THE COMPARISON OF THE READING ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN READING ON SCREEN AND PRINTED TEXT TOWARDS THE FIRST
YEAR ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS
SKRIPSI
BY
ANDRI JAMAUL RIFIYANI NPM 21601073005
UNIVERSITY OF ISLAM MALANG
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
JULY, 2020
ABSTRACT
Rifiyani, A. J. 2019. The Comparison of the Reading Achievement between Reading on Screen and Printed Text. Skripsi, English Education Department Faculty of Teacher Training and Education University of Islam Malang. Advisor I: Diah Retno Widowati, S.Pd., M.Pd.; Advisor II: Dzurriyyatun Ni’mah, S.S., M.Pd.
Keywords : On-screen, Printed Text, Reading Achievement
The purpose of this study was to compare the students’ reading achievement between reading on screen and printed text towards the first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang. This study used quantitativeresearch design.
The participants of this study were 60 students, the first year English Department students from class C and D. The students were randomized into two groups, where class C as the experimental group read on screen and class D as the control group read on printed text. The instrument of this study was a news article with 10 multiple choice questions and 10 true false statements adopted from Breaking News English with the title “Dietary Supplements” by Sean Banville.
To analyze the data, the researcher used Independent Sample T-test. The finding revealed that there was a significant difference on students’ reading achievement based on the students’
reading score. It was proved by the significant difference on the mean score of both groups. The mean score of the experimental group was 85.33 while the mean score of the control group was 75.00. Then, the result of sig. (2-tailed) value showed that p value 0.008 was lower than α 0.05, (0.008 < 0.05). Hence, it can be concluded that the students who read on screen scored higher in reading achievement than the students who read printed text towards the first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang.
ABSTRAK
Rifiyani, A. J. 2019. The Comparison of the Reading Achievement between Reading on Screen and Printed Text. Skripsi, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Islam Malang. Penasihat I: Diah Retno Widowati, S.Pd., M.Pd .; Penasihat II: Dzurriyyatun Ni’mah, S.S., M.Pd.
Kata kunci: On Screen, Printed Text, Reading Achievement
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk membandingkan prestasi membaca siswa antara membaca di layar dan teks cetak terhadap tahun pertama mahasiswa Jurusan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Islam Malang. Penelitian ini menggunakan desain penelitian kuantitatif.
Partisipan penelitian ini adalah 60 siswa, tahun pertama siswa Departemen Bahasa Inggris dari kelas C dan D. Para siswa secara acak menjadi dua kelompok, di mana kelas C sebagai kelompok eksperimen membaca di layar dan kelas D sebagai kelompok kontrol membaca pada teks cetak . Instrumen penelitian ini adalah artikel berita dengan 10 pertanyaan pilihan ganda dan 10 pernyataan salah yang benar diadopsi dari Breaking News English dengan judul "Dietary Supplements" oleh Sean Banville.
Untuk menganalisis data, peneliti menggunakan Independent Sample T-test. Temuan ini mengungkapkan bahwa ada perbedaan yang signifikan pada prestasi membaca siswa berdasarkan skor membaca siswa. Itu dibuktikan dengan perbedaan signifikan pada skor rata-rata kedua kelompok. Nilai rata-rata dari kelompok eksperimen adalah 85,33 sedangkan skor rata-rata dari kelompok kontrol adalah 75,00. Kemudian, hasil sig. Nilai (2-tailed) menunjukkan bahwa nilai p 0,008 lebih rendah dari α 0,05, (0,008 <0,05). Oleh karena itu, dapat disimpulkan bahwa siswa yang membaca di layar mendapat nilai lebih tinggi dalam prestasi membaca daripada siswa yang membaca teks cetak pada tahun pertama mahasiswa Jurusan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Islam Malang.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
There are some points that will be discussed in this chapter. It explains the the background of the study, research problem, purpose of the study, hypothesis, scope and limitation of the study, significance of the study, and the definition of key terms.
1.1 Background of the Study
Expanding an infancy of modern machinery 4.0 era, the world becomes more constructive because of these proliferations; nonetheless, the extension of technology preserves the process of the past. The development of technology has apparently started an exclusively different world on how information is recognized (Byars, 2015). Digital media that is more prevalent through the development of technology provides numerous purposes to reading experiences. The digital surroundings which obtained an interest in the development of technology brought out a dissimilar perspective to reading experiences of individuals and also gave a different dimension to the terms of reading. This difference leads the transition from the usual types of reading such as printed text to the new types of reading text; on-screen while bringing some beneficial and unbeneficial things.
