ABSTRACT
TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION CONVEYED IN ANECDOTE
TEXT THROUGH SELF-QUESTIONING STRATEGY AT THE SECOND
GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH
By
Fetrisia
In English Language Teaching, one of the important skills in English is reading,
but most of the students still got difficulty in comprehending the text. As a matter
of fact, the students’
reading ability in reading comprehension is still need to be
improved to achieve the target goal in the curriculum. Since self-questioning
strategy is effective to develop students’ critical thinking by using anecdote as the
material because it is an interesting material for the students.
The objective of this research was to find out whether self-questioning strategy
can be used to increase students’ reading ability in
comprehending the anecdote
text at the second grade of MA Ma’arif 4 Kalirejo Lampung Tengah.
were taken by means of the test and then they were analyzed by using Repeated
Measure T-Test.
The result of the data shows that
the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension of anecdote text has increased after they were taught using
Self-Questioning strategy. It has been proven by the gain (15,5)
of the students’ mean
score in posttest that is higher than the mean score in pretest. The improvement of
the mean is from 62.1 in the pretest up to 77.6 in the posttest. By using Repeated
Measure T-Test, it was found that ratio is -20.756 and table is 2.021. Since
t-ratio is higher than t-table, it proved that the increase is significant.
Based on the result, it can be concluded that
the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension conveyed in anecdote text increases by using Self-Questioning
strategy. In other word, the hypothesis of the research is accepted.
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Alhamdulillahirabbil’alamin. Praise to Allah SWT, the Almighty and Merciful
God, for blessing the writer with faith, health, and opportunity to finish this script.
This script is
entitled “Teaching Reading Comprehension Conveyed in Anecdote
Text through Self-Questioning Strategy at the Second Grade of MA Ma’arif 4
Kalirejo Lampung Tengah”. This script is presented to fulfill one of the
requirements in accomplishing the S-1 Degree at the Department of Language and
Arts of Teacher Training and Education Faculty in the University of Lampung.
The writer would like to express her gratitude to many people who have suggested
and helped in writing this script. First, she delivers her gratitude and respect to
Dra. Editha Gloria Simanjuntak, her first advisor, and Dra. Rosita Simbolon,
M.A., her second advisor, who have given their best criticisms, suggestions, and
revisions during the accomplishment of this script. Then, she wants to deliver her
gratitude to her examiner, Hi. Ujang Suparman, S.Pd., M.A., Ph.D., for his input
and contribution.
ix
did her research, and all beloved students of class XI 1 Science and XI 2 Social
Programs for their participation in this research.
The writer also would like to extend her appreciations to her beloved comrades of
English ’07, especially for Diah Arini Kusumastuti, Fevi Meila Suwarni and
Meila Sari. Thanks for all support and everything since her very first year in this
department.
Her grateful love is dedicated for her mother and her father, for their pray,
support, patience, motivation
and willingness to wait for the writer’s graduation.
Her thankfulness is also due to her brother Fitrah Oganda, A.Md., S.E. for his
encouragement.
Great appreciation is also dedicated to Briptu Novri Sukendi who always
motivates, loves, cheers her up and lightens every pressure in her life. He is her
everything.
Bandar Lampung,
February 2012
TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION CONVEYED IN ANECDOTE
TEXT THROUGH SELF-QUESTIONING STRATEGY AT THE SECOND
GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH
By
F E T R I S I A
A Script
Submitted in a Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for S-I Degree
in
The Language and Arts Department of
Teacher Training and Education Faculty
LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY
BANDAR LAMPUNG
TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION CONVEYED IN ANECDOTE
TEXT THROUGH SELF-QUESTIONING STRATEGY AT THE SECOND
GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH
(A Script)
By
F E T R I S I A
LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY
BANDAR LAMPUNG
CURRICULUM VITAE
The writer’s name is
Fetrisia. She was born in Bandar Lampung, May 27
th, 1989.
She is the second daughter of Drs. Ahmad Junaiedi and Jundami, BBA. She has
one brother, Fitrah Oganda.
She entered TK Al-Azhar 4 Bandar Lampung before continuing her study at SD
Negeri 2 Way Halim Permai Bandar Lampung in 1995. Having graduated from
the Elementary School in 2001, she went to SLTP Negeri 12 Bandar Lampung
and graduated in 2004. She finished her High School at SMU Negeri 9 Bandar
Lampung in 2007. At the same year, she was registered as an S-1 college student
of Lampung University at English Department of Teacher Training and Education
Faculty through PKAB.
LIST OF GRAPH
Graph
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ... i
TITLE ... iii
APPROVAL ... iv
CURRICULUM VITAE ... v
DEDICATION ... vi
MOTTO ... vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii
CONTENTS ... x
LIST OF TABLES ... xii
LIST OF GRAPH ... xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problems ... 1
1.2 Identification of Problems ... 4
1.3 Limitation of the Problem ... 4
1.4 Formulation of the Problem ... 5
1.5 Objective ... 5
1.6 Uses ... 5
1.7 Scope ... 6
1.8 Definition of Terms ... 6
II. FRAME OF THEORIES
2.1 Concept of Reading Comprehension... 7
2.2 Teaching Reading ... 9
2.3 Types of Reading Text ... 11
2.3.1 Criteria for Choosing the Reading Text ... 13
2.4 Concept of Anecdote ... 15
2.5 Concept of Self-Questioning Strategy ... 17
2.7 Procedure of Teaching Reading Comprehension through Self-
Questioning Strategy ... 21
2.8 Theoretical Assumption ... 24
2.9 The Hypothesis ... 25
III. RESEARCH METHODS
3.1 Research Design ... 26
3.2 Population and Sample ... 27
3.3 Data Collecting Technique ... 28
3.4 Research Prosedure ... 28
3.5 Scoring System ... 35
3.6 Data Analysis ... 35
3.7 Hypothesis Testing ... 36
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Result of Research ... 37
4.1.1. Result of a Tryout Test ... 37
4.1.2. Result of Pre Test ... 38
4.1.3. Result of Post Test ... 39
4.1.4. Increase of the Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension 39
4.1.5. Hypothesis Test ... 41
4.2. Discussion ... 42
V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1. Conclusions ... 49
5.2. Suggestions ... 50
REFERENCES ... 51
APPENDICES ... 54
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDICE
Page
1. Research Schedule ... 54
2. Try Out Test ... 55
3. Lesson Plan ... 65
4. Pre Test ... 80
5. Post Test ... 86
6. Upper-Lower Group Try Out Test ... 92
7. Difficulty Level and Discrimination Power of the Try Out Test ... 94
8. Reliability Analysis of Try Out Test ... 95
9. Students’ Pre-test and Post-Test Score ... 97
10. Table Distribution of Pre Test Score... 99
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. Table Specification of Try Out ... 31
2. Table Specification of Pre test ... 31
3. Table Specification of Post test ... 31
4. Increase from the Pre-test to Post-test ... 41
5. Result of the Students Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 42
DEDICATION
This script is entirely dedicated to:
My beloved parents, Ahmad Junaiedi and Jundami.
