COMPREHENSION
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora By:
M. JAINI
Registration Number: 81061111020
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
ABSTRACT
M. Jaini, Registration Number: 8106111020. The Effect of Reading Strategies and Student’s motivation on Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension. A Thesis. English Aplied Linguistics Study Program, State University of Medan. 2016.
The objectives of this study are to find out if: (1) students’ achievement in reading comprehension that taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy is higher than those that taught by using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy, (2) students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high motivation is hihger than those with low motivation, (3) there is interaction of reading strategies and students’ motivation in reading comprehension.
An experimental research with factorial designed 2x2 was used in this study. The population of this research was all students of grade VIII of SMPN 38 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015 which have 272 students and consists of 8 classes. There were two classes as samples of this research taken by using Cluster Random Sampling; one class used as experiment class that taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy and another class used as control class that taught by using guided reciprocal peer questioning strategy. Motivation was measured by given questionnaire for classifying the students that have high motivation and low motivation. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension was measured by given multiple choice test of reading text that covers the requirements of reading comprehension meaning
The data were analyzed by applying Two-Way ANOVA, comparing �
ABSTRAK
M. Jaini, Nomor Induk Mahasiswa: 8106111020. Pengaruh Strategi Reading dan Motivasi Siswa pada Prestasi Siswa dalam Reading Comprehension. Tesis untuk menyelesaian Gelar Magister pada Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan. 2016.
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Collabortave Strategic Reading lebih tinggi daripada yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning, (2) prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension yang memiliki motivasi tinggi lebih baik daripada siswa yang memiliki motivasi rendah , (3) terdapat interaksi strategi membaca dan motivasi siswa dalam Reading Comprehension.
Ini adalah sebuah penelitian eksperimental dengan desain factorial 2x2 populasi riset ini adalah semua siswa kelas VIII SMPN 38 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015 yang berjumlah 272 siswa dan teridir dari delapan kelas. Dua kelas dijadikan sebagai sampel dengan menggunakan Cluster Random Sampling; satu kelas digunakan sebagai kelas eksperimen yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Collaborative Strategi Reading dan kelas lainnya digunakan sebagai kelas kontrol yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning.motivasi diukur dengan menggunakan kuesioner untuk memenentukan siswa yang memiliki motivasi tinggi dan rendah. Prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension diukur dengan tes pilihan ganda berdasarkan teks bacaan yang memenuhi persyaratan reading comprehension.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, the writer would like to express his great gratitude to Allah
SWT, the Almighty God, for His Blessing and Permission so that He can
complete his thesis to finish postgraduate school in Applied Linguistics Study
program, State University of Medan. Shalawat and Salam are presented to the
prophet Muhammad SAW, his family, and companions.
Second, the writer would like to express his gratefully acknowledge to Dr.
Rahmat Husein, M.Ed as the Head of English Applied Linguistics, Prof. Dr. Sri
Minda Murni, M.S as the Secretary of English Applied Linguistics in UNIMED of
the writer who has kindly assisted him in guiding, direction, revising and
correcting the systematic or the concept of this thesis. And he sincerely would like
to express his high appreciation to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., his first
adviser, and Prof. Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S, his second adviser, for their
assistance, patience, guidance, advice, comment, encouragement, and constructive
criticism. A big thanks to them, because their assistance, patience, guidance, and
outstanding knowledge in writing ability really gave great contribution to the
writer’s thesis writing.
Third, great gratitude is also expressed to reviewers and examiners; Prof.
Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd, Dr. Zainuddin,M.Hum and Dr. Siti Aisyah Ginting,M.Pd.,
thank for their constructive criticism, right from Proposal Seminar up to Thesis
Examination. God bless them.
Fourth, high appreciation is addressed to all lectures in Applied Lingustics
provided invaluable knowledge, especially in language teaching. And for all of
her classmates LTBI A1, thanks for their support and sincere friendship.
Fifth, high appreciation is also addressed to Hj.Rohanim,S.Pd,MM., the
Principle of SMPN 38 MEDAN who gave the opportunity to allow the writer
conducting research in the school.
Sixth, the writer would like to express his sincerest appreciation and
thanks to: his beloved wife, Utari Tampubolon.S.Pd.I, for her great love and
patience, her support and motivation to continue and finish the writers’ study; his
lovely parents; H.Dahlan and Hj. Murni Siregar., and his sisters and brothers,
Budi Baik, Nuraidah, Abdul Rahman, Marhamah and Umar, for their
encouragement and prayers.
