







































  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

9 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

Improving Grammar Mastery by Using Scramble 
Method of the Eleventh-Grade Students at Senior High 

School Number 2 Palopo 
 

Andi Hasriani1, Masruddin2 
State Islamic Institute (IAIN Palopo), Indonesia 

 masruddin@iainpalopo.ac.id  

 
ABSTRACT 

This research focused on using the scrambling method to teach grammar at the eleventh-grade 
students of Senior High School Number 2 Palopo. The research problem of this research was: “Does 
the scrambling method effectively improve students’ grammar mastery?”. The objective of this 
research was to find out whether or not the scrambling method effectively improves students’ 
grammar mastery. In this research, the researcher used pre-experimental design, and the 
treatments were conducted in six meetings. The population of this research was the eleventh-grade 
students of senior high school 2 Palopo. The researcher used a total sampling technique. There were 
26 students from IPA 3 class involved in this research. The instrument used to collect data was a 
written test. It was divided into pretest and post-test. The data of this research were analyzed 
quantitatively by using SPSS program version 20. The result of this research showed that the 
scrambling method effectively improves students’ grammar mastery. The mean score in the pretest 
is lower than the mean score in the post-test (63, 85 < 82, 23). The researcher found that the p-Value 
is 0.00, and the alpha is 0.05, therefore p<α (0.00 < 0.05). Meanwhile, the mean score of the post-test 
is better than the mean score of pretest (82,23 > 63,85). 
 
Keywords: English Language Teaching, Grammar Mastery, Scramble Method. 

 
INTRODUCTION 

In language learning, grammar is one of the main language aspects, especially in speaking 
and writing. To get good communication with other people, someone has to make the correct 
structure or grammar so that people do not misunderstand our speaking and writing (ESL, 2009). 
Grammar evolves both the use and the lack of human population. Formal grammars are a context 
of use developed by documentation over and over again, and with rules established and 
developed, prescriptive concepts of grammatical tenacity could arise. This often creates 
discrepancies between contemporary use and what has been adopted, over time, as the right 
thing. Grammar is a rule established in the English language itself. Formal grammar studies are 
an important part of education for children from a young age to advanced learning, although the 
rules taught in schools are not “grammar” in the sense that most linguists use the term, because 
they are often receptive and not descriptive (ESL, 2009). According to Rudy Haryono, Language 
is a means of communication, to communicate well, we must know about the grammatical 
language. Grammar is one of language learns about the way of arranging the word to become a 
sentence. So if we want to learn about the English language, also understanding grammar 
(Haryono, 2003). To write a sentence the students have to know about grammar. The common 
problem of English language grammar has to be overcome by all students, and the difficulties they 
find are similar in all part of the word. Flor and Jan Aarst says that grammars play an important 
part in the student’s linguistic education. Apart from their role in language acquisition they form 
the basis on which the student’s further, more theoretical, linguistic training can be founded. 
Students who have studied pedagogical grammars may be supposed to know English (Flor & 
Aarts, 1982). Based on observation, the students in Senior High School 2 Palopo, especially in the 
eleventh class, there were still difficult to use the structure of grammar. Based on an exercise in 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
mailto:masruddin@iainpalopo.ac.id


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

10 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

the problems that have been given, they were having trouble working on that exercise. They had 
a problem in understanding how to compile words to form good sentences. Many students 
commonly make mistakes in grammar. Therefore, students need another method in grammar 
that can help them formulate good sentences. Scramble method would help found some mistake 
so it was processed to repaired became correct sentences. So the learning process took place in 
enjoying and interesting way. 
 
METHODS 
In this research, the researcher used the pre-experimental method. This method was used to 
know the effectiveness of the scramble method in teaching grammar at eleventh-grade students 
of senior high school 2 Palopo. The researcher took the population from the eleventh-grade 
students of Senior High School 2 Palopo in 2019/2020 academic year. Because the size of the 
population was petite so that the taking sample technique was total sampling. The researcher 
would examine the entire population that have a practical set of characteristics, they still had low 
achievement in grammar. The researcher took one class of the eleventh grade of Senior High 
School 2 Palopo as the sample, class IPA 3 which consisted of 26 students to be respondent in this 
research. They had the same proficiency level, they still had low achievement in grammar. 
 