My beloved brother, Fitrah Oganda.
Motto
Watch your thoughts; they become words.
Watch your words; they become actions.
Watch your actions; they become habits.
Watch your habits; they become character.
Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.
1
I. INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses certain points; introduction deals with background of the
problem, identification of the problems, limitation of the problems, formulation of
the problems, objectives of the research, uses of the research, scope of the
research, and definition of terms.
1.1 Background of the Problems
In English Language Teaching, English is a compulsory subject, which is learned
from elementary school through university. Realizing that English plays a very
important role in the world of communication, The Indonesian Department of
National Education has declared English as the first foreign language. One of the
important skills is reading. Students must improve their ability in reading
comprehension, so they can get information from the text. As a matter of fact, the
students’reading ability in reading comprehension is far from the goal being
expected.
Based on the writer’s experience when she took the teaching practice program
(PPL) at SMAN 5 Bandar Lampung on February to April 2011, she found that
one of the problems faced by the students was that they often found difficulty in
2
finding the main idea, the answer to questions based on the text and making
inferences from the text, but the main problem is that they still got difficulty in
getting the specific information from the text. As the result, students’ reading
achievement was still below the minimal mastery criterion (65) while the
students’ average score of reading test was only 59. In this case, teachers should
help students to find appropriate strategy in order to improve their reading skill
and reading achievement.
The standard and basic competence of KTSP indicates that there are many kinds
of reading text, such as descriptive, narrative, recount, anecdote, report, etc. In this
research, the writer focused on anecdote text of reading comprehension, because
anecdote text is one of reading material which is interesting and enjoyable for the
students that they will be curious to follow the subject due to the funny text. As
Pratiwi (2010) concludes at her research in SMAN 5 Bandar Lampung that
anecdote introduces new vocabularies, grammar patterns, message, and
entertainment at the same time. She also adds that anecdote can make the students
enjoy their learning process. Even though the text is not simple, some of the
students do not really understand this sort of text. Most of them have difficulty in
comprehending the anecdote text.
Due to those facts, this research was focused on strategy applied during teaching
and learning process. There are many kinds of strategies that can be implemented
in the class. There are many strategies that can be applied in teaching reading, the
3
strategy gives all students opportunity to attend to the clues as they read the text,
say some questions, keep prediction in mind, identify the answer, and talk about
the answer. This strategy also develops students’ understanding and stimulates the
students to be engaged with the text.
Hartman (2002) defines Self-Questioning as a step that can also be labeled as
planning, monitoring, and evaluating task. When students generate questions, it
means that during the planning, monitoring and evaluating of task students are
covertly asking themselves questions that they have formulated by themselves.
The students should be active and ask themselves questions about what they read.
Wong (1985) distinguishes and defines three theoretical perspectives of
self-questioning: active processing, metacognitive and schema theories. Active
processing theory assumes that self-questioning leads to increased comprehension
and longer retention of the text. Metacognitive theory highlights the need for
developing an awareness of the cognitive process that allows students to monitor
their comprehension. In schema theory, readers call upon their experiences to
build prior knowledge during reading and influence understanding. Meanwhile,
Munawaroh (2011) in her research, states that Self questioning strategy can
motivate and challange the students. It can be seen from their enthusiasm and their
participation in learning.
According to the explanation above, the writer proposed that self-questioning
strategy can overcome the difficulty in reading comprehension because it teaches
4
during reading that may enhance and consequently, lead to better comprehension.
Self-questioning strategy is useful to help the students to comprehend the
anecdote text. The students of MA Ma’arif 4 Kalirejo Lampung Tengah are
selected as the subjects of the research because the writer wants to improve the
students’ reading ability in the school, besides no research using self-questioning
strategy of anecdote text has been carried out there. Hopefully, by presenting
self-questioning strategy of anecdote text in reading class, the students’ skill in reading
will increase.
1.2Identification of Problems
In reference to background of the problem, the following problems can be found:
1. Students get difficulties in comprehending the reading text. They get
difficulties in getting main idea from the text, finding the details, finding the
answer to the questions based on the text and making inference and especially
getting the specific information from the text.
2. Students’ motivations in learning English are still low. So it is difficult to
improve their English ability well.
3. Students have negative attitude in learning English. So it is difficult for them
to learn English well because they regard that English is difficult to be learnt.
4. Teachers use inappropriate technique in teaching English. So it is difficult in
helping students understand reading comprehension easier.
5. Teachers do not use interesting materials which encourage students to learn.
5
1.3 Limitation of the Problem
The research focuses on increasing students’ ability in comprehending the reading
text. As the solution to overcome student’ difficulties, the researcher was
interested in investigating the increase of students’ ability in comprehending the
anecdote text through Self-questioning strategy.
1.4 Formulation of the Problem
Based on the background above, the writer states the problem as follows:
Can self-questioning strategy be used to increase students’ reading achievement in
comprehending the anecdote text?
1.5 Objective
Concerning with the research problem, the objective of this research is to find out
whether self-questioning strategy can be used to increase students’ reading ability
in comprehending the anecdote text.
1.6 Uses
1. Theoretically, the use of this research is expected to support previous theories
dealing with self-questioning strategy.