The last, the writer would like to express her thanks to all her buddies:
Rahma Tirta.S.Pd, Dini Febriani.M.Hum, Erwin Ashari,M.Hum and others, who
always help her in daily life, give support and motivate the writer in finishing this
thesis. May Allah the Almighty bless them all!
Medan, April 2016
The writer,
TABLE OF CONTENT 1.1. The Background of the Study ...1
1.2. The Problems of the Study ...7
1.3. The Objectives of the Study ...7
1.4. The Significance of the Study ...8
CHAPTER II 2.1. Theoretical Framework...9
2.1.1. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension ...9
2.1.2. Reading Comprehension ...11
2.1.2.1 Levels of Reading Comprehension ...13
2.1.2.2. Genre ...14
2.1.2.3. Assessment of Reading Comprehension ...15
2.1.3 Reading Comprehension Strategy ...16
2.1.3.1 Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) Strategy ...20
2.1.3.1.1 Procedure ...26
2.1.3.1.2 Strengthen and Weakness ...26
2.1.3.2 Guided Reading Peer Questioning Strategy ...27
2.1.3.2.1 Procedure ...29
2.1.3.2.2 Strengthen and Weakness ...30
2.1.4 . Motivation ...31
2.1.4.1 Concept of motivation ...31
2.1.4.2 Low and high motivation...32
2.1.4.3 Assessment of students’ motivation ...33
2.2 Conceptual Framework ...34
2.2.1.The Difference between the Reading Comprehension of the Students that Taught by Using collaborative strategic reading Guided and Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...34
2.2.2 The Difference between the Reading Comprehension of the Students with high and low motivation ...36
2.2.3 The Interaction of Reading Strategies and Students’ motivation on Reading Comprehension ...38
2.3 Hypothesis ...39
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design ...40
3.2 Population and Sample ...41
3.4 Treatment of Using the Strategy ...42
3.5. Control Treatment ...44
3.5.1. Internal Validity ...45
3.5.2. External validity ...45
3.6 Instrument of Data Collection ...46
3.6.1 Reading Comprehension Test ...46
3.6.2 Motivation Questionnaire ...47
3.7. Instrument Validation ...48
3.7.1 Validity ...48
3.7..2 Reliability ...49
3.8 Technique of Data Analysis...51
3.9 Statistical Hypothesis ...51
CHAPTER IV : RESULT AND DATA ANALYSIS 4.1 Description of Data ...53
4.1.1 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading Strategy and Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ... 54
4.1.2 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with High and Low Motivation ... 57
4.1.3 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with High Motivation and Low Motivation Taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading Strategy ... 59
4.1.4 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with High Motivation and Low Motivation Taught by using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ... 62
4.2 Requirements of Data Analysis ... 65
4.2.1 Normality Test ... 65
4.2.2 Homogeneity Test ... 66
4.2.2.1Groups of Reading Strategies Homogeneity ... 65
4.2.2.2 Groups of students’ motivation ...66
4.2.2.3 Groups of interaction ...66
4.2.2.4 the result of homogeneity variance Among groups ...67
4.3 Hypothesis Testing ...68
4.3.1 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by Using Collaborative Strategic Reading Strategy is Higher than Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...70
4.3.2 Students’ Achievement with High Motivation is Higher than That of the students with Low Motivation in Reading Comprehension ...70
4.4Discussion
4.4.1 Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension taught by Using Collaborative Strategic Reading Strategy is Higher than Using Guided Reciprocal Peer
Questioning Strategy ...72
4.4.2 Students’ Achievement with High Motivation is Higher than That of the students with Low Motivation in Reading Comprehension ...73
4.4.3 The Interaction of Reading Strategies and Students’ Motivation on Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension ...75
4.5Limitations of Research ...76
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1Conclusions ...78
5.2Implications...79
5.3 Suggestions ... 79
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Mean score of students’ Reading comprehension in SMPN 38
Medan, School year of 2013/2014. ... 3
Table 3.1. Factorial Research Design 2x2 40 Table 3.2 The Procedures of the Treatment in the Two Groups ...43
Table 3.3 The indicators of reading comprehension test 47 Table 3.4 The indicators of students’ motivation questionnaire ...48
Table 4.1 Summary of Data Description... 53
Table 4.2 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ...54
Table 4.3 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension taught by using Reciprocal peer Questioning strategy ...55
Table 4.4 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high motivation ...57
Table 4.5 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension with low motivation ...58
Table 4.6 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension of high motivation students’ taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ...60
Table 4.7 frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension with low motivation taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ...61
Table 4.8 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high motivation taught by using Guided Reciprocal peer Questioning strategy ...62
Table 4.9 Frequency distribution of students’ achievement in reading comprehension with low motivation and taught by using Guided Reciprocal peer Questioning strategy ...64
