THE USE OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION.

(1)

Dzulfiqar Akbar Juhaendi, 2013

THE USE

OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’

READING COMPREHENSION

(A Quasi-Experimental Research in Eight Grade Students of a Junior High School in Bandung)

A Research Paper

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Sarjana Pendidikan degree

By:

DZULFIQAR AKBAR JUHAENDI

0608977

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

THE USE OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING

COMPREHENSION

Oleh

DZULFIQAR AKBAR JUHAENDI

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni

©Dzulfiqar Akbar Juhaendi 2013 Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Januari 2013

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

(3)

PAGE OF APPROVAL

The Use of Jigsaw Technique in Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension

(A Quasi-Experimental Research in Eight Grade Students

of a Junior High School in Bandung)

By

Dzulfiqar Akbar Juhaendi

0608977

Approved by

First Supervisor Second Supervisor

Sudarsono M.I., M.A. Iyen Nurlaelawati S.Pd., M.Pd.

NIP. 196607051994031004 NIP. 197709062009122002

Head of English Education Department

Prof.Dr. H. Didi Suherdi, M.Ed.

(4)

ABSTRACT

(5)

ABSTRACT

In junior high school, teaching reading comprehension is very important in order to help students gain information and knowledge from written sources. A good teaching technique is necessary to improve students’ reading comprehension. This study investigated the use of Cooperative Learning: Jigsaw Technique in improving students’ reading comprehension and students’ responses to the use of the technique. Quasi experimental research was used in this study. The samples of this study were two classes of eight grade students of a junior high school in Bandung; one class became the control group and the other the experimental group. Each class consisted of 42 students. From the findings it is shown that the implementation of Jigsaw technique failed to improve the students’ reading comprehension as indicated by the statistical scores in the post test of the experimental group (M= 74.85), SE (1.54), and the post test of the control group (M=78.73), SE (1.40). The students’ responses in the questionnaires and observation proved that learning condition and class management became the causes of the ineffectiveness. In accordance with the result, it is recommended that teachers need to pay attention to the learning condition and class control when deciding to use Jigsaw technique.

First Supervisor Second Supervisor

Sudarsono M.I., M.A. Iyen Nurlaelawati S.Pd., M.Pd.

(6)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 Variables... 20

Figure 4.1Students’ Score Improvements... 47

Figure 4.2 Students’ Responses of Using Jigsaw Technique... 48

Figure 4.3 Students’ Positive Responses... 49

(11)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 The Quasi-Experimental Design... 19

Table 3.2 Lesson Plan of Control and Experimental Groups... 25

Table 3.3 r Coefficient Correlation (Validity)... 29

Table 3.4 The Result of Validity Test... 29

Table 3.5 Criteria of difficulty Index... 30

Table 3.6 The Result of Difficulty Test... 31

Table 3.7 Criteria of Discrimination Index... 32

Table 3.8 Discrimination Index... 32

Table 3.9 r Coefficient Correlation (Reliability)... 33

Table 3.10 Effect Size Value... 38

Table 3.11 Criterion on Students’ Response... 39

Table 3.12 Checklist Table for the Teacher’s Activity... 40

Table 3.13 Checklist Table for the Students’ Activity... 40

Table 4.1 Students’ Activity... 52

(12)

CHAPTER I

BACKGROUND

Introduction

This chapter provides general outline of this study. It covers background

of the study, the scope of the research, research question statement of the

problems, aims of the research, significance of the research, clarification of terms,

and also organizations of the paper.

1.1 Background

Nowadays, many sources of knowledge such as books, journals, articles,

encyclopedias are written in English. In that condition, only people with good

English proficiency may deal with the sources. With that reason, in broadening

knowledge, language, in this case English, is one of the bridges that people are

required to master. Improving reading skill is the way to comprehend the sources.

Learning to read in English is considered very useful and essential in broadening

knowledge in many areas of expertise.

In order to gain knowledge from written sources, reading skill is important

to improve. According to Haris and Sipay (1980:8), reading is the ability to

recognize printed symbols and to comprehend their meanings. In line with that,

Burmaster (2005:3) states that reading is a process of determining words and

(13)

reading as a mental and cognitive process in trying to follow and respond to a

message from a writer.

Students have to be able to comprehend what they read. According to

Brown (2001) Reading comprehension is primarily a matter of developing

efficient comprehension strategies for the majorities of the second language

learners who are already literate in their native language. In line with this, Snow

(2002:11) states that reading comprehension is a process of extracting and

constructing meaning simultaneously by doing some interaction and involvement

with written language.