2. Practically, it may inform teacher at Senior High School that self-Questioning
strategy may give some benefits as to increase the students’ achievement
6
1.7 Scope
This quantitative research was conducted at MA Ma’arif 4 Kalirejo Lampung
Tengah. The variables of the research are Self-Questioning Strategy as the
independent variable and the reading comprehension conveyed in anecdote text as
the dependent variable. The research was focused on the activities of reading
comprehension conveyed in anecdote text taught by Self-Questioning Strategy.
The materials were taken from English Book and internet relevant to the school
based curriculum (KTSP) of SMA and the students reading achievement was
measured by a set of pre-test and post-test in form of multiple choices.
1.8 Definition of Terms
There are some terms used by the writer and to make it clear, the writer will gave
some definitions as follow:
1. Teaching is the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart
knowledge or skill.
2. Reading Comprehension is defined as an active cognitive process of
interacting with print and monitoring comprehension to establish the
meaning. (Silberstine,1987; Simanjuntak, 1998:15)
3. Self-questioning is a set of steps that students follow to generate, think
about, predict, investigate, and answer the questions that satisfy curiosity
from what is being read to understand the text.
4. Anecdote is s an account of an unusual or amusing incident which ends by a
7
II. FRAME OF THEORIES
In this chapter the researcher uses some concepts related to this research. The
concepts are concept of reading comprehension, concept of teaching reading,
types of reading text, concept of anecdote, concept of self-questioning strategy,
advantages and its disadvantage of using self-questioning strategy, teaching
procedure, theoretical assumption and hypotheses.
2.1 Concept of Reading Comprehension
Nuttal (1982: 42) defines reading as the meaningful interpretation of printed or
written verbal symbols. It means that reading is a result of the interaction between
the perception of graphic symbols that represent a language, and the knowledge in
the world. In this process the reader tries to recreate the meaning intended by the
writer.
While, Clark and Silberstein (1987:2) define reading as an active cognitive
process of interacting with print and monitoring comprehension to establish
meaning. Reading is the instantaneous recognition of various written symbol,
simultaneous association of these symbol with existing knowledge, and
8
Reading is an active process (Mackay in Simanjuntak, 1988:15). The reader forms
a preliminary expectation about the material, then select the fewest, most
productive cues necessary to confirm or reject that expectation. Reading involves
an interaction between thought and language. It means that the reader brings to the
task a formidable amount of information and ideas, attitudes and beliefs.
These concepts basically state that reading always deals with printed materials,
which stresses on the grasping meaning from the printed language. It means that
reading activity is the interaction between the perception of the graphic symbols
that represent the language and the readers’ language skill, cognitive skills and the
knowledge of the world. In this process, the reader tries to create meaning
intended by the writer.
According to Doyle (2004), comprehension is a progressive skill in attaching
meaning beginning at the same level and proceeding to attaching meaning to an
entire reading selection. All comprehension revolves around the reader’s ability in
finding and determining specific information and main idea from the text.
Smith (1982: 5-6) says that reading certainly implies comprehension, and reading
is something that makes sense to the reader The readers try to understand and get
the meaning and information in the written texts in form of symbols, letters,
9 Rubbin (1993: 194) states that reading comprehension is a complex intellectual
process involving a number of abilities. The two major abilities involve word
meanings and verbal reasoning. Without word meaning and verbal reasoning,
there could be no reading comprehension; without reading comprehension, there
would be no reading. From these concept basically, it can be understood that
reading needs comprehension.
Referring to the explanation above, it can be said that in comprehending the texts
the students have to know their technique in reading. It means to make them easy
to comprehend the anecdote text. One aspect that becomes essential in students’
reading is the reading technique. It has direct “link” in comprehension and
strategy or technique. The writer assumed that reading comprehension is students’
competence in comprehending the specific information, words and surface
meaning in texts is described by students’ score with an appropriate technique.
2.2 Teaching Reading
Alyousef (2005: 143) says that teaching reading, contemporary reading tasks,
unlike the traditional materials, involve three-phase procedures: pre-, while-, and
post- reading stages. The pre-reading stage helps in activating the relevant
schema. For example, teachers can ask students questions that arouse their interest
while previewing text. The aim of while-reading stage (or interactive process) is
to develop students’ ability in tackling texts by developing their linguistic and
10 comprehension using matching exercises, cloze exercises, cut-up sentences, and
comprehension questions.
The aim of teaching reading is to develop students’ skills so that they can read
English texts effectively and efficiently. To be able to do so the reader should
have particular purposes in their mind before they interact with the texts. Effective
and efficient reading is always purposeful and tends to focus mainly on the
purpose of the activity. Then the purpose of reading is implemented into the
development of different reading techniques. These can be real when the students
read and interact with various types of texts, i.e. functional and monologue texts.
Suparman (2005: 1) states that there are two major reasons for reading: (1)
reading for pleasure, (2) reading for information (in order to find out something or
in order to do something with the information readers get). Harmer (1997: 70)
states the principles behind the teaching reading:
1. Reading is not a passive skill.
2. Students need to be engaged with what they are reading.
3. Students should be encouraged to respond to the content of a reading text, not
just to the language.
4. Prediction is a major factor in reading.
5. Match the task to the topic.
11 In teaching reading, when the teacher teach reading, appropriate and possible
technique should be applied based on the purpose of reading in order to get the
comprehension. Students may use reading technique to make their reading
effective and efficient. Self-Questioning Strategy as one of reading technique is
possible to be applied by the Senior High School students in their reading, e.g.
students are able to identify and look for the specific information in various types
of texts (functional and monologue texts).
2.3 Types of Reading Text
Types of reading texts are divided into two, they are: a) Short Functional Text and
b) Monologue Text (Nainggolan, 2010). The text that will be used in this research
is Monologue Text. There are nine common monologue texts that are usually used
in Senior High School:
1. Descriptive Text
Descriptive text is a text which talks about or describe on a particular person,
thing, or place.
2. Report Text
Report text is a text which talks about or describes a whole class of things
(general). It describes and tells what the phenomena are like, in terms of parts:
their functions, qualities, habits or behaviors.