Table 4.10 Summary on the result of normality test ...65
Table 4.11 Summary on the result of homogeneity test ...66
Table 4.12 Summary on the result of homogeneity variance on students’ motivation ...67
Table 4.13 Summary on the result of homogeneity within groups ...67
Table 4.14 Result of homogeneity variance among groups ...67
Table 4.15 Two-way ANOVA ...68
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure.2.1 CSR’s Plan for Strategic Reading Includes Before,
During, and After Reading ...22 Figure 2.2 Generic comprehension and thinking questions used in
the Guided Peer Questioning Strategy ... 29 Figure 4.1 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ...55 Figure 4.2 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
taught by using guided reciprocal peer questioning strategy ...56 Figure 4.3 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with high motivation ... 58 Figure 4.4 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with low motivation ...59 Figure 4.5 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with field independent style and taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ...60 Figure 4.6 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with low motivation and taught by using Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy ... 62 Figure 4.7 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with high motivation taught by using guided reciprocal peer
questioning strategy ...63 Figure 4.8 histogram of students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with low motivation taught by using guided reciprocal peer
questioning strategy ...64 Figure 4.9 the Interaction of reading strategies and students’
LIST OF APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A: Pre-Test ...90
APPENDIX B : Post-Test ...90
APPENDIX C : Motivation Questionnaire ...98
APPENDIX D : Lesson Plan for CSR ...100
APPENDIX E : Lesson plan for GRPQ ...102
APPENDIX F : Validity of Questionnaire ...104
APPENDIX G : Reability of Questionnaire ...106
APPENDIX H : Validity of Reading Test ...108
APPENDIX I : Reability of Reading Test ...110
APPENDIX J : The Normality Test ...112
APPENDIX K : The Data Tabulation of All Classes ...114
APPENDIX L : Description of Basic Competence ...115
APPENDIX M : Homogeneity Test ...124
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problem
Today, the ability in mastering English language is a crucial need since
language has an important role as a means of communication among others. In
Indonesia, English is used as a foreign language which is taught at schools. It is
not only given as a main subject which is examined in the national final
examination , but also it is given to prepare students facing the global era for now
and their future life. English is used as a means of communication both oral and
written. Here, to communicate means to comprehend and convey information,
thought and feeling by using English. Language is expected to help students
knowing themselves and others. English as a foreign language is needed not only
in academic field but also in the development of science and technology, many
work fields and life activities, such as in the process of getting knowledge,
transferring information from the text books and mass media (newspaper,
magazine, radio, TV and internet).
In English, student must master four skills, they are: listening, speaking,
reading, and writing. Among those four skills, reading is one of the most
important skills in learning language. Reading skill becomes a part of language
skill that the students have to master since reading skill has an important role in
education field. Reading is one of a way for the students to get the information
needed in their education field, such as transferring information and knowledge
Reading comprehension refers to constructing the meaning of the oral
message. Moreover, comprehension involves the ability of understanding the
intended message of a text. Reading comprehension is based on using the
appropriate meaning-making processes from the printed messages. Reading
comprehension involves the passage the reader, and the context.
Reading comprehension plays important role to help students develop their
knowledge, reading in foreign language in this case English language, is important
skill that should be mastered by students in Indonesia. California Task Force
(2002) informed that the ability to read is crucial to the success of all students, and
it essential succeed in society. In addition, Trelease (2001) stated that reading is a
fundamental task that must be mastered by every student, in order to be able to
functionally compete in society.
For some readers, comprehension is always challenging. They may
understand each word separately, but to link them together into meaningful ideas
often doesn’t happen as it should. These readers can decode the words, but have
not developed sufficient skills to comprehend the underlying, deeper meaning of
the sentences, the paragraphs, and the entire text. Reading can be challenging,
particularly when the material is unfamiliar, technical, or complex, moreover, for
them who have reading problems that included inability to pronounce words,
limited academic vocabulary, and difficulty applying literal and critical
comprehension skills when processing text.