It is easy to see that college students of University of Islam Malang in English Department constantly bring smartphones for entertainment, games, business, and other purposes. According to Khalid (2014), college students are more familiar with electronic reading. Those are encouraging college students to gain reading interest. Even though several prefer using a smartphone or laptop instead of gaming purposes, reading on screen using tablets, smartphones, or computers can be effective for reading texts.
As a result of the studies, there have been many researchers comparing reading activity using printed texts and on-screen texts. Recent studies conducted by several researchers such as Noyes & Garland (2008), Aydemir, Ozturk & Horzum (2013), Baron (2013), and Reid (2016) suggest that reading through different media affected better understanding on the students’ reading comprehension significantly and those electronic documents can also increase the students’
enthusiasm to read more and more (Walsh G. , 2016). It can be said that reading on screen can be an effective way to achieve better reading comprehension and also the students can highly be motivated to complete reading tasks easily. Literacy engages understanding all styles of which means that are pictured among a group of social practices embedded within the culture (Brown, 2016). To combine learning process in the classroom, the lecturers are supposed to occur with new ideas.
On another side, many students prefer to read printed texts and are not familiar with reading on screen. Milar and Schrier (2015) stated that frequent learners chose reading academic printed. The result of studies conducted by Milar & Schrier (2015) indicates that not all students feel comfortable reading on-screen, although the students cannot avoid smartphones, tablets, and other digital media from daily life even a minute. In terms of perception, commonly the students have fewer attitudes towards digital reading (Pardede, 2019). Commonly, the students are confident to use electronic pattern but some choose conventional form as the best medium for academy study (Abuloum, Farah, Kaskaloglu, & Yaakub, 2019). Many students agreed that reading on screen exhausted them, but no printed text (Macedo-Rouet, Sandrine, & Genevieve, 2009).
From the discussion above, the researcher finds that the previous researches attracted on the students’ attitude, preferences, and the effect of printed text and on screen text on native and second language learners’ reading comprehension. However, only few studies have focused on
EFL (English Foreign Language) learners in Indonesia. In this time, this present study attempts to explore the extent to EFL (English Foreign Language) learners in the first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang.
1.2 Research Problem
In relation to research background that has been mentioned, this study attempts to reveal a research problem.
Do the students who read on screen score better in reading achievement than the students who read printed text?
1.3 Purpose of the Study
This study aims to compare the students’ reading achievement between reading on screen and printed text towards the first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang.
1.4 Hypothesis
To synchronize with research question and background of the study which are previously elaborated, the researcher states the hypothesis of this study as follows.
H1: Students reading on screen score higher in reading achievement than the students with the same level reading printed text.
H0: There is no different reading achievement between students who read on-screen and students of the same level who read printed text.
1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study
In this study, the scope is about analyzing the students’ reading achievement between the students who use printed text and on screen. On the other side, this study also has several weaknesses due to the situation during the process of collecting the data. The first is the weakness
of ex-post facto research design which is chosen by the researcher. Second, this study also limits on the use of digital media such as smartphone and laptop as the tool of reading in enhancing students’ reading comprehension, and the last is the researcher adopts the news article taken from any sources which are related to the students’ capability in the class.
1.6 Significance of the Research
This present study was expected to be beneficial for some parties, as follows:
1. For the EFL Students
The result of this study was considered to support and give a choice for the students who want to read in different ways, yet it is still with the same purpose to achieve better in reading achievement.
2. The Lecturers
By knowing the result of the study, it is expected to give a contribution to the lecturers in looking up the language teaching especially for reading. Besides, the lecturers are expected to know more in what ways the students can easily achieve better in reading comprehension. So, the lecturers can provide any assistance to solve the students’ problems in reading.
3. Further Researcher
The finding can be the reference for the next researchers who are highly interested in conducting the same form of research.
1.7 Definition of Key Terms
The researcher provides several definition of key terms to prevent readers’ misconception and vagueness.
The printed text means reading materials that are in the traditional form using printed media such as a paper, book, etc. The texts used are adopted from the Breaking News English by Sean Banville entitled Dietary Supplements. The length of the reading text is 300 words. The texts are printed out on a piece of paper to not scruple the students.
Digital or screen simply means characterized by electronic media. Reading on screen here, the students use any media that is encoded in a machine-readable format and performed in digital form such as a computer, mobile phone, iPad, laptop, etc. Here, the researcher uses Google Form to support the reading on screen consisted of an offline reading test with the questions, and the students can use the mobile phone as the medium. The digital text uses the same passage and length as the printed text.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
The conclusion of all chapters in this study and the suggestion from the researcher are explained below.