Most schools in Indonesia, especially in junior high schools use a method

which makes students passive learners (Nurkamto, 2000). That situation leads the

students to the consideration that English is hard to learn, especially reading. This

can be caused by several factors, for example the use of inappropriate method

where the teacher only makes the students as listeners in reading class. Besides,

the use of inappropriate textbooks also affects negatively to the students‟ reading

skill. In teaching reading to the students, the only way to gain the knowledge is by

listening to teachers‟ lecturing (Nurkamto, 2000).. This method makes teachers as

the only source of learning in the class. According to Novak (1998), conventional

teaching is concerned with the teacher being the controller of the learning

environment. It means that during the teaching activity, the teacher only used

lecturing as the method; giving instruction and explaining. During the activity, the

(14)

In accordance with the situations mentioned above, this research attempts

to find out if cooperative learning may be the answer to solve the problem of

teaching and learning reading skill. Johnson & Johnson (1999) state that

cooperative learning is one of the most remarkable and fertile areas of theory,

research and practice in education. It will only work if students work well in a

group in terms of accomplishing the learning goal.

Cooperative learning strategy is appropriate to apply in big classes- classes

with many students. Cooperative learning task goes a further step by encouraging

students to work together and by promoting an equal opportunity for every student

to participate in the activity, improving self-esteem enjoyment of school and

interethnic methods are key in this approach (Johnson, Johnson and Holobec,

1993; Slavin, 2005).

Cooperative learning has several teaching techniques. One of them is

Jigsaw technique. Jigsaw is developed by Elliot Aronson and first used in 1971 in

Austin, Texas. According to Aronson et al (1978):

Jigsaw is a cooperative learning strategy that enables each student of a „home group‟ to specialize in one aspect of a learning unit. Student meet with other members from other groups who are assigned the same aspect called “expert group” and after mastering the material, returnto the ‟home group‟ and teach or explain the material to their group members. Just as in a Jigsaw puzzle, each piece-each student‟s part- is essential for the completion and full understanding of the final product. If each student‟s part is essential, then each student is essential. That is what makes the Jigsaw strategy is so effective.

Jigsaw technique, as an effective way to improve students‟ reading

(15)

on their research journal explain that Jigsaw is a great way to introduce speaking

into a reading lesson. It provides a real opportunity for genuine communication. In

real life, we may tell people about a news article we have read, so this is a

classroom activity that is fairly authentic. The other learning journal by Mengduo

and Xiaoling (2010) shows that Jigsaw technique can give students a real learning

opportunity because every member‟s effort is required. Those conditions made the

students active learners.

Due to the reasons above, teaching with the conventional method is no

longer relevant to be applied in nowadays schools, in this case junior high school.

Students need more flexible methods to gain knowledge and teacher should find a

better way of teaching to make the students easier in gaining knowledge.

This research tries to find evidence of the statement by doing research on

the use of both conventional teaching and learning and cooperative learning and

this research titled: “The Use of Jigsaw Techniques to Improves Students’ Reading

Comprehension”

1.2. The Scope of the Research

This research focus on finding out the effectiveness of implementing with

Jigsaw techniques to improve students‟ reading comprehension. There are two

groups to be investigated, one as the control group and the other one as the

experimental group. For this present study, the participants are the second grade

(16)

1.3 Research Questions

The writer intends to figure out the problems‟ solutions in this research

through the following research questions:

1. Is Jigsaw technique effective in improving students‟ reading comprehension?

2. How do the students respond to the use of Jigsaw technique in teaching

reading?

1.4 The Aim of the Research

The aim of the research is to investigate whether Jigsaw technique is

effective in improving students‟ reading comprehension or not. Besides, it is also

aimed to finding out the students‟ responses toward the use of Jigsaw technique in

teaching reading.

1.5 Significance of the Research

This research is expected to provide positive contribution to the teachers

especially in teaching reading to the students. Jigsaw which is already broadly

known is expected to be one of the effective ways in improving students‟

knowledge. For the future researcher studying the same field, it can be reference

to study more detail in this area of research.

(17)

1. Effectiveness is a capability of producing an effect or the quality of being able

to bring about an effect.

2. Reading is the way of getting information from something that is written

3. Cooperative learning is a model of learning where the students learn and work

in small groups collaboratively or positive purposes in order to reach the

learning goals easier.

4. Jigsaw is a cooperative learning strategy that enables each student of a „home group‟ to specialize in one aspect of a learning unit. Students meet other

members from other groups who are assigned the same aspect called “expert group”. After mastering the material, they return to the ‟home group‟ and teach

or explain the material to their group members. Just as in a Jigsaw puzzle, each

piece-each student‟s part- is essential for the completion and full understanding of the final product. If each student‟s part is essential, then each student is

essential (Aronson et al, 1978).