This lack of reading comprehension ability is also found in SMP 38
MEDAN students, researcher finds that students have low score in reading
that requires cognitive process. It is based on their score of reading
comprehension the last examination. The data is shown in the following table.
Table 1.1 Mean score of students’ Reading comprehension in SMPN 38 Medan, School year of 2013/2014.
Academic Year 2013/2014
Class / Semester I II
VIII-1 70 68
VIII-2 65 67
VIII-3 64 66
VIII-4 65 65
VIII-5 66 67
VIII-6 66 66
VIII-7 64 65
VIII-8 65 65
(Source: Mark Collection List (Daftar Kumpulan Nilai: DKN) of SMP Negeri 38 MEDAN, School Year of 2013/ 2014)
Table above shows that the scores of those eight different classes are
divided by the total number of the students that result the average scores of each
class. From table it is concluded that the students’ achievement does not achieve
the minimal Mastery Criterion (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal: KKM ) determine
which is 70. It means that the teaching reading comprehension has not been
successful; therefore this teaching should be improved in order to achieve the
criteria standard based.
Many factors that cause difficulties for the students to understand the
reading text and to gain information from the written words. Based on the
observation in the classroom, the students had the difficulties in understanding the
negative attitude, low motivation, and minimum reading activity at home. Most of
the students admitted that they often felt boring when they had to read the text,
especially a long and uninteresting topic. The students were not so interested in
reading because they often did not understand the meaning the word used in the
text. According to Alexander (1988), reading comprehension is influenced by
many factors; among others is reading material, the total program of reading
instruction, the children own personality, attitudes, interest, motivation, habits and
his out of school environment.
Many teaching reading strategies has been suggested by a lot of
researchers. One of the strategies is Collaborative Reading Strategy (CSR). CSR
is a set of instructional strategies designed to help students with diverse abilities
acquire and practice comprehension strategies for use with informational text.
Sousa (2005) describes that CSR is particularly effective in classrooms where
students have many different reading abilities and learning capabilities. This is in
line with Klinger & Vaughn (1998), Fitri (2010) Wang (2008), they found that
CSR was effective in improving reading comprehension for most of the students
with low learning abilities. Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) teaches
students to use comprehension strategies while working cooperatively. Students’
strategies include previewing the text; giving ongoing feedback by deciding
"click" (I get it) or "clunk" (I don't get it) at the end of each paragraph; "getting
the gist" of the most important parts of the text; and "wrapping up" key ideas, find
out how to help students of mixed achievement levels apply comprehension
strategies while reading content area text in small groups. Initially, the teacher
whole class using modeling, role playing, and teacher think- a loud. After students
have developed proficiency applying the strategies through teacher-facilitated
activities, the teacher asks them to form heterogeneous groups, where each student
performs a defined role as students collaboratively implement the strategies.
Another strategy is guided reading peer questioning (GRPQ). GRPQ is a
structured approach to peer interaction focusing on the cognitive processing of
participants” (O’Donnell, 1999). It emphasizes the role of teachers and generic
question stems in guiding peer interaction. Through reciprocal peer-questioning,
students learn from each other by giving and receiving help, by recognizing and
resolving contradictions between the individual student and other students’
perspectives, and by internalizing problem-solving processes and strategies that
emerge during group work (Brown and Palincsar, 1989). King (1990) found that
students using this guided reciprocal questioning procedure asked more critical
thinking questions, gave more detailed explanations, and demonstrated higher
achievement with the material under discussion than students who just discussed
the lecture material with each other or who used an unguided reciprocal peer
questioning approach (i.e., students were trained to ask and answer question but
were not provided with the list of generic question stems to guide their generation
of questions). King argued that the generic question stems helped students
generate their own list of critical thinking questions designed to elicit elaborated
explanations. To be able to answer these questions, students had to think
extensively about the material, organize it, and integrate it into their own existing
understandings, and it was the process of reorganization and restructuring and
This finding is also in line with Pan (2014) and Gelmini-Hornsby, G., Ainsworth,
S.E. & O'Malley, C. (2011, they found that reciprocal peer-questioning
instruction created a more positive attitude toward learning English reading. In
conclusion, they strongly recommend EFL instructors use reciprocal
peer-questioning instruction in English reading classrooms.