3. Procedure Text
Procedure text is a text which tells us how something is accomplished through a
12 4. Recount Text
Recount text is a text which tells what happened. The function is to retell events
for the purpose of informing or entertaining.
5. News Item Text
News item is a text which informs readers about events of the day. The events are
considered newsworthy or important.
6. Explanation Text
Explanation text is a text which explains about the process of what happened in
the activity that is connected with science world, natural phenomenon,
social-culture, and etc.
7. Spoof Text
Spoof is a text which tells about an event, strange or funny event based on the real
activity. The function is to entertain and it is usually ended with something
unexpected (twist).
8. Narrative text
Narrative is a text which tells what happened. The functions are to amuse,
entertain, and to deal with actual or vicarious experience in different ways. There
are some genres of literary text which fit to be classified as the narrative text.
Some of them are: folktale, myth, folklore, fairy tale, etc.
9.Anecdote Text
Anecdote is a short and amusing or interesting story about a real incident or
13
2.3.1 Criteria for Choosing the Reading Text
The writer used the authentic texts and textbook, since the textbook did not cover
the types of texts that students have to read (e.g. advertisement, schedule, etc.).
Besides using authentic materials are more suitable for the students to apply as
what they find in real life. “Authentic texts can be motivating because they are
proved that the language is used for real-life purposes by real people.” (Nuttal,
1996: 172). The students can extract real information from a real text in a new or
different language. It also can be extremely motivating, therefore increasing
students’ motivation for learning by exposing them to ‘real’ language (Guariento
& Morley: 2001). Therefore, by using authentic materials, the students can reflect
the changes in language use, (again something that does not occur in textbooks,
which become very dated, very quickly) as well as giving the learner the proof
that the language is real and not only studied in the classroom.
The reading texts are selected based on the following reasons (Nuttal, 1996):
1. Its length is considered appropriate for the Senior High School students-long
enough to contain ample testable information, and not too long as to over-task
students (number of paragraph is about 3-4 paragraphs for the articles and not
more than ten sentences for the functional texts). For the words contain have
to be equal each of the texts.
2. The level of difficulty is suitable. The writer takes and uses authentic
materials, since the textbook does not provide the various types of text that
students need to know. The materials are taken from English magazines and
newspaper for Indonesian readers. Therefore, the materials are quite
14 3. Suitability of content, the materials are chosen for students’ interest and the
materials that have taught.
4. Readability is used to describe the combination of structural and lexical
difficulty of a text, as well as referring to the amount of new vocabulary and
any new grammatical forms present. It is important to assess the right level
for the right students (i.e. for intermediate level, Senior High School
students).
Is the text too easy / difficult for the student?
Is it structurally too demanding / complex?
How much new vocabulary does it contain? Is it relevant?
5. Exploitability refers to how the text can be used to develop the students’
competence as readers. A text which cannot be exploited or explored for
teaching learning, it cannot be used for the students’ materials in learning.
Just because it is in English does not mean that it can be useful.
The materials are chosen from authentic sources not only from students’ textbook,
since the language used is realistic which means it is a mixture of formal and
informal language used in daily life. The material is monologue text for Senior
High School students. Authentic materials could raise students’ awareness and
motivation in reading the texts. The material is also adapted from School Based
Curriculum (KTSP) based on students’ interest and the materials that have been
15
2.4 Concept of Anecdote
An anecdote is a short tale narrating an interesting or amusing biographical
incident. In addition, Daniels (2006) cites that anecdote is prone to the same
weaknesses that gossip suffers from: lack of objectivity, exaggeration, distortion
through repetition, lying, one-sidedness, etc. Anecdote is a very brief retelling of a
true account which can be humorous or interesting. The value of the anecdote is
that it lends credibility to you as the speaker. She also adds that students practice
oral expression and reading skills and develop vocabulary in a fun, relaxed
atmosphere through short reading, humorous stories and studying idioms
commonly used in English. Anecdotes in simple English are used to help students
boost their reading speed when while maintaining good comprehension.
In writing, anecdote or joke story is known as a narration text. It narrates a series
of events. It introduces a number of characters. They can be human or nonhuman
characters. It introduces the relationship among the characters. The relationship is
realized by their communicative interaction in the events. The punch line in the
events is an unpredictable action done by a character(s) for a response to another
character(s).
Short story has its origin in the prose anecdote, a fast situation that comes rapidly
to its point, with similarities in oral story telling tradition. Stories are the oldest
form of education. Stories capture the imagination, engaging the emotions and
opening the minds of the readers. The plot are in the middle of the story with
16
As we know, anecdote is quite similar to jokes or funny story, it derives from
people’s experiences or imagination of something happened. Anecdote is a
usually short narrative of an interesting, amusing, or biographical incident. In
other words an anecdote is a short account of an interesting or amusing incident,
often intended to illustrate or support some points.
According to the experts, anecdotes stimulate the students’ interest in language
work, create a relaxed learning atmosphere and help students to think positively
through humor.
Text organization of anecdote text:
Orientation (giving the reader the background information needed to
understand the text or introducing the setting and figures in the story)
Crisis (Provides the details of the unusual)
Reaction (Action that taken to respond the problem)
Coda (Reflection of the incident, usually unpredictable statement)
Language Features of anecdote text:
Use of exclamation and intensifiers (e.g. really, very, quiet, etc) to point
out the significance of the events.
Use of material processes to tell what happened.
17 Here are the examples of anecdotes:
Like Father Like Son
Little Johnny returns from school and tells he got an F in arithmetic. "Why ...?"
asks the father, in that oh-so familiar warning tone of voice.
"The teacher asked 'How much is 2x3?', and I said '6'," answers Johnny.
The father frowns: "But that is right."
So then she asks me, “How much is 3x2?'"
The father's frown deepens: "What is the confusing difference?"
"That is exactly what I said to my teacher! That is why I failed the math test."
Uhm ... is there something you are not telling me?
A distraught patient phoned her doctor's office. "Is it true," the woman wanted to
know, "that the medication you prescribed has to be taken for the rest of my life?"
"Yes, I am afraid so," the doctor told her.
There was a moment of silence before the woman continued, "I am wondering,
then, just how serious my condition is. This prescription is marked 'no refills'."