1.7 Organization of the Paper

The paper is devided into five chapters. The chapters are subdivided into

subtopics that elaborate the issue given.

1. Chapter I is introduction. It comprises the background of the study,

background of the study, the scope of the research, research question statement

of the problems, aims of the research, significance of the research, clarification

(18)

2. Chapter II is theoritical foundation presenting the theoretical foundation on the

issue that is relevant to the present study.

3. Chapter III is research methodology. It comprises the method of research, the

data collection, and the data analyses.

4. Chapter IV is findings and discussion presenting the result of data collection,

data presentation, and explanation the result of the data analyses.

5. Chapter V is conclusions and suggestions.

(19)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter provides a discussion of the methodology employed in

conducting the research. The description and account below involve: research

design, research variables, research hypothesis, data collection, research

procedure and data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

The research conducted quasi-experimental as the research design. The

quasi-experimental design was used because this method does not require random

sampling (Jackson, 2008:318). This research method provide the students with

pre-test, treatment, and post test to find out the effect of Jigsaw technique on the

student’s reading comprehension. Since there was no random sampling, the

sample in this research is considered as nonequivalent sample which consisted of

Experimental and Control group (Jackson, 2008: 323).

In this research, two classes were taken as the sample classes; those were

labeled as the experimental group and control group. The first group (e1) as the

experimental group was given a pre-test (X1), treated by using Jigsaw technique

(T), and then provided a post-test (X2). The second group (c1) as the control

(20)

post-test (X2) (Hatch and Farhady 1982:21),. Here is the representation of the

design:

Table 3.1

The Quasi-Experimental Design

Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test

Experimental Xe 1 T Xe 2

Control Xc 1 O Xc 2

Xe 1 : Students’ reading scores of experimental group on pre-test Xc 1 : Students’ reading scores of control group on pre-test T : Jigsaw treatment

O : Non- Jigsaw treatment

Xe 2 : Students’ reading scores of experimental group on post-test Xc 2 : Students’ reading scores of control group on post-test

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:21)

The table shows that both classes are given a pre-test and a post-test, but

the difference is in giving the treatments. In the experimental group, Jigsaw

technique was given as a treatment to the students in the learning process. In

contrast, for the control group, conventional teaching was implemented as the

treatment in learning to read. After both treatments were applied to both groups, a

post-test was administered in order to investigate the result of the treatment.

3.1.1 Research Variables

According to Khan (1990:18), variable is a concept which serves a

particular purpose and can be expressed in quantitative or qualitative value. There

were three variables in this research. Those variables were independent variable,

(21)

The independent variable is the prominent method which is manipulated

and measured by a researcher. The dependent variable is students' scores that are

observed and measured to determine the effect of independent variable (Sukardi,

2008:179). There is also another type of variable called extraneous variable.

Extraneous variable is other conditions outside independent variable that is

responsible for the effect on dependent variable.

In this study, the students’ reading skill was measured with the test to

determine the effect of using Jigsaw technique to the students’ scores, and also to

figure out if there is any other condition that effects students’ achievement.

Therefore, in accordance with Khan’s and Sukardi’s statements, the three

variables are categorized as follow:

1. Dependent variable: students’ reading scores or achievement in the test

2. Independent variable: the effect of using Jigsaw technique in improving

students’ reading comprehension

3. Extraneous variable: students’ responses toward the use of Jigsaw technique

The situation is further explained in the diagram below.

Figure 3.1

Variables

The use of Jigsaw technique Academic Achievement

(Independent Variable) (Dependent Variable)

Motivation, Students’ responses (Extraneous Variable)

(22)

3.2 Research Hypothesis

Basically this research began with null hypothesis (Ho). _{The hypothesis is}

stated as follow:

Ho:m experimental=m control

The null hypothesis (Ho) means that there is no difference between the

experimental group and the control group in the mean of adjustment level

(Kranzler and Moursund, 1999).

3.3 Data Collection

The data collection in this study included population, sample, and research

instruments.

3.3.1 Population

According to Borg and Gall (1979: 179), population is all members of a

real or hypothetical set of people or object to which we wish to generalize the

result of the research. It is supported by Arikunto (2002) who stated that

population is the whole subject of the research. The population of the research

was the second grade of a junior high school in Bandung.

3.3.2 Sample

A sample is a part or a representation of the whole population that is

(23)

selected population (Kahn, 1990:27). The two choosen classes involved in the

research have relatively the same characteristics.