Teaching reading strategy is not only factor affecting the process of
comprehending reading but also motivation. Motivation is a theoretical construct
used to explain the initiation, direction, intensity, persistence, and quality of
behavior, especially goal-directed behavior (Maehr & Meyer, 1997 in Brophy
2010:3). Motives are hypothetical constructs used to explain why people do what
they do. Motives are distinguished from related goals (the immediate objectives of
action sequences) and strategies (the methods used to achieve goals and thus to
satisfy motives). Building motivation is an essential step in developing students
who will turn into readers (Anderson, 1985). Students with low motivation to
achieve in school most likely also have very low reading comprehension. Whether
the focus of an approach is directed at parents, teachers, students, or some other
influence such as the curriculum or choice of text, there has always been a critical
area of attention for reading comprehension. That area is the motivation of
students. It seems that teachers are constantly striving to find ways to motivate
children to read (McNinch, 1997). One cannot expect students to comprehend
printed material if they have not read that material. It is just as unreasonable to
expect them to want to read without any motivation. When students are highly
motivated to read, the likelihood that they will comprehend the reading material
outcome of reading instruction (Johns and VanLeirsburg, 1994). So, motivation is
needed to influence students’ reading comprehension achievement.
Based on the explanation above, this study is conducted to see the
students’ achievement in reading comprehension by Collaborative Strategic
Reading (CSR) and Guided Reading Peer Questioning (GRPQ) which are suited
to the students with low and high motivations
1.2 The Problems of Study
This research is aimed at answering the following questions:
1) Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension taught by
collaborative strategic reading is higher than taught by guided reading
peer-questioning?
2) Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension who have high
motivation higher than low motivation?
3) Is there any interaction between the two teaching reading strategies and
motivations?
1.3 The Objectives of the Study.
In carrying out the research, it is necessary to state the objective of this
study clearly, they are:
1) To find out the difference between the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension taught by collaborative strategic reading is higher than
2) To find out the differences between the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension who have high higher than low motivation
3) To find out if there is any interaction between the two teaching reading
strategies and the motivations.
1.4 The Significance of the Study
These research findings are expected to be useful for the theoretical and
practical development. Theoretically, this study is expected to provide
information, which may have as well as practical values for English Language
Teacher to promote deeper comprehension on reading, by using the various type
of reading strategies. For students in order to improve their ability in reading
comprehension, and this research also can be used as the references for those who
want to conduct further research.
. Practically, for the English teachers, it can be used as one of strategies
when teaching reading. For students, it can help them who have problem in
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1Conclusions
Based on the data analysis and hypothesis testing, it is concluded:
1. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by
Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy is significantly higher than those
that taught by Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy. It means,
Collaborative Strategic Reading strategy affects reading comprehension
better than Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy.
2. Students’ learning motivation significantly affects students’ achievement
in reading comprehension. The students’ achievement in reading
comprehension of the students who have high motivation better than that
of the students who have low motivation.
3. There is an interaction between reading strategies and students’ motivation
to the students’ achievement in reading comprehension. The interaction is
the students with high motivation better to be taught with by using CSR
and the students who have low motivation better to be taught by using
5.2Implications
The first finding of this research reveals that the students’ achievement in
reading comprehension taught by using collaborative strategic reading is
significantly higher than that of students taught by using guided reading peer
questioning. Thus, it implies English teacher should apply collaborative strategic
reading strategy.
The second finding of this research reveals that the achievement in reading
comprehension of the students who have high motivation is significantly higher
than that of the students who have low motivation. Therefore, the teacher should
pay more attention to the students’ motivation, so that the students can obtain
better learning achievement.
Finally, the third research finding of this study reveals that there is
interaction between reading strategies and students’ motivation to the students’
achievement in reading comprehension. It implies that teachers should apply
teaching methods which are suitable with students’ motivation so that the students
can improve students’ achievement in reading comprehension.
5.3Suggestions
In connection with the conclusion, some suggested stated as follow:
1. English teachers are recommended to use Collaborative Strategic Reading
2. English teachers should pay more attention to the students’ motivation for
the success of their achievement in reading comprehension.
3. English teacher should encourage low learning motivation students to
participate in study English in order to get better achievement in reading
comprehension.
4. Teachers can develop further study in the area of reading strategies that
expected to improve students reading comprehension achievement. It is
believed that with the advent of learner-centered approaches, future
teachers have the responsibility of training students to be capable of
deciding what their best learning path is. They should be ready to assist
and guide students through the process of reflecting on how they learn
best.
5. Teachers should make learners aware of the need of strategic, autonomous
REFERENCES
Anthony, Edward M. 1963. “Approach, method and technique.” English Language Teaching 17: 63-57
Ary, D., & Rajaviah, A. 1979. Introduction to Research in Education. New York Holt, Rinchart and Winston.
Berry, James. 2005. Levels of Reading Comprehension. Retrieved June 7, 2014 from http//www.sc4. edu/documents/studyskills/h7levelsreadingcomp.doc. Best, J.W., & Kahn, J.V. (2006). Research in Education. (10th ed.) New York:
Pearson Education.
Bracht, G. H., & Glass, G. V. (1968). The external validity of experiments.
American Education Research Journal, 5, 437-474.
Brophy, Jare. 2010. Motivating Students to Learn(3rded). New York: Taylor &
Francis.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2000. Principles of language Learning and Teaching. New York:Addison WesleyLongman.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Longman.
Brown, F. A. (2008). Collaborative learning in the EAP classroom: Students’ perception. ESP World, 17, 1-18.
California Task Force. 2002. Reading, Every Child A Reader. Retrieved
December 15, 2014 from
http://orton-gillingham.com/orton-gillingham2.asp-11k.
Dhieb, H.N. (2006). Applying metacognitive strategies to skimming research articles in an ESP context. Language Teaching Forum, number 1, 2006. Dutcher, Peggy. 1990. Authentic Reading Assessment. Practical Assessment
Research and Evaluation. Retrieved July, 6 2014 from http://
PAREonline.net/getvn. asp?v=22n=6.
ymock, S.J. (2007). Comprehension strategy instruction: Teaching narrative text structure awareness.The Reading Teacher, 61(2), 161–167
Fan, Y. C. (2010). The Effect of Comprehension Strategy Instruction on EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension. Asian Social Science, 6(8), P19. Gerot, L., & Wignell, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:
Graesser, C. Arthur, 2007. An introduction to Strategic Reading Comprehension. In McNamara, S. Danielle (Ed.), Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions and Technologies (pp. 3-26). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Gregory, R.J. (2000). Psychological testing (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
Johns, J.L. & Vanleirsburg, P. (1994) “Promoting The Reading Habit;
Consideration and Strategies” Newark, Delaware, IRA: Cramer/Castle. Karabuga, F., & Kaya, E. S. (2013). Collaborative Strategic Reading Practice with
Adult EFL Learners: A Collaborative and Reflective Approach to Reading. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 621-630.
Katims, David S. 1997. Improving the ReadingComprehension of Middle School Students in Inclusive Classrooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 2: 116-124.
Kim, A.-H., Vaughn, S., Klingner, J. K., Woodruff, A. L., Klein, C., & Kouzekanani, K. (2006). Improving the reading comprehension of middle school students with disabilities through computer-Assisted collaborative strategic reading (CACSR). Remedial and Special ducation, 27, 235–248. King, A. (1990). Reciprocal peer questioning: A strategy for teaching students
how to learn through lectures. The Clear-inghouse, 64, 131–135
King, A. 1994b. Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of Teaching Children How to Question and How to Explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30:338–368.
Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Arguelles, M. E., Hughes, M. T., & Leftwich, S. A. (2004). collaborative Strategic Reading “Real-World” Lessons From Classroom Teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 25(5), 291-302 McNinch, J. (1997) Motivational Tools in Reading Comprehension, Reading
World, v25, n3, p243-49. 1997.
O'Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
O'Donnell, A. M; A. King (1999). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Lawrence Erlbaum
RAND (Reading Study Group). 2002. Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetty, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. 2001. How Psychological Science informs the Teaching of Reading.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2 (2): 31-68.
Ross, J.,& Smythe, E. 1995. Differentiating cooperative learning to meet the needs of gifted learners: A case for transformational leadership. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 63-82.
Sarwo.2013. Analysis on the Students’ Problems in Comprehending Narrative Texts. unpublished Theses .Teacher Training and Education Faculty. Tanjungpura University. Pontianak
Slavin, R. E.1990. Cooperative Learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Sousa, D.A. 2005. How the Brains Learn to Read. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. international Journal of Educational Research, 13, 89-99. Spear-Swelling,L. 2006. Assement of reading comprehension. Retrieved:
http://www.indoline.org/sperasswelling/assesmentofreadingcomprehnsion. December 2014.
Trelease, Jim. 2001. Reading for FUN is Reading for the Future. Retrieved December 15, 2014 from http://www.Trelease-on-reading.com/rah.html Webster New World College Dictionary. 1996. Macmillan Simon & Schuster. Wlodkowski, R. & Jaynes, J. H. (1990). Eager to Learn: Helping Children