2.5 Concept of Self-Questioning Strategy
Self-questioning is simply a process in which students ask and answer questions
before, while and after reading. Strategically asking and answering questions
before, while and after reading helps students with difficulties engage with text in
ways that good readers do naturally, thus “improving their active processing of
text and their comprehension” (National Reading Panel, 2003:51).
18 appropriate information and to monitor their own understanding. Good readers are
actively involved in the reading process.
Self-questioning strategy focuses on knowledge acquisition and concept
comprehension by learner generating questions. This strategy slows down the
reading process, focuses students’ attention on details in the text, and makes them
aware of gaps in the story and/or breaches with their own expectation (Janssen,
2002). This strategy may promote students’ personal engagement in reading. By
generating questions, students actively and purposefully engage in the reading and
comprehending the text. Some general questions that can be asked as an example
of how self-questioning is used are: “What do I already to know?”, this is a
question that would be asked before the task begins, “Do I understand what is
going on this far?”, this is effective to ensure comprehension during the task, and
finally, “What new information did I learn?”, this can be asked after the task is
complete.
According to Bryant, et al. (1999) good readers will involve these activities in
their reading:
Before reading,
1. consider what they already know about the topic, and
2. use text features (e.g., headings and illustrations) to get a sense of what
they will read.
While reading,
19 2. use “fix-up” strategies to repair meaning when comprehension problems
occur,
3. use context clues to help them figure out the meanings of unknown
vocabulary and concepts,
4. identify the text, and
5. use their knowledge of text structure to help them understand what they
are reading.
After reading,
1. mentally summarize what they have read,
2. reflect on content, and
3. draw inferences to help them make connections to themselves, the world
and other texts.
Meanwhile, according to Lenz (2005), self questioning requires a reader to look
for text clues that make them wonder, think about possible meanings, ask
questions about the meanings, make predictions about the answers, read to find
the answers, evaluate the answers and their predictions, and reconcile differences
between their questions, their predictions about answers, and the information
actually provided by the author in the text.
Lenz also subdivides self-questioning into three phases in teaching reading as
follows:
1. Before Reading Self-Questioning. It focuses on teaching students to use the
20 creating a set of guiding questions (e.g. “Why is the title of the story Magic
Mirror?” and “What will it talk about?”) to check comprehension during
reading.
2. During Reading Self-questioning. It focuses on teaching the students to use a
self-questioning process, by leading and giving them example how to make
questions using What, Why, When, Which, Where and How as they read
paragraphs and sections of text.
3. After Reading Self-Questioning. It focuses on teaching students to generate
questions and answer questions after they have read the text.
It seems that self-questioning as an active strategy to increase the readers’ reading
ability; the active processing theory posits that since readers have to interact with
the text longer and more deeply, in order to formulate questions about it, they
develop deeper understanding and longer retention of the text (Singer, 1978).
This strategy also helps students determine a motivation for reading by getting
them to create questions about the material they will be reading, form predictions
about what the answers will be, and locate their answers in the text. (Biancarosa
et. al.; 2006:16)
Considering the statement above, it can be inferred that self-questioning is more
than just asking question. It is an active process of students learning to pay
21 background knowledge to generate questions and make predictions based on the
clues.
2.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of Self-Questioning Strategy as a
Teaching Resource
Reading through Self-Questioning Strategy has some advantages and
disadvantages, they are:
Advantages:
1. By this self-questioning strategy, it can motivate learners’ interest and trigger
learners to become actively involved in the lesson.
2. This strategy is also used to develop learners’ critical thinking skills and
inquiring attitudes. Related to critical thinking, by guiding the students’ to let
them make their own question about the text, it can stimulate them to pursue
knowledge of their own.
3. A student does not have to constantly rely on the teacher to gain understanding
of a subject. It is a great way to take learning into students’ own hands.
4. It can be used in all academic subjects.
Disadvantages:
1. For the poor readers, it will be hard for them to develop their skill in this
strategy; the students do not know what questions are best to ask themselves.
Teacher needs “extra-work” to give them example about the use of this strategy
22
2.7 Teaching Reading Comprehension through Self-Questioning Strategy
The steps of teaching reading through self-questioning strategy are:
a. Pre- Activity
1. The procedure begins with the teacher motivates the students by asking
them about anecdote text e.g. “Do you know about anecdote text?”, “What
do you know about anecdote text?”, “Have you ever read anecdote text?”.
It functions to activate their background knowledge of anecdote text.
2. Before the teacher asks students to apply self-questioning strategy to a
passage, the teacher explains to the students the purpose of learning this
strategy. It is intended to introduce the students to self-questioning
strategy applied in the treatment.
3. The teacher describes the strategy and makes a list of steps on the board,
the teacher gives the model of how the strategy is used in the text, and
meanwhile the students see and sometimes participate in following the
steps. The steps can be described as follows:
a) The students must understand question “what do you study this passage
for?” with self-reminder that he or she reads the passage in order to
answer questions about its content.
b) The students locate all specific information in the passage underlines or
highlight them.
c) For each specific information that the students have highlighted, he or
she generates a question. The students read through the passage again to
self-23 questioning strategy. Corder (1979: 26) mentions that the students are
taught to ask WHO? WHAT? WHERE? WHEN? WHY? HOW? For
example, “Who is the main character in the story?” “ What did the
character do in the story?” Students answer the questions by
paraphrasing sentences in the first paragraph. They are taught to get the
answer to these questions in the opening paragraph, it is usually easy
enough to see how the questions are answered.
d) The students underline events and actions they found in the text. This
helps them to make questions about specific information stated in the
text.
e) Students review the specific information, the questions and answers.
b. While- Activity
1. Teacher distributes the text to all students and instructs them to write 5
questions based on the text.
2. The teacher asks the students to go through the text in order to get an
overview of the whole text.
3. Teacher teaches the students about how to make common questions that
usually found in the text by giving the example how to arrange a question.
4. Next, the students underline the main idea they found in the text. They
make questions, for example, “What is the main idea of the first
paragraph?”