In accordance with the research design, the two classes were divided into

the experimental group and control group (VIII-8 as experimental class and VIII-9

as control class). Both classes consisted of 42 students.

3.3.3 Research Instruments

In this research, observations and a pre-test were used to gain the

information about the prior reading proficiency of the students from both groups.

Then a post-test and a set of questionnaire were distributed to obtain more

information about the students’ responses toward the use of Jigsaw technique in

improving their reading comprehension. All research instruments were also meant

to investigate the effectiveness of using Jigsaw technique in term of improving

students’ reading comprehension.

a. Pre-test

A pre-test was conducted to find out initial differences between the experimental and control groups’ levels in reading skill before receiving the

treatment. The pre-test was held in both control and experimental classes. The

students had 50 minutes to finish the test consisting of 26 multiple-choice

questions.

b. Post-test

A post-test was conducted to find out the students’ progress in reading

(24)

The post-test was held in both control and experimental classes. The students had

50 minutes to finish the test which consists of 26 multiple choice questions.

c. Observation

Observations were conducted to collect the data about the teacher and

students’ performances during the teaching and learning process. This study used

the focused observation method. This method was chosen because it could refine

the judgment about both the teacher and students’ activity (Hopkins, 1993). The

observations were conducted during the treatments applied to the experimental

group.

d. Questionnaire

The questionnaire consisted of ten questions. The questionnaire was aimed

to gather more information about the students’ responses towards the use of

Jigsaw technique based on the students’ point of view. The questionnaire was

only distributed to the experimental group. The students’ answers were collected

to find out the students’ perception towards the use of Jigsaw technique. The

questions were related to the topic and research questions. These questions

illustrated the students’ responses when they were using Jigsaw technique to

improve their reading comprehension.

3.4 Research Procedure

(25)

The texts used for teaching and learning process during the experimental

period were taken from English in Focus (2008) and English on Sky 2 (2007). The

materials consisted of narrative texts and questions. The narrative texts were

chosen as requirements from the school where the research was held.

3.4.2. Organizing teaching procedure

A teacher is responsible for the teaching and learning process, not only as

a performer but also a facilitator. First, the appropriate materials should be chosen

and prepared well. Second, teaching procedures were organized in the control and

experimental groups. They were written differently in both lesson plans for

experimental and control groups. Both lesson plans have different procedures. The

lesson plans for control group used conventional procedure. The lesson plans for

experimental group employed Jigsaw procedure which was adapted from Slavin

(26)

Table 3.2

Lesson Plan of Control and Experimental Groups

Description Lesson Plan of Experimental Group Lesson Plan of Control Group

Objectives - Students are able to identify explicit

Materials Some Sample of Narrative Text Some Sample of Narrative Text

Procedure Pre activity - Greetings and praying

- Checking attendance list - Brainstorming and apperception

- Greetings and praying - Checking attendance list - Brainstorming and apperception

Main activity - Teacher asks the students to form “home

group” consist of 4-5 students

- Teacher gives a text

- Teacher gives explanation about

narrative text

- Teacher gives explanation about part of

narrative text

- Teacher asks questions to students about

the text

- Teacher gives explanation about Jigsaw

technique

- Teacher gives second text to the students - Teacher asks every member of “home

group” to choose a paragraph from the text.

- Teacher asks students who choose the

same paragraph to gather and form “expert group” consist of 4-5 students.

- Students of “expert group” make a

discussion in order to find out some information from the paragraph

- Students return to the “home group” - Students discuss about what they get

- Teacher gives a text

- Teacher gives explanation about narrative

text

- Teacher gives second text to the students - Students read the second text

(27)

from the discussion in each “expert

Post activity _- Teacher and students conclude what they have learnt today

- Students are given opportunity to ask

questions

- Teacher gives homework to students - Closing and Praying

- Teacher and students conclude what they

have learnt today

- Students are given opportunity to ask

questions

- Teacher gives homework to students - Closing and Praying

3.4.3. Instrument try out

Instrument try out was held before the pre-test and post-test were

administered to the two chosen classes. The purpose is to measure the validity and

reliability of the instrument. The try out was administered in another class which

was not involved during the research process.

3.4.4. Pre-test

The pre-test instrument consisted of 26 questions. The test was

administered to both the experimental and control groups during the school hours.

3.4.5. Treatments

The control and the experimental groups got different treatments. The

control group was treated using conventional teaching while Jigsaw technique was

implemented in the experimental group. Two types of lesson plans were used in

this research; the first was used for the experimental group and second one was

(28)

Four meetings were conducted for both groups. The duration for each

meeting was 80 minutes; each meeting consisted of pre-activity, main activity and

post-activity (see Table 3.2). The details are explained below.