The procedure of Data Collection 

 The procedures for collecting data were described as follows: 
1. Pretest 

Before treatment took place, the class was given a pretest. The aim of pretest was to find 
out the students’ prior knowledge in grammar. 

2.  Treatment 
After giving pretest, the researcher treats the treatment through the scramble method, 

Each meeting has different material. The materials were introduced about the scramble method 
(scramble sentence and scramble discourse), and teach some kinds of tenses (simple past, simple 
present and simple future). The treatments consisted of four meetings. 

3.  Post-test  
The post-test was given to the students after being taught and given the treatment. The 

purpose of post-test was to assess their achievement on grammar mastery. 
 
Instruments of the Research 

The tests were pretest and post-test. The purpose of the writing test was to know the 
students’ level in grammar. The form of the test was to complete the paragraph by using the 
phrasing of words into a sentence.  

 
The technique of Data Analysis 

In giving scores to the students after following the pretest and post-test, the researcher 
adopted the scoring classification which is suitable with the grammar testing criteria. Those 
criteria or classification are presented as follows: 

Table 3.2 Scoring classification using in grammar 

No Classification Score 

1 Excellent 96-100 
2 Very Good 86-95 
3 Good 76-85 
4 Fairly Good 66-75 
5 Fairly 56-65 
6 Poor 36-55 
7 Very Poor 0-35 

 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

11 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

RESULTS 
The findings from the research were showed to describe the result based on the analysis of data 
collected. The researcher got the data by calculating students’ pretest and post-test score. 

The students’ score of pretest and post-test result 

Table 4.1 The students’ in pretest and post-test result 

No Students 
Score 

Pretest Posttest 

1 S1 70 91 
2 S2 65 91 
3 S3 65 96 
4 S4 70 75 
5 S5 70 86 
6 S6 65 84 
7 S7 65 75 
8 S8 65 75 
9 S9 65 80 
10 S10 55 75 
11 S11 60 75 
12 S12 55 83 
13 S13 65 80 
14 S14 60 75 
15 S15 60 93 
16 S16 60 80 
17 S17 65 89 
18 S18 70 82 
19 S19 65 80 
20 S20 65 80 
21 S21 55 75 
22 S22 60 85 
23 S23 65 80 
24 S24 65 80 
25 S25 65 80 
26 S26 70 93 

Totally 1.650 2.138 
 

Table 4.2 The students’ percentage in pretest and post-test result 

Clarification Score 
Frequency Percentage 

pretest posttest Pretest posttest 

Excellent 96-100 - 1 - 4% 

Very Good 86-95 - 6 - 23% 
Good 76-85 - 12 - 46% 

Fairly Good 66-75 - 7 - 27% 
Fairly 56-65 19 - 73% - 

Poor 36-55 7 - 27% - 

Very Poor 0-35 - - - - 
 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

12 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

Table 4.2 showed that there were 26 students observed in experimental class before 
giving treatment and after giving treatment. In the pretest, there were 7 students (27%) who got 
a poor score, there were 19 students (73%) who got fairly score. There was no student who got 
the excellent score, very good score, good score, fairly good score and very poor score. In the post-
test, there were 7 students (27%) who got a fairly good score, there were 12 students (46%) who 
got a good score, there were 6 students (23%) who got a very good score, and there was 1 student 
(4%) who got an excellent score. there was no student who got fairly score, poor score and very 
poor score. 

The mean score of students’ in pretest and post-test result 

Table 4.3. Mean Score of Students’ in Pretest Result 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Deviation 

Pretest 26 55 70 1660 63.85 4.540 
Valid N (listwise) 26      

 
Table 4.3 showed that the highest score of students in pretest was 70 and the lowest 

score was 55. Besides, it also indicated that the mean score in pretest was 63.85, and the 
standard deviation was 4.54. 