24 6. The students underline some of the specific information they found in the
text and make questions by using WHAT or WHO i.e. “Who is the main
character in the story?”, “What is the character do in the text?”
7. The students underline events they found in the text and make questions
based on them, for example, “But you shouldn't use this to wash your
dog.” The possible question is “What was the grocer’s reason for
forbidding the boy washed his dog?” and the possible answer is “The dog
could be sick even kill him.”
8. The students make an inference or prediction about the meaning of the
story that are not explicitly stated in the text, for example, “What does this
statement mean: Darn! This one doesn't have any shoes either…”
9. The students make prediction about the answers of those questions and
write the answers on their own paper.
c. Post- Activity
1. The students exchange their questions with their partner and answer each
other, and then they discuss their answer with their partner.
2. The teacher administers students’ questions and let the students answer.
3. The students submit their work to the teacher.
4. Students try to express their problems in comprehending the text.
5. Teacher summarizes the materials.
6. Teacher gives homework to the students.
25 Based on the frame of theories, it is assumed that self questioning is an effective
strategy to be used to increase students’ reading ability in comprehending the
anecdote text. By this self-questioning strategy, it can motivate learners’ interest
and trigger learners to become actively involved in the lesson. This strategy is also
used to develop learners’ critical thinking skills and inquiring attitudes. Related to
critical thinking, by guiding the students’ to let them make their own question
about the text, it can stimulate them to pursue knowledge of their own.
This learning strategy forces students to pay closer attention to what they are
doing, and incorporate existing knowledge with newly retained information. A
student’s ability to combine new information with old information is also essential
to their ability to transfer knowledge from one context to another.
Based on the literature review and the explanation above, it can be assumed that
self-questioning strategy can be used to increase students’ reading comprehension
in comprehending the anecdote texts for Senior High School students. It makes
the students aware of their purpose of reading and can motivate them, and also
makes them enjoy the reading activity.
2.9 Hypotheses
Based on the theoretical assumption above, the writer formulates the hypothesis as
26
Self-questioning strategy can be used to increase students’ reading ability in
comprehending the anecdote text.
III. RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter discusses about the methods of research used in this study, they are:
research design, population and sample, data collecting technique, research
procedures, scoring system, data analysis and hypothesis testing.
3.1 Research Design
This research was quantitative in nature, because the major data were quantitative,
that was the students’ scores of reading comprehension and was done by using
one group pretest-posttest design. The research investigated whether there was an increase in students’ reading ability in comprehending the anecdote text through
self-questioning strategy. This study uses one class as experimental class using
27
The research design was represented as follow:
T1 X T2
Notes:
T1 is the pre-test
T2 is the post-test
X is the treatment
(Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 20)
Firstly, the writer administered a pre-test to the students to identify their
achievement of reading ability in comprehending the anecdote texts before
applying the technique. Then, the students were given three treatments by using
self-questioning strategy.
Eventually, a post-test is administered to identify students’ reading ability in
comprehending anecdote texts after being taught by using self-questioning
strategy. If the average score of the pre-test is higher than the average score of the
post-test, it indicates that self-questioning strategy can not be used to increase
students’ reading ability in comprehending the anecdote text. However, if the
average score of the post-test is higher than the average score of the pre-test, it
shows that self-questioning strategy can be used to increase students’ reading
ability in comprehending anecdote text.
3.2 Population and Sample
The population of the research was the second year students of MA Ma’arif 4
28
school: XI 1 Science (40 students) and XI 2 Social (40 students). The total
number of the population was 80 students. Their ages range from 16-17 year old.
In determining the experimental class the writer used the simple random sampling
technique by using lottery, so that all second year classes got the same chance to
be sample in order to avoid subjectivity and to guarantee every class has the same
opportunity. The sample chosen was XI 1 Science as the experimental class and
therefore XI 2 Social program became the try out class.
3.3 Data Collecting Technique
In collecting the data, the writer used the following steps:
1. Administering the Pre-test
The pre-test was given before the treatment, in order to find out how far the
competence of the students in reading comprehension or their input before the
treatment and to find out the experimental class’ reading comprehension
achievement, the test was multiple choices that consist of 25 items. The
materials tested, was related to the curriculum used in the school and suitable
with their level.
2. Administering the Post-test
Post-test was given after the treatment in order to find out whether there was
any increase of students’ reading comprehension achievement. The test was
multiple choices consisted of 25 items. The materials tested, were related to
the curriculum used in the school and suitable with their level. The post-test
was done after three meetings of the treatments. The result of the post-test of
29
3.4 Research Procedures
The research was conducted during normal class hour. The writer followed the
following procedures:
1. Determining the research problem
Based on the researcher’s background of problem in the first chapter, it was
assumed that self-questioning strategy could be used to improve the students’
reading comprehension achievement conveyed in anecdote text and the
researcher tried to find out whether there was an improvement of learner’s
achievement in reading comprehension conveyed in anecdote text skill before
and after being taught using self-questioning strategy.
2. Selecting instruments materials
The research used three anecdote texts for treatments. The material was based
on KTSP 2006. The stories were taken from students’ handbook and also
from the internet.
3. Determining Sample
The sample was the students chosen, that was the second grade of XI 1
Science as the experimental class. The writer selected the sample by using
random sampling with the assumption that the second year classes of MA
Ma’arif 4 Kalirejo had the same characters and level of English Proficiency..
4. Conducting try-out test
The try-out test had been conducted before the pre-test was administered.
This was expected to measure the validity and reliability of pretest and
30
use as a research instruments. This test was multiple choice tests and was
conducted in 80 minutes. There were 40 items of multiple choices with four
options and one of them was as the correct answer, the test items could be
reduced or kept depends on its reliability and validity. The aim of try -out was
to determine the quality of the test used as the instrument of the research, and
to determine which item should be revised for the pre-test and the post-test.
This research used the result of the try-out test to measure the level of
difficulty and discrimination power, to find out the validity and reliability of
the test.
Criteria of Good Test
Whenever a test or other measuring device is used as part of the data
collection process, there are four criteria of a good test should be met:
validity, reliability, reliability, level of difficulty, and discrimination power.
1. Validity of the Instrument
A test can be said valid if the test measures the object to be measured and
suitable with the criteria (Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 250). According to
Hatch and Farhady (1982: 251), there are four basic types of validity: face
validity, content validity, construct validity and empirical or
criterion-related validity. To measure whether the test has good validity, the
researcher used content and construct validity since the other two were
considered be less needed. Face validity only concerns with the layout of
31
the future, as in replacement test (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:251). The two
types used in this research were:
a. Content validity
Content validity refers to the extent to which a test measures a
representative sample the subject matter contents, the focus of the
content validity is adequate of the sample and simply on the
appearance of the test (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:251). To know
whether the test is good reflection of what will be taught and of the
knowledge which the teacher wants the students to know, the
researcher compares this test with table of specification. If the table
represents the material that the researcher wants to test, then it is valid
from that point of view. A table of specification is an instrument that
[image:46.612.194.524.458.671.2]helps the test constructor plans the test.
Table 1. Table specification of try out
NO Objective Number of items Percentage
1 Identifying main idea 1., 3., 7., 8., 10., 16., 18., 20., 21., 23., 29., 31., 36.
32,5%
2 Specific Information 4., 5., 9., 12., 13., 14., 19., 22., 25., 27., 30., 33., 34., 35., 37., 38., 39., 40.
45%
3 Inference 6., 15., 24., 28. 10% 4 Vocabulary 2., 11., 17., 26., 32. 12,5%
32
Table 2. Table specification of pretest
NO Objective Number of items Percentage
1 Identifying main idea 1., 2., 4., 5., 7., 8., 10., 11., 14., 16., 18., 20., 23., 24., 25.
60%
2 Specific Information 6., 9., 12., 17., 21. 20%
3 Inference 3., 13., 22. 12%
4 Vocabulary 15., 19. 8%
Total 25 100%
Table 3. Table specification of posttest
NO Objective Number of items Percentage
1 Identifying main
idea 1., 3., 5., 8., 9., 10., 11., 12., 14., 15., 18., 20., 22., 23., 25.
60%
2 Specific Information 2., 6., 16., 21., 24. 20%
3 Inference 7., 13., 17. 12%
4 Vocabulary 4., 19. 8%
Total 25 100%
b. Construct Validity
Construct validity is concerned with whether the test is actually in line
with the theory of what reading comprehension means. To know the
test was true reflection of the theory in reading comprehension, the
researcher examined whether the test questions actually reflected the
means of reading comprehension or not.
[image:47.612.194.524.321.493.2]33
Reliability refers to the extent to which the text is consistent in its score,
and gives us an indication of how accurate the test score are (Hatch and
Farhady, 1982: 244). To test the reliability of the instruments, the writer
used split-half method in which the reading tests were divided into halves (Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 246). By splitting the test into two equal parts
(first half and second half); it is made as if the whole tests have been
taken in twice. The first half contained passage 1, 2 and 3 and the items
were number 1. until 18. The second half contained passage 4, 5 and 6
involving question number 19. until 40. Moreover, by arranging the tests
into first half and second half allowed the writer to measure the test
reliability by having split half method.
To measure the coefficient of the reliability between the first and the
second half, Pearson Product Moment was used, which was formulated
as follows:
Where,
n = number of students
r = coefficient reliability between first and second half = total number of first half
= total number of second half = square of
= square of
= total score of first half items = total score of second half items
34
Then to know the coefficient correlation of the whole items, Spearman
Brown’s Pharophecy Formula was used. The formula was as follows:
Where:
rk = the reliability of full test
rl =the reliability of half test The criteria of reliability are: 0.90- 1.00 = high
0.50- 0.89 = moderate 0.0- 0.49 = low
(Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 286) 3. Level of Difficulty
To see the index of difficulty, the writer used the following formula:
Where,
LD = level of difficulty
R = the number of the students who answer correctly N = the total number of the students
The criteria are: < 0.30 = Difficult 0.30- 0.70 = Average > 0.70 = Easy
(Heaton, 1975: 182)
4. Discrimination Power
The discrimination power (DP) is the proportion of the high group
students getting the items correct minus the proportion of the low-level
students who getting the items correct. In calculating the discrimination
35
Where,
DP = Discrimination Power
U = Number of upper group who answer correctly
L = Number of lower group who answer correctly
N = Total number of the students. The criteria are:
DP: 0.00-0.19 = Poor DP: 0.20-0.39 = Satisfactory DP: 0.40-0.69 = Good DP: 0.70-1.00 = Excellent
DP: - (negative) = Bad items, should be omitted
(Heaton, 1975: 182)
5. Administering the pretest
The test aim was to know the input or the state of students’ ability in reading
comprehension before they were given the treatment. The test was used by
the researcher was multiple choice questions with four alternative answers for
each question. One was the key answer and the last three were distracters.
6. Giving the treatment
There were three times treatments in this research. The anecdote text was
used as the media in teaching reading to the students by using
self-questioning strategy.
7. Administering the post test
The next step were administered the post test to the experimental class. The
type of the test was similar to the pretest. The urgency of giving the test was
to find out whether there was any increase of the students’ reading
comprehension achievement.
36
The next step of the research analyzed the data. Drawing conclusion from the
tabulated results of the pre-test and post-test administered.
3.5 Scoring System
The scoring system that was used in this research is dividing the right answer by
total items timed 100. In scoring the students’ result of the pre-test and post-test,
the formula by Arikunto (1997:212) was employed:
Notes:
S = score of the test R = the right answers N = the total item
3.6 Data Analysis
The writer computed the students’ score in order to find out the students’
achievement in reading anecdote text through Self-Questioning Strategy using the
following steps:
1. Scoring the pre-test and post-test.
2. Tabulating the results of the test and calculating the score of the pre-test
and post-test.
3. Drawing conclusion from the tabulated results of the pre-test and post-test
administered, that was by statistically analyzing the data using statistical
37
version 16.0 for windows to test whether the increase of students’ gain is
significant or not, in which the significance was determine by p < 0.05.
3.7 Hypotheses Testing
After collecting the data, the researcher recorded and analyzed them in order to
find out whether there is an increasing in students’ ability in reading
comprehension conveyed in anecdote text or not after the treatment. The writer
used Repeated Measure T-test to know the level of significance of the treatment
effect.
The formulation is:
)2|}
Notes:
= Mean from pre-test = Mean from post-test
SD = Standard error of differences between means n = Subjects on sample
(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:114)
The criteria are:
1. If the t-ratio is higher than t-table: H1 is accepted
REFERENCES
Alexander, L. G. 2002.
Question and Answer. Graded Oral Comprehension
Exercises
. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Alyousef, H. S. 2005
.
Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners.
The Reading Matrix Vol. 5
, No. 2, September 2005. Updated on 5
thJanuary 2007. http.acrobat/rider.co.id.
Arikunto, S. 1997.
Prosedur Penelitian suatu Pendekatan Praktek
. Jakarta: PT.
Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, S. 2010.
Prosedur Penelitian suatu Pendekatan Praktek
. Jakarta: PT.
Rineka Cipta.
Biancrosa, G. and Snow, C. E. (2006).
Reading Next: A Vision for Action and
Research in Middle and High School Literacy
(2nd ed.). Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education.
Bryant, D. P., Ugel, N., Thompson, S., and Hamff, A. (1999). Instructional
Strategies for Content-area Reading Instruction:
Intervention in School
and Clinic
,
34
, 293-310.
Clark, M. and Silberstein, S. 1987.
Toward a Realization of Psycholinguistic
Principle in the ESL Reading Class in Methodology TESOL
. New York:
Newbury House Publisher.
Daniels, N. 2006.
The Value of the Anecdote
: the Official Guide to Public
Speaking. Retrieved September 11
th, 2009.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2003.
Pembelajaran Anekdot
. Jakarta:
Depdiknas.
Doyle, B. S. 2004.
Main Idea and Topic Sentence
. London: Ward Lock
Educational.
Guariento, W. and Morley, J. 2001.
Test and Task Authenticity in the EFL
52
Hartman, H. 2002.
Self-Questioning Strategies
. Inquiry to Learn Fall.
http://condor.admin.ccny.edu/~group2/research%20paper.txt
Retrieved on November, 28
th2010.
Hatch, E. and Farhady, H. 1982.
Research Design and Statistics for Applied
Linguistics
. Los Angeles: Newbury House Publisher.
Heaton, J. B. 1975.
Writing English Language Tests
. London: Longman.
Janssen, T. 2002.
Instruction in Self-Questioning as a Literary Reading Strategy:
An Exploration of Empirical Research.
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Lenz, K. 2005.
Instructional Tools Related to Reading Comprehension
.
http://www.specialconnections.ku.edu. Retrieved on November, 27
th2010.
Munawaroh, S. 2011.
A Comparative Study of Students’Reading Comprehension
Achievement Taught Through Self-Questioning Strategy and Grammar
Translation Method at First Year Students of SMA Kosgoro Lampung
Timur.
Bandar Lampung: Lampung University.
Nainggolan, F. 2010.
Modul 14 Pendalaman Materi Bahasa Inggris SMA
. Bandar
Lampung: University of Lampung.
National Reading Panel. (2003).
Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based
Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its
Implication for Reading Instruction
(2
ndEdition). Washington, DC:
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and U. S.
Department of Education.
Nuttal, C. 1982.
Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language.
London:
Heineman Educational Book Ltd.
Nuttal, C. 1996.
Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language
(New Edition).
Heineman Educational Book Ltd.: Oxford University Press.
Pratiwi, A. P. 2010.
Analysis of Students’ Listening Comprehension Ability
Taught Through Anecdote’s Generic Structure at the Second Year of SMA
Negeri 13 Bandar Lampung
. Bandar Lampung: Unpublished Script.
Rubbin, D. 1993.
A Practical Approach to Teaching Reading
. Needham:
Macmillan.
Setiyadi, B. 2003.
Teaching English as Foreign Language
. (Buku Ajar). Bandar
Lampung: Lampung University.
53
Simanjuntak, E. G. 1988.
Developing Reading Skills for EFL Students
. Jakarta:
Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Singer, H. 1978. Active Comprehension from Answering to Asking Question:
The
Reading Teacher Volume 31,
No. 8, 1978.
Smith, F. 1978.
Understanding Reading.
2
nded. New York: Holt Rinehart and
Winston.
Smith, F. 1982.
Understanding Reading
. 3
rded. New York: Holt Rinehart and
Winston.
Suparman, U. 2005.
Understanding and Developing Reading Comprehension
.
Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung.
Universitas Lampung. 2007.
Pedoman Penulisan Karya Ilmiah
. Bandar Lampung:
Universitas Lampung.
Wong, B. Y. L. 1985.
”Self
-questioning Instructional R
esearch: A review”.
49
V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1Conclusions
In line with the data analysis and the results of the research previously presented,
the researcher draws the conclusion as follows:
Self questioning strategy can be used to improve the students’ reading
comprehension in comprehending anecdote text. It has been proven by the gain
50
pretest, and then also the students ability in comprehending anecdote text was
increased, since they were able to make questions based on the text and answer to
their own questions. Then, by implementing self-questioning, students became
more active in their reading, since self-questioning provides a chance to the
students to focus on their reading, control and monitor their own reading hence
this leads to better comprehension.
5.2 Suggestions
Referring to the conclusion above, some suggestions can be listed as follows:
1. Suggestions to teacher
a. English teachers are recommended to apply self questioning strategy as one
of the ways in teaching reading comprehension conveyed in anecdote text
because it can help the students comprehend the text easier. For example,
the teacher could guide the students in comprehending the text by leading
them to make good questions related to the text based on the clues given.
b. In self questioning, it is needed that all students generate their own
questions. It must be emphasized that the structure of students’ questions is
not the main point. The point is the question itself. The teacher must train
the students about how to make question that will lead the understanding of
the anecdote text.
c. The teacher should control and consider the time spent during teaching
learning process through self-questioning strategy because it may affect the
51
2. Suggestions to further researchers
a. Further researchers may apply other kinds of texts, i.e., descriptive,
exposition, spoof, recount, report text etc.
b.Self questioning may be better if it is done by pairing the students. So the