The first meeting was conducted on may 16th, 2011. Before the giving the

explanation about the material, the students were given two passages in this

meeting. The first passage was entitled Takatuliang the Woodcarver and the

second was The Story of Sangkuriang and Tangkuban Perahu.

The second meeting was carried out on May 19th, 2011 for the control

group and May 20th 2011 for the experimental group. The students were given two

passages in this meeting. The first one was entitled The Cowardly Lion and the

second was Red Feather the Hen.

The third meeting was carried out on May 23rd, 2011 for both groups. As

the first meetings, the students were given two passages. the first was entitled

Little brother, little sister and the second was Beauty and the Beast.

The fourth meeting was conducted on May 26th, 2011 for the control group

and May 27th, 2011 for the experimental group, these were the last meeting.

Unlike the other meetings, in this meeting the students were only given one

passage. The title of the passage was The deathly Poppy Fields. After finishing the

activity, the teacher reviewed the whole materials. In this activity, teacher asked

the students about what was not clear yet about the materials.

(29)

At the end of the treatments, the post test was conducted. This test was

given to both groups (control and experimental groups) to find out the

improvements of their reading skill after the experimental group received the

treatments. The test was administered to both groups on May30th, 2011.

3.5 Data Analysis

Data analysis in the research includes scoring technique, data analysis on

the instrument try out, data analysis on the pre-test and post-test, data analysis on

the questioners, and data analysis on the observation.

3.5.1 Scoring

According to Arikunto (2003), there are two types of formula that can be

used in the process of scoring and data. They are formula with punishment and

formula with no punishment. The formula with no punishment was used in this

study. It means that there are no minus score when the students choose the wrong

answer.

In which: S: Score

(30)

R: Right Answer

3.5.2 Data analysis on instrument try out

3.5.2.1 Validity

The try out item should be tested to measure its validity and reliability

before conducting pre-test and post-test (Brown, 1988). This study used the

Pearson’s product moment formula to test the instrument. A software was

employed in the process of calculation. The software’s name is Anatest V 4. The

criteria of validity were shown in Table 3.3:

Table 3.3

The following formula is used to measure the validity of the instrument.

√

Where : r = correlation coefficient X = item score

Y= total score

n= number of subject

(Arikunto, 2003)

Validity test was intended to find out whether or not the test instrument

(31)

analyzed using corrected item total correlation in Anatest V.4 for windows. The

result of the statistical computation on the try out test is presented in the following

table.

Table 3.4

The Result of Validity Test

Item Number Raw Score Interpretation 3, 5,11, 12, 17, 19, 21,

research instrument. While 14 items were not valid and could not be used as the

research instrument. The detail validity score and analysis are presented in

Appendix C.

3.5.2.2 Difficulty Level

The research adopted Heaton’s Formula (1995: 178), Heaton states that the

index of difficulty or facility value of an item illustrates how easy or difficult the

certain item established in the test. In addition, the following formula was used to

calculate the index of difficulty of an item.

FV= R N

(32)

N = The number of students taking the test

Table 3.5

Criteria of difficulty Index

Index of Difficulty Difficulty Degree

0.00 – 0.30 Difficult item

0.30 -0.70 Moderate item

0.70 – 1.00 Easy item

(Heaton, 1955: 178)

According to the category above, the items in the try out instruments are

categorized as follow.

Table 3.6

The Result of Difficulty Test

Item Number Interpretation

25, 37, 39, 40 _{Difficult Item}

3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 23, 26,

27, 28, 29, 33, 34, 38 Moderate Item 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 18, 19,

20, 22, 24, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36 Easy Item

Table 3.6 shows that four items were considered as difficult. Meanwhile

17 items were considered as moderate. The rest of the 19 items were categorized

easy. Because the items taken as the instrument was only 26, the instrument

consists of 9 moderate items, and 17 easy items. The category of the instruments

is presented as follows

(33)

The discrimination index of an item indicates the extent to which the item

distinguishes between the tests, separating the more able tests from the less able

(Heaton, 1995:179).

The present study are able to find the discrimination index by following the

procedures.