 
Table 4.4 Mean Score of Students’ in Posttest Result 

Descriptive Statistics 

 N Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Deviation 

Posttest 26 75 96 2138 82.23 6.489 
Valid N (listwise) 26      

 
Table 4.4 showed that the highest score from students in post-test was 96 and the lowest 

score was 75. Besides, it also indicated that the mean score in post-test was 82,23, and the 
standard deviation was 6,48. 
 
The t-test Pretest and Posttest Result 

Table 4.5 below shows the possible value is better than alpha (α) (0.000 < 0.05). It means 
that H1 is accepted and H0 is rejected. It is concluded that there was a significant difference after 
treatment. It could also be stated the scramble method was effective to improve grammar 
mastery of the eleventh-grade students at senior high school number 2 Palopo. 

Table 4.5 The Paired Sample Test of pretest and post-test 

Paired Samples Test 

 Paired Differences t Df Sig. (2-
tailed) 

Mean Std. 
Deviation 

Std. Error 
Mean 

95% Confidence 
Interval of the 

Difference 

   

Lower Upper    

Pai
r 1 

pretest - 
posttest 

-18.385 6.646 1.303 -21.069 -15.700 
-

14.106 
25 .000 

 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

13 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

DISCUSSION 
In this research, grammar test was given to the students that were still learning basic 

English, there was the class of IPA 3 at Senior High School 2 Palopo. Based on the result of data 
analysis of students’ grammatical error in the pretest, the researcher found that students were  
still lack understanding of the worming structure correctly. The data that can be seen from the 
one that found the error is last “I not could sleep a night” should be “I could not sleep last night”. 
Of the data, students have many mistakes in worming structure correctly. It means that the 
students did not remember or still lack of understanding about tenses so that students make 
mistakes in making a sentence. Based on the result of the data analysis shows that the scramble 
method is effective to improve the students’ grammar mastery, it can be seen on the table before 
and after giving treatments continually (by using scramble method) the score of students’ in 
pretest is 70 while the score of students’ in post-test is 96. It means that after giving treatment 
using scramble method is effective to improve the students’ grammar mastery. 

In this case, scramble method could attract the students in learning grammar mastery. 
Based on the research that had been conducted, during this research teaching grammar by using 
scramble method could make the students motivated to learn, they enjoyed and they were 
enthusiastic in the learning-teaching process. The students felt easier to write sentences or text 
by using the scramble method. It is evidenced that the scramble method could help the students 
to learn grammar. It has been discussed in Chapter II that Scramble is a rutting method that 
invites students to find answers and solve problems by handing out problem sheets and answer 
sheets along with available alternatives. Besides that, this research also in line with According to 
Robert B. Taylor scramble is one of the learning methods that can improve students’ 
concentration and speed of thought. This method requires students to combine the right brain 
and the left brain. In this method, they not only asked to answer the questions but also to guess 
quickly answer questions that are available but still in random conditions (Huda, 2014). So that 
students can improve their grammar skill because students are trained to answer questions even 
in random form. 

In fact, teaching grammar by using the scramble method at Senior high school number 2 
Palopo, the students got better score grammar mastery. Therefore, it could be started that 
scramble method in teaching-learning of grammar has solved the students’ grammar problem 
and increase the students’ grammar skill for the eleventh-grade students of Senior high school 
number 2 Palopo. So, the hypothesis proposed in this research which says “the use of the scramble 
method is effective to improve students grammar mastery” is accepted. The similarities in the 
research of previous study and the researcher, they have used scramble method, they want to 
found out whether or not the scramble method was effective to improve students’ skill in learning 
English. As for differences in the previous study and the researcher are in the previous study, they 
did research in SMP and MI, and they taught about writing skill. While the researcher did research 
in senior high school and taught about grammar mastery, focus on form/structure and 
meaning/semantics. The component of form/structure covers about an agreement with the genre 
of the text, and how it appears in certain literature, and pinning down the framework of a text, 
including the sequence of events, how they were told, and how they all fit together. The 
component of meaning/semantics covers of constructs a relation between adjoining words and 
clarifies the sense of a sentence, and literal or figurative. 
 
