The Students’ Ability on Comparison Degree in Irregular Form

  • Siti Nur Fatimah MA Muhammadiyah Aimas
Keywords: Comparison Degree, Irregular form


The study is designed to investigate the students’ ability in using comparison degree on learning English especially in using irregular forms. To look their understanding about this matery the writer used method design descriptive design. Comparison degree was a compare between noun, people, and animal. Comparison degree has three type that was positive degree, comparative degree, and superlative degree. In taked the data of this study, the writer especially in taked data of comparative degree and superlative degree but just irregular forms. The sampling of data, the writer choose the students of the first grade at Madrasah Aliyah Muhammadiyah Aimas of number 20 person. The writer used written test as tools to take the data that was multiple-choise of number eighteen comparative degree and seventeen to superlative degree. Before doing research, the writer explains about comparison degree in irregular forms to the students and then the writer given tast about comparative degree in irregular forms to the students. First step done the author was giving material of paper to students about comparison degree in irregular form and both steps given the students exercise about matery had given as multiple-chooise. After that, exercise correct and analyze. By this test given by the author getting the data for her research. From 12 students of first grade at Madrasah Aliyah Muhammadiyah Aimas got score, to comparative degree in worse = 69%, better = 62%, farther = 85%, less = 69%, more = 96%, elder = 7,7%. Commonly, their ability can be seen based on the score of test, in which they got their mean of score of test was 47%. The writer can explain that the students of the first grade at Madrasah Aliyah Muhammadiyah Aimas yet understand about comparative degree, their ability was still including in bad category, and superlative degree specifically on worst = 65%, best = 50%, farthest = 23%, least = 8%, most   = 31%, Eldest = 89%. In overall, can be seen their mean score of superlative degree = 32%. It means that their ability in superlative degree was very bad. By this result, the writer found that the students understanding on superlative degree was still very minus.



Download data is not yet available.


Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2009). Penelitian Tindakan Kelas,Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

________________. (2009). Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan,Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Ari Susanti. (2011). An Analysis On Students’ Mastery Of Degree Comparison (Case Study at Second Gray VIII 10) Of SMP Negeri 3 TangeranSelatan.Tangerang Selatan: SMP Negeri 3 Tangerang Selatan.

Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about Language Assessment: Dillemas, Decisions, and Direction, London: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.

Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers,NewYork: Cambridge University Press.

Celce-Murcia, Marriane and DianeLarsen-Freeman. (1999). The Grammar Book: AnESL/EFL Teacher’s Course, USA: Heinle & Heinle Publisher, Inc.

Djamarah,Syaiful Bahriand Aswan Zain. (2006). Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.

Fatmawati. (2010). The Analysis On Students’ Difficulies In Learning Degrees Of Comparison. Ciputat: SMP Dua Mei Ciputat.

Fernando. (2010). Improving Students Ability In Forming Degree of Comparison By Using Subtitition Drills (A Classroom Action Research at The First Grade of Accountancy Class at Vocational School of Bangun Nusantara 2, Cipondoh, Tangerang). Tangerang: Vocational School of Bangun Nusantara 2, Cipondoh, Tangerang

Gorell and Laird. (19640). Modern English Handbook, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

Hewings, M. (2005). Advanced Grammar in Use, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Kunandar. (2008). Langkah Mudah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas Sebagai Pengembangan Profesi Guru, Jakarta:PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Kusuma, W. & Dedi, D. (2009). Mengenal Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, Jakarta: PT Indeks.

Nunan, David. (1992). Research Method in Language Learning, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Nuttall, C E. (1971). English Language Units: Comparison of Adjectives and Adverbs,London: Longman Group Ltd.

Oller, John W. (1979). Language Test at School, London: Longman Group Limited.

Parrot, Martin. (2000). Grammar for English Language Teachers, USA: Cambridge University Press

Richard, Jack C and David Nunan. (1990) Second Language Teacher Education, New York:Cambridge University Press,

Sudijono, Anas. (2008). Pengantar Statistis Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada

Sudjana. ( 2002). Metode Statistika, Bandung: PT. Tarsito.

Thomson, A.J.and A. V Martinet. (1986). A Practical English Grammar, New York: Oxford University Press.

Thornbury, S. (1999). How to Teach Grammar, England: Pearson Education,

Ur, Penny. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

________. (1988). Grammar Practice Activities;A Practical Guide for Teacher, New

York:Cambridge University Press.

Wallace, Michael J. (2006). Action Research for Language Teachers, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Wiriaatmadja, Rochiati. (2009). Metode Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Zandvoort R.W. and J.AVan Ek. (1980). A Handbook of English Grammar, London:Longman Group Limited.

How to Cite
Fatimah, S. (2019). The Students’ Ability on Comparison Degree in Irregular Form. INTERACTION: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, 6(2), 1-10.