1. Arranging the students’ total scores and dividing the scores into two groups

of equal size (the top half and the bottom half);

2. Counting the number of the students in the upper group who answer each

item correctly, then counting the number of lower group students who answer

the item correctly;

3. Subtracting the number of correct answer in the upper group to find the

difference in the proportion passing in the upper group and the proportion

passing the lower group; and

4. Dividing the difference by the total number of the students in one group

The following formula is used to calculate the discrimination index of an

The criteria of discrimination index were shown in Table 3.7

Table 3.7

(34)

Discrimination Index Interpretation

The result of the statistical computation on the try out test is presented in

the following table.

Table 3.8 Discrimination Index

Item Number Interpretation Discrimination Index

28, 29 Excellent Acceptable

2, 6, 10, 33, 34 Good Acceptable

used as research instrument because the value were not ideal.

3.5.2.4 Reliability

Hatch and Farhady (1982) stated that reliability is the extent which a test is

produced in constant result when administered under similar condition. Another

statement comes from Arikunto (2002), an instrument is regarded as reliable if it

is reliable to collect the data required. To find out the reliability of the test items,

the present study used internal consistency method which is facilitated by

(35)

The result of the calculation was interpreted by the following criteria in

The result of computation of reliability test shows that the reliability of the

items from Cronbach’s Alpha calculation is 0.820 with the total items 40 (see

Appendix C). According to Triton (2006:248) if the level of Alpha is in between

0.800 – 1.000, it can be assumed that the reliability of test items was very high

and could be used as the research instrument.

3.5.3 Data analysis on pre-test and post-test.

Pre-test was administered at the beginning of the experiment in order to

obtain the initial equivalence between the groups. To determine the equivalence of

(36)

Post-test was given at the end of the experiment, and t-test was also used

to find out whether the hypothesis (null hypothesis) was rejected or accepted. If

the null hypothesis was accepted, it means that there was no difference between

the experimental and control groups after implementing Jigsaw technique.

3.5.3.1. Testing the normal distribution

In the research, the present study used Kolmogrov-Smirnov’s formula to

analyze the normal distribution. The table data output from SPSS 17.00 for

windows. The following formula was used to calculate the Normal distribution of

the data:

√

Where: µ = mean of x

σ = Standard deviation of x

π= 3.14159 e= 2.71828

These steps were taken to test the normal distribution:

1. Looking at the hypothesis

Ho= The distribution of the scores are normally distributed

H1= The distribution of the scores are not normally distributed

2. Analyzing the normal distribution by using Kolmogrov-smirnov formula in

(37)

3. Comparing the level of significance to test hypothesis. If the result is more

than the level of significance (0.05), the null hypothesis is accepted, the score

are normally distributed.

3.5.3.2 The variance homogeneity

In analyzing the variance homogeneity, the present study used Levene’s

formula in SPSS 17.00. These are the steps taken to test variance homogeneity:

1. Stating the hypothesis

Ho= the variance of the experimental and control group are homogeneous

H1= the variance of the experimental and control group are not homogeneous

2. Analyzing the variance homogeneity using SPSS 17.0 for windows

3. Comparing the level of significance value to test hypothesis. If Levene’s test

is significant at p< 0.05, it means that the null hypothesis is incorrect and the

variances are significantly difference. But, if Levene’s is non significant at

p>0.05. it means that the variance is approximately equal (Field, 2002).

3.5.3.3 The independent t-test

The primary purpose of t-test is to determine whether the means of the

two groups’ scores are different from a statistically significant degree as stated by

Kranzel and Moursound (1999:89). There are some requirements of the data

which must be considered before conducting t-test. First, the data should be

(38)

formed in the same type. Third, the data should have a normal distribution

(Coolidge, 2000: 143).

The procedures of t-test computation were as follow:

Ho= there is no difference between the pre-test and post-test means for the

experimental group and control group.

H1= there is significance difference between the pre-test and post-test mean

for the experimental group and for the control group.

2. Finding the t value with independent sample test computation in SPSS 17.00

for windows

3. Comparing the significance value with the level of significance for testing

hypothesis. If the significance value is less than the level of significance

(0.05), the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that the two groups are

equivalent.

3.5.3.4 The dependent t-test

The pre-test and post-test scores were analyzed by using dependent t-test

to investigate whether or not the pre-test and post-test scores of the experimental

group was significantly different (Hatch &Farhady, 1982: 114). These are the

procedures taken in dependent t-test:

Ho= there is no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test score

(39)

2. Finding the value with dependent sample test computation in SPSS 17.00 for

windows.

3. Comparing the level of significance from the calculation of dependent t-test

with the level of significance for testing the hypothesis. If the probability is

more than or equal than the level of significance, the null hypothesis is

accepted. But if the probability is less the level of significance, the null

hypothesis is rejected.