Conclusion 

The researcher concluded that the use of the scramble method is effective to improve 
grammar mastery of the eleventh-grade students at Senior high school number 2 Palopo. Based 
on the result from pretest and post-test, the maximum score in pretest is 70, and the maximum 
score in post-test is 96. The mean score pretest is 63,85 and the mean score post-test is 82,23. It 
concluded that there was a significant difference in teaching grammar mastery before and after 
using the scramble method.  

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


  
 

Copyright © The Author(s) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, August 2020 
e-ISSN: 2723-4126 

 

14 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 

Suggestions 
From the conclusion above, there were some suggestions proposed by the researcher:        

1. The teachers should be more creative in teaching and learning process to increase students’ 
motivation in learning English.  

2. The students have to be more active or have better motivation in teaching and learning 
process. The students have to pay attention to the teacher so that they can improve their 
grammar mastery. 

3. The researcher appreciates that this thesis is still far from perfect words and because of that; 
upbuilding comments and advice are really expected for the perfection of this thesis. The 
researcher hopes that the result of this research can be useful for the readers. It is expected 
to the readers will get more information about interactive technical activities. 

4. The researcher suggests the next researcher choose sentences or texts that can be easier to 
understand by students and give students more new vocabulary so as to increase students’ 
knowledge. 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Afrizal, M. 2016 “Improving Students’ Writing Skill by Using Scramble Sentence Method to the 
Second Years Students of SMP Negeri 3 Bireuen”. Bireuen. 

Agraini, Dewi Oktavia, 2017. Penerapan Metode Pembelajaran Scramble untuk Meningkatkan 
Hasil Belajar Bajasa Inggris Peserta Didik kelas III MI Thoriqul Huda Kromasan Ngunut 
Tulungagung.  

Brown, Douglas, Teaching by Principles an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, (San 
Francisco State University, 2001). 

ESL.2009. “Teaching Grammar”, Online: www.wikipedia.com. Accesses on October 10th, 2009. 

Flor and Jan Aarts, English Syntactic Structures. (Pergamon Press 1982). 

Huda, Miftahul, Model-Model Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Belajar, 2014). 

Komalasari, Kokom. 2010. Pembelajaran Kontekstual: Konsep dan Aplikasi. PT Refika Aditama. 
Bandung. 

Kurniawan, Bella Aditya, 2016.  “The Effectiveness of Scramble Method in Teaching Writing 
Procedure Text to the Seventh Grade Students At SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Purworejo in the 
Academic Year 2015/2016” Purworejo.  

Muhajirah, M. (2020). Basic of Learning Theory: (Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and 
Humanism). International Journal of Asian Education, 1(1), 37-42. 
https://doi.org/10.46966/ijae.v1i1.23 

Nisak, Rohmalia Dita Khoirun, “Pengaruh Mode Scramble Didukung Media Bagan Terhadap 
Kemampuan Memahami Kegiatan Jual Beli Di Lingkungan Rumah dan Sekolah Siswa 
Kelas III SD Mojoroto 1 Kota Kediri Tahun Pelajaran 2016/2017”, (Artikel Skripsi 
Universitas Nusantara PGRI Kediri, 2017). 

Nordquist, Richard, What is Grammar? (http://grammar.about.com) Accessed on 30th October 
2011  

Radford, Andrew. Transformational Grammar, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 

Shoimin, Aris, 2013. 68 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif Dalam Kurikulum, (Yogyakarta: AR-RUZZ 
MEDIA, 2014). 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://www.wikipedia.com/
http://grammar.about.com/

