthal, (1974), https://web.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/. Sardiman,Arief. Media Pendidkan. Jakarta: Rajawali Press. Santri4wan’s,(2016).Blog.,http://santri4wan.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/defenitiongam e/Accessed at January 11th. Saricoban.,&Metin,(2016).http://www.teachingenglishgames.com/Aryicles/htm. Accessed at January 11th. Schmitt (2000) https://www.iises.net/international-journal-of-teaching-edu. Sudijon, Anas. (1995). PengantarStatistik Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT. Raja GrafindoPersada. Sugiyono. (2015). MetodePenelitian Pendidikan. cet.XVIII; Bandung: Alfabeta. Teacher and Students, (2017). SMPN 8 Palopo,Jl.AgatisBalandai Palopo.April,3th Tarsan, Rais. (2013). Teaching Vocabulary Through Word Association Game at the Eight Grade Student of MTS AL-Mawatsir Padang Kalua. Thesis STAIN Palopo. Thorndike and Woodworth on transfer Cronbach, (1957). Unesa,(7489).http://jurnalmahasiswa.unesa.ac.id/index.php/paudteratai/article/view/74 89.file://:/Users/NOVIA/Documents/New%20folder/Downloads/QuasiExperimenta l_Design_and_Methods_ENG.pdf. Ur Penny. (1996), A Course in Language Teaching. Cet. I; New York: Cambridge University Press. http://www.mifi.gof/parnershipforreading/publishings/readingfirstvocab.html Copyright © The Author(s) Vol. 1, No. 2, October 2020 e-ISSN: 2723-4126 109