3.5.3.5 The calculation of effect size

In the research, to verify the influence of independent variable to the

dependent variable and to know how well the treatment works, the calculation of

size effect was employed. In order to determine the effect size in the independent

t-test, a correlation coefficient of effect size can be derived as presented below:

√

Where: r= Effect size

t= tobt or t value from the calculation of independent t-test

df= N1+N2-2

(Rosenthal, 1991:19)

After obtaining the value of r, the score was matched with the following

scale to interpret the effect size.

Table 3.10 Effect Size Value

Effect Size r value

Small 0.100

(40)

Large 0.371

(Coolidge, 2000: 151)

3.5.4 Data analysis of questionnaires

Data from the questionnaire were calculated with the frequency of the

students who answered the questions given. These data revealed the use of Jigsaw

technique in improving students’ reading comprehension. The results of

questionnaires were calculated using the formula below:

P= fo x100%

“no” was counted as zero. After that, the result was shown in order to find out the

students’ responses toward the use of Jigsaw technique in improving students’

reading comprehension by using the percentages as follows.

Table 3.11

Criterion on Students’ Response

No Percentage (%) Criterion

(41)

3.5.5 Data analysis of observation

Data from the observation were collected using checklist tables and each

category from the table was described briefly. There are two tables which were

used to collect the data. The first table was to record the teacher’s activities during

the treatments. The second table was to record the students’ activities during the

treatments. The format of the tables which were used to present the findings of the

data are as follow.

Table 3.12

Checklist Table for the Teacher’s Activity

1st Meeting

2nd Meeting

3rd Meeting

4th Meeting Explain the material

(42)

Ask student to form expert group

Respond to students’ question

Bring the students back to the home group

Checklist Table for the Students’ Activity

1st

Make a discussion in expert group

Return to the “home group”

Make a discussion in “home group”

Answer the questions about the text

(43)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Introduction

This chapter consists of the research conclusions and suggestions.

Conclusions are drawn as the interpretation toward the results of the research

study while suggestions are written to be addressed to the English teachers and

further researchers.

5.1 Conclusions

Referring to the findings in the previous chapter, it can be concluded that

Jigsaw method used in the experimental group is not more effective than the

conventional method used in the control group. The result shows that the control

group (ME=78.73, SE= 1.40) had better improvement than the experimental

group (ME=74.85, SE= 1.54). The result also shows that the Jigsaw method gave

small effects on the students’ reading comprehension. In other words, Jigsaw

technique is not effective in improving students’ reading comprehension. The

result from the calculation of the effect size also shows that the treatment gave

small effect (r=0.201<.243) to the experimental group.

Besides, the findings also show that most of the students did not like the

Jigsaw technique. Moreover, the results of questionnaire show that most of the

(44)

findings show that most of the students thought that the Jigsaw technique did not

help them to increase their reading ability.

The students also thought that Jigsaw technique was confusing and it did

not make the students felt more interest in learning to read. The findings show that

the instruction about the Jigsaw procedure was not well-received. Besides, the

finding shows that the students often find someone who dominated the group

which made them less motivated in learning to read. The disruptive students were

also found during the treatments. It made the students could not focus on doing

their task during the treatments.

5.2 Suggestions

Having accomplished the study, there are some recommendations to

propose. Those recommendations go to both teacher and researchers. First, if

teachers intend to use Jigsaw technique, they should know about the learning

situation in the class. When teachers find some dominant students, teachers should

try to control them; otherwise they will try to dominate the others and it will give

a bad motivation to the others. Second, if teachers want to use Jigsaw technique

the teacher should make the students understand about this method: otherwise the

method will make the students confused and it will lead to the lack of enthusiasm

in learning to read.

For the next researchers who want to do the research on the use of Jigsaw

technique in improving students’ reading comprehension, researcher should be

more careful when implementing the technique. It will be better to ensure that the

(45)

researcher should control the dominant students to prevent them from dominating

the other students. This research paper is expected to be reference to make it

(46)

REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsimi, Dr., Prof.(2002). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek.

(2003). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek (Edisi Revisi V). Jakarta: PT, Rineka Cipta.

Aronson et al. (1978).The Jigsaw Classroom.(0nline) Retrieved from

:http:www.cooperativelearning.com/instructional strategies online jigsaw.html [ January,20th,2011]

Avenoso, E. and Totoro, K. Comparison of retention rates of the first and second year co-op

and non-co-op students at small liberal arts college. Journal of Cooperative

education, 29, 6-13.

Borg, Walter R. and Gall, Meredith D. (1979). Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: Longman Inc.

Brown, H.D. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.2nded. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall.