5.1 Conclusion
Reading on screen means the action of reading texts, passages or books digitally through a screen of mobile phone or computer. Many experts completed this kind of issue with positive results on students’ reading comprehension. In this recent study, the researcher implemented ex- post facto research design to collect the data and the independent t-test from SPSS 20 was used to compare the mean score of the results. The aim of conducting this study is to compare the students’
reading achievement between reading on screen and printed text. The result of this study mentioned in chapter IV is the answer to the research problem related to reading on screen towards students’ reading achievement.
As stated in the previous chapter, the data were taken from the students’ reading score from a reading test given to60 first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang.
The researcher found that the experimental group’s mean score was higher than the control group.
The findings were proved by the mean score of each group (class C = 85.33 and class D = 75.00) and p value. It indicated that the students of experimental group achieved better in reading achievement than the students of control group. Next, the data result from independent sample t- test mentioned that the sig. value was 0.008 while α was 0.05. It meant that p < 0.05 (p value is smaller than 0.05). It could be stated that the comparison of the students’ reading achievement between reading on screen and printed text was significantly different. In other words, the student
who read on screen achieve better in reading score than the students who read printed text towards the first year English Department students of University of Islam Malang.
5.2 Suggestion
According to the conclusion above, the researcher provides several suggestions to the students, the teachers, and researchers.
1. The Students
Based on the result, the students of experimental class got better reading achievement than control class. It is possible that students choose reading on screen as the learning technique to increase the achievement, therefore the students are suggested to read on screen. By using this reading technique, the students can easily access any kind of reading texts.
2. The Further Researchers
This study is needed to be updated along with the development of digital media and students’ interest. This study already proved that the students who read on screen achieve better reading score than the students who read printed text. For the future researchers can consider using different materials of reading text, samples, English skills, and research design to offer more certain contributions and results in different perspectives. Besides that, due to Covid-19, this study was conducted via online to the first year English Department students. Hopefully, the next researchers will conduct the research in a longer time to get more complete and qualified results with non-English majors and different level of the participants like junior high, senior high, sophomore, senior, or adult samples.
3. The Teachers or Lecturers
English teachers or lecturers are highly recommended to implement this kind of teaching media as the students who read on screen scored higher than reading printed text.
It is also supported by several related previous studies as mentioned before. By implementing this media, the teachers and lecturers can help the students to know more about the use of media in learning language skills.
REFERENCES
Abuloum, A., Farah, A., Kaskaloglu, E., & Yaakub, A. (2019). College Students' Usage of and Preferences for Print and Electronic Textbooks. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(7), 1-36.
Auckerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive Regulation of Text Learning: On Screen versus on Paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17(1), 18-32.
Auckerman, R., & Lauterman, T. (2012). Taking Reading Comprehension Exams on Screen or on Paper? A Metacognitive Analysis of Learning Texts under Time Pressure. Journal of Computer in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1816-1828.
Asunka, S. (2013). The Viability of E-Textbooks in Developing Countries: Ghanaian University Students' Perceptions. Open Learning, 28(1), 1-42.
Aydemir, Z. I., Ozturk, E., & Horzum, M. B. (2013). The Effect of Reading from Screen on the 5th Grade Elementary Students' Level of Reading Comprehension on Informative and Narrative Type of Texts. Educational Concultancy and Research Center, 13(4), 1-18.
Baker-Eveleth, L., & Stone, R. W. (2014). Usability, Expectation, Confirmation, and Continuance Intentions to Use Electronic Textbooks. Journal Behavior and Information Technology, 34(10), 1-36.
Baron, S. (2013). Do Mobile Technologies Reshape Speaking, Writing, or Reading?. Journal of Media and Communication, 1(1), 130-147.
Brown, S. (2016). Young Learners' Transactions with Interactive Digital Texts Using E-Readers.
Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(1), 1-42.
Byars, M. N. (2015). Printed Books versus Digital Books. Retrieved from CAL POLY SAN LUIS OBISPO: https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/grcsp/141. Accessed on 21 March 2020.
Chen, G., Cheng W., Chang, T., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of Reading Comprehension across Paper, Computer Screens, and Tablets: Does Tablet Familiarity Matter?. Journal of Computer and Education, 5(1), 213-225.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (6th ed., Vol. 4). Boston, United States of America: Pearson.
Devana, T., & Agustina, A. (2019). Effect of Screen Text in Improving Students' Reading Rate and Reading Comprehension. Jambi-English Langauage Teaching Journal, 4(2), 1-79.
Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2007). Does the Medium Affect the Message? The Influence of Text Representation Format on Critical Thinking. Journal of Human Systems Management, 26(4), 269-279.
Gunuc, S., & Nuru. (2017). Technology Integrating English Language Teaching and Learning.
The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purpose, 5(2), 349-358.
Hamer, B., & McGrath, J. (2011). On Screen versus On Paper Reading: Students' Strategy Usage and Preferences. Journal of National Association for Developmental Education, 5(3), 25- 39.
J. David Cooper, N. D., & Michael. (2012). Literacy; Helping Students Construct Meaning (8th ed., Vol. IIX). (M. Keer, Ed.) USA: Linda Schreiber-Ganster.
Kerr, M., & Symons, S. (2006). Computerized Presentation of Text: Effects on Children's Reading of Informational Material. International Journal of Reading and Writing, 19(1), 1-19.
Khalid, A. (2014). Text Books: ebook Vs. Print. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(2), 235-243.
Kretzschmar, F., Pleimling, D., Hosemann, J., Fussel, S., Bornkessel-schlesewsky, I., &
Schlesewsky, M. (2013). Subjective Impressions do not Mirror Online Reading Effort:
Concurrent EEG-Eyetracking Evidence from the Reading of Books and Digital Media.
International Journal of Public Library of Science, 8(2), 1-25.
Latief, M. A. (2016). An Introduction Research Methods on Language Learning. Malang:
Universitas Negeri Malang.
Macedo-Rouet, M. N., Sandrine, C., & Genevieve, L.-B. (2009). Students' Performance and Satisfaction with Web vs. Paper-based Practice Quizzes and Lecture Notes. Elsevier, 53(2), 370-383.
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Bronnick, K. K. (2013). Reading Linear Texts on Paper versus Computer Screen: Effect on Reading Comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58(1), 1-32.
McNamara, & Danielle. (2007). Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies (1st ed.). New York: Psychology Press. Accessed on February 20, 2020.
Millar, M., & Schrier, T. (2015). Digital or Printed Textbooks: Which do Students Prefer and Why?. Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, 15(2), 1-22.
Ni'mah, D., & Umamah, A. (2020). Mobile-Assisted on Extensive Reading: Students' Voices.
Journal of English Teaching and Research, 5(1), 1-37.
Noyes & Garland. (2008). Computer vs. Paper based Tasks: Are They Equivalent? Journal of Ergonomics and Human Factors, 51(9), 1352-1374.
Pardede, P. (2019). Print vs Digital Reading Comprehension in EFL. Journal of English Teaching, 5(2), 40-59.
Patru, M. (2002). Information and Communication Technology in Education. France: UNESCO.
Accessed on February 11, 2020.
Reid. (2009). Dyslexia: A Practitioner's Handbook. UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Rubin. (2013). Measuring Reading Performance. Journal of Vision Research, 15(2), 43-51.
Schneps, M. H., Thomson, J. M., Chen, C., Sonnert, G., & Pomplun, M. (2013). E-Readers are More Effective than Paper for Some with Dyslexia. PLOS ONE, 8(9), 1-15.
Singer, L., & Alexander, P. (2016). Reading Across Medium: Effects of Reading Digital and Print Texts on comprehension and Calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(1), 155-172.
Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. G. (2013). Reading and Learning from Screens versus Print: A Study in Changing Habits. New Library World, 114(9), 1-12.
Syaputri, K. D., & Trilestari, K. (2016). A Survey of Readers' Reading Preference: Digital or Printed Reading Text. Retrieved from Binadarma Journal: http://eprints.binadarma.ac.id.
Accessed on April 2,2020.
Trakhman, L. S., & Alexander, P. (2016). Reading Across Mediums: Effects of Reading Digital and print Texts on Comprehension and Calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 87(1), 1-15.
Uso-Juan, E., & Ruiz-Madrid, M. N. (2009). Reading Printed versus Onine Texts. A Study of EFL Learners' Strategic Reading Behaviour. International Journal of English Studies (IJES), 9(2), 60-79.
Walsh, G. (2016). Screen and Paper Reading Research. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 47(3), 145-160.
Wang, Y.-H. (2017). Integrating Self-paced Mobile Learning into Language Instruction: Impact on Reading Comprehension and Learner Satisfaction. Interactive Learning Environment, 25(3), 387-398.
Wolf, M. (2010). Our 'deep reading' Brain: Its Digital Evolution Poses Questions. Cambridge, MA: Nieman Foundation for Journalism.