(2001). Teaching by Principles. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc.

Burmaster, Elizabeth.(2005) Reading: In Grades 3 through 8 and 10. Wisconsin:_Department of Public Instruction.

Cohen, J. (1987). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nded.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence-Erlbaum.

Coolidge, Federick L. (2000). Statistic “A Gentle Introduction”. London: Cromwell Press Ltd.

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. White Plains, NY: Longman

Davies, Florence. (1995) Penguin English Applied Linguistic. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

David and Roger Johnson. 2001. "Cooperative Learning."Available at::

<http://www.clcrc.com/pages/cl.html>. [ February10th,2011]

(47)

Forgan, Harry W. and Mangrum II, Charles T.(1989). Teaching Content Area Reading Skills

(4th Edition). New York: Merrill Publishing Company.

Gall, M., Gall.J.P, And Borg, W.R. (2002) Educational Research: An Introduction. Pearson Education

Haris, D.D. and Sipay, L.(1980). Teaching Reading Vocabulary. New York: Holt Rinehart

Hatch, Evelyn. And Farhady, Hossein.(1982). Research Design and Statistic for Linguistic. Massachusetts, Newbury House Publisher Inc.

Hismanoglou, M. (2000).“Language Learning Strategies in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching”. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VI, No. 8, Aug 2000. http://iteslj.org/

Hopkins, D. (1993). A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research, 2nd Edition. Milton Kenyes, Open University Press.

Isjoni, (2007). Cooperative Learning :MengembangkanKemampuamBelajarBerkelompok. Jakarta :Alfabeta.

Jackson, Sherri L. (2008). Research Method and Statistic. A Critical Thinking Approach (3rd Edition). Wardsworth.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson R.T., and Holubec E.J. (1993) Cooperation in the Classroom: 6th

edition. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company

Joyce, Bruce and Weil, Marsha (1992).Model of Teaching 4th Edition.Massachusetts: Simon and Schuster Inc.

(1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente. CA: Kagan Publishing

Khan, M. S. (1990).Educational Research.New Delhi: ASHISH Publishing House

Kranzler,G and Moursund, J. (1999). Statisric for the Terrified: Second Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

Lie, Anita (2008).Cooperative Learning: Mempraktikan Cooperative Learning di

Ruang-ruangKelas. Jakarta : PT Grasindo

MacmilanDictionary, http://www.macmilandictionary.com

Mengduo, Qiao and Xiaoling, Jin (2010).Jigsaw Strategy as a Cooperative Learning

Technique: Focusing on the Language Learners. Harbin: Harbin Institute of

Technology

Mukarto. (2007). English on Sky 2. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, Creating and Using Knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative

(48)

Nurkamto, Joko. (2000). Problema Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia.Surakarta :UniversitasSebelasMaret.

Priyanto, Duwi (2010). Paham Analisa StatistikDengan SPSS. Yogyakarta: Mediakom

Rahmawati, Rahmawati.(2003). Improving Students Listening Comprehension Through Story

Telling Technique.Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished.

Roshental, R. (1991). Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. California : Sage Publication Inc.

Simanjuntak, Edithia G., Dra. (1990) Developing reading skill for EFL Students.Jakarta :Depdikbud. DirjenPendidikanTingi P2LPTK.

Snow, Catherine E. (2002). Reading for Understanding:Toward an R&D Program in Reading

ComprehensionSanta Monica: RAND Education.

Slavin, Robert E.(2005). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice. London: Allymand Bacon.

Smith, Nila B. and Robinson, H.A.(1980). Reading Instruction for Today’s Children(2nd

Edition). London Prentice-Hall Inc.

Spencer, Kagan. (1985).Cooperative learning resources for teachers. Riverside, CA: University of California at Riverside.

Sudjana(1996) Metoda Statistika. Bandung :Tarsito

Sugiyono.(2008). MetodePenelitianPendidikan (PendekatanKuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan

R&D). Bandung: CV Alfabeta.

Sukardi.(2008). MetodePenelitiamPendidikandanPrakteknya.Jakarta: BumiAksara

Triton, P.B. (2006). Terapan SPSS 13.00. Riset Statistic Parametrik. Yogyakarta: Andi

Offset.

Wallace, C. (1992). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wardiman, A., Jahur, Masduki B., dan Djusma, M. Sukirman. (2008). English in Focus for

Grade VIII Junior High School. Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan

THE USE OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION.

THE USE

OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’

READING COMPREHENSION

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

THE USE OF JIGSAW TECHNIQUE IN

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING

COMPREHENSION

PAGE OF APPROVAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES