USING CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO ENHANCE STUDENTS’
COMPREHENSION IN READING PROCEDURE TEXT
(A Quasi Experimental Research of Tenth Graders at a Senior High School in Cimahi)
A RESEARCH PAPER
Submitted to the English Department of FPBS UPI as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
Written by:
Aquilina Yunita
0902402
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Using Constructivist Approach to
E ha ce Stude ts’ Co prehe sio
in Reading Procedure Text
Oleh Aquilina Yunita
Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni
© Aquilina Yunita 2014 Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Januari 2014
Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.
PAGE OF APPROVAL
USING CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO ENHANCE STUDENTS’ COMPREHENSION IN READING PROCEDURE TEXT
A Research Paper
By:
Aquilina Yunita
0902402
Approved by
First Supervisor Second Supervisor
Dra. Hj. Sri Setyarini, M. A.,Ling. Rd Della Nuridah K. A., S.Pd., M.Ed
NIP. 19631229 199002 2 001 NIP. 19770414 200112 2 003
Head of Department of English Education
Faculty of Language and Arts Education
Indonesia University of Education
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
ABSTRACT
Using Constructivist Approach to Enhance Students’ Comprehension in Reading
Procedure Text
This study entitled, “Using Constructivist Approach to Enhance Students’ Comprehension in Reading Procedure Text: A Quasi Experimental Research of Tenth Graders at a Senior High School in Cimahi” aimsto discover the effect of Constructivist Approach on students’ comprehension in reading procedure text and to find out the students’ perceptions toward the implementation of this approach.The research designemployed in this study was quasi experimental in which the participants were 60 students from two classes. The data were collected through pre-test, post-test, and interview. The data gathered through pre-test and post-test were computed using t-test while the data from the interview was interpreted, referring to Bryman (2004). The findings indicate that the implementation of Constructivist Approach had significantly improved students’ comprehension in reading procedure text ( �(0 �) −2,907 >�( ���)2,0017). In addition, the result of data analysis from the interview showed that the implementation of Constructivist Approach was positively responded by all students. Considering the findings, it is recommended that implementing Constructivist Approach in teaching reading helpsSenior High School students comprehend procedure text better.
Keywords:Constructivist Approach, reading comprehension, procedure text
ABSTRAK
Penggunaan Pendekatan Constructivist Untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman Siswa
Dalam Membaca Teks Prosedur
pemahaman siswa dalam membaca teks prosedur ( �(0 �) −2,907 >
�( ���)2,0017). Selain itu, hasil dari analisis data wawancara menunjukan bahwa pelaksanaan Pendekatan Constructivist ditanggapi secara positif oleh semua siswa. Dengan mempertimbangkan penemuan yang didapat, maka direkomendasikan bahwa pelaksanaan Pendekatan Constructivist dalam pengajaran membaca akan membantu siswa Sekolah Menengah Atas untuk memahami teks prosedur lebih baik.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.5 Significance of Study ... 4
1.6Research Design ... 4
1.7 Clarification of Terms ... 6
CHAPTER II : THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... 8
2.1 The Definition of Reading Comprehension ... 8
2.2 The Challenge in Teaching Reading in EFL ... 10
2.3Procedure Text ... 11
2.4 Constructivist Approach... 13
2.4.1The Definition of Constructivist Approach ... 13
2.4.2 The Principles of Constructivist Approach ... 17
2.4.3 Teaching Procedure Text through Constructivist Approach ... 20
CHAPTER III : METHODOLOGY ... 23
3.1 Research Design ... 23
3.2 Data Collection ... 24
3.2.1 Population and Sample ... 24
3.2.2 Research Instruments... 25
3.3 Data Analysis ... 28
3.3.1 Data Analysis on the Validity Tests of Pre-test and Post-test ... 28
3.3.2 Data Analysis on the Pre-test and Post-test Scores ... 29
3.3.3The Normal Distribution Test ... 29
3.3.4The Homogeneity of Variance Test ... 30
3.3.5The Independent T-test ... 31
3.3.6The Dependent T-test ... 31
3.3.7Data Analysis on the Interview ... 33
CHAPTER IV : FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 40
4.1 Findings ... 40
4.1.1 Findings from the Pilot Test ... 40
4.1.1.1 The Validity of the Test ... 41
4.1.1.2 The Reliability of the Test ... 41
4.1.1.3 The Difficulty Index of the Test... 42
4.1.2 Findings from the Pre-Test and Post-Test ... 42
4.2 Discussions ... 50
4.2.1The Effectiveness of Constructivist Approach ... 51
4.2.2 The Students’ Perceptions toward Constructivist Approach ... 52
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ... 60
5.1 Conclusions ... 60
5.2 Recommendations ... 61
REFERENCES ... x
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents an overview of this study. This chapter consists of
background, research question, research purpose, limitation of the study, the scope
of the study, clarification of terms, and organization of paper are also presented.
1.1 Background
People read everyday, ranging from reading newspapers to brochures or
even advertisements on TV. In doing so, people need to have good reading skills.
Thus, reading skill has been a crucial part in people’s lives and so has been for
students at the school. In learning to read at the school, students are guided to
learn vocabulary items, grammar, or punctuation that is useful to construct
sentences and paragraph (Rivers and Temperley, 1978). Besides, reading can be a
good way to practice English in non-English speaking country and also a good
way to discover new facts, and experiences (Mikulecky & Jeffries, 1996, pp. 1-2).
From the statement, it can be said that reading is one important way to improve
English language skills.
Unfortunately, a study discovers that 15-year-old Indonesian students have
low reading performances (Kompas, cited in Sukyadi & Hasanah, 2010). To be
more detail, the study finds that there are 37,6 % of 15-year-old Indonesian
students who are only able to read the texts without comprehending the meaning
of the text. Meanwhile, there are only 24,8 % out of them who are able to connect
the texts to their prior knowledge and comprehend the texts. This study is
supported by the research of the Organization for Economic, Cooperation, and
Development (OECD) which finds that tenth graders in Indonesia have low
reading performance (Grazella, 2011). Departing from the findings, many
Indonesian students are not able to comprehend reading text. Moreover, many
teachers in Indonesia still employ teacher-centered classroom in which the
difficult words, translating English text into first language, asking learners to read
loudly or silently, and getting students to answer questions which are related to
the text (Sunandar, 2006). In a teacher-centered approach, there is no group work,
whereas students’ interaction within group work is an important element in the learning process (Piaget, cited in The Concept of Classroom, 2004). Moreover,
knowledge itself can be acquired through dialogue (Vygotsky, 1978, cited in
Forman & Cazden, 2004, p.180). Thus, it can be said that teacher-centered
approach may not be effective to construct understanding among students (Noor,
2011).
Therefore, the demand of having a better learning to read for language
students directs the need to develop teaching and learning approaches of reading
skill in the classroom. An effective language classroom requires meaningful use
of the language in which the teaching material should be in connection with
students’ prior knowledge and interests (Brown, 2001, pp. 56-57). It indicates that
students’ prior experiences and interests will encourage learners to actively construct their understanding. In consequence, interactive and fun activities
should be carried out in the language classroom to get the students’ active
participation in the learning process of reading.
Based on the previous theories, it can be said that one way to trigger
students’ success in reading comprehension is through Constructivist Approach. Constructivist Approach is considered appropriate by many experts to provide
meaningful use of the language in the classroom. It is proven by some prior
research which investigates the use of Constructivist Approach. In Turkey, a
qualitative study of reading activity through a CA (Altun and Büyükduman, 2007
in Mvududu & Burgess, 2012) reveals that the students appeared to be more
active on task during the classroom activity and they were better able to connect
their learning to previous knowledge by participating in group work. In addition,
Kim (2005), who conducted a quantitative study of constructivist approach in
English subject in China, identifies that constructivist teaching is more effective
than teacher-centered teaching is in terms of academic achievement and it has
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
self-monitoring. It can be drawn a conclusion that Constructivist Approach is
considered appropriate to be implemented in teaching and learning reading
comprehension.
Constructivist Approach refers to a teaching approach that guides learners to
construct their own understanding of the new informationbased on learners’ prior
knowledge (Bruner, 1996). Therefore, the learning material should be as authentic
as possible to the real-world situation where learners will possibly take part
(Lavadenz, 2011). In addition, the interaction between learners and their current
knowledge and also the learning situation which is created by the role of teacher
evoke the occurrence of an active learning (Moore, 2004). This element supports
the use of CA in teaching procedure text, as the focus of the present study,
because procedure text exists in the real-world situation (Gerot and Wignell,
1995). The use of prior knowledge in CA also supports the implementation in
teaching procedure text since procedure text can be found in the daily life, such as
in making a cup of instant noodle and in creating social media account.
Furthermore, CA has a number of characteristics namely the learners are
actively involved, the environment is democratic, the activities are interactive and
student-centered, the teacher facilitates learning process in which learners are
encouraged to be responsible and independent of what they have learned (Gray,
2000). Those characteristics show that Constructivist Approach tries to use the
meaningful and automaticity teaching principles that can encourage learners to
comprehend the reading text better (Brown, 2001, pp. 55-57). Based on the
experts’ findings of constructivist study and also its elements, thus, Constructivist Approach can be suitable and applicable to be used in teaching reading in
procedure text.
Regarding the background of the study as well as the importance of
reading comprehension in learning English for EFL students in Indonesia, this
research is aimed at investigating the use of Constructivist Approach to enhance
1.2 The Statement of Problems
This study is directed to answer:
1. Is Constructivist Approach effective to enhance students’ scores in
reading procedure text?
2. What are students’ perceptions toward the use of Constructivist Approach
in teaching the reading of procedure text?
1.3 The Aims of the Study
The aim of this study is to achieve these following objectives:
1. To find out the enhancement of students’ scores in reading procedure text
by the use of Constructivist Approach; and
2. To find out students’ perceptions toward the use of Constructivist
Approach in teaching the reading of procedure text.
1.4 The Scope of the Study
The study focuses on the use of Constructivist Approach in enhancing
students’ reading comprehension. Furthermore, the use of Constructivist Approach focuses on procedure text in tenth grade of Senior High School. In
addition, this study was conducted to one Senior High School in Cimahi.
1.5 The Significance of the Study
This study is expected to improve an innovative teaching and learning
approach that is used in the language classroom in order to enhance students’
reading comprehension. Furthermore, the research can be used as a reference for
English teachers to develop their teaching skill.
This study can also be useful and helpful for English language teachers as
one of the sources in teaching English through constructivist classroom. This
study may also inspire other researchers to investigate issues that are related to the
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
1.6 Clarification of Terms
In order to avoid misinterpretation, several terms are clarified as follows:
1. Constructivist is the adjective from the word ‘construct’ which is defined as
to build something or to put together different parts to form something
whole (Cambridge University Press, 2008). Meanwhile, approach is defined
as the act of coming nearer (Oxford University Press, 2013). Therefore,
Constructivist Approach means the act of getting nearer to achieve
something by putting together some parts. In addition, CA is defined as an
innovative teaching and learning approach which leads students to build
their own understanding (Hoover, 1996, cited in Mvududu and Burgess,
2012). Here, CA utilizes several elements in order to construct learners’
comprehension, they are learning interesting and real-world topics,
interacting with teacher and other students, and making connection between
what they have known with the new idea (Philips, 2000). In this study, those
principles of Constructivist Approach are employed to enhance students’
reading comprehension.
2. Procedure is an usual or proper way of doing something while text is a main
printed part of a book (Oxford University Press, 2013). Thus, procedure text
is printed words that contain of a proper way of doing something. In
addition, procedure text is a text which describes how something is
accomplished through a sequence of an action or steps (Gerot and Wignell,
1995). Moreover, procedure text is also defined as a text which is presented
in a logical sequence of events where it is broken down into small steps in
sequence (Gatzke, 2003). In this research, Constructivist Approach is
employed to enhance students’ reading comprehension, especially in
procedure text.
1. 7 Organization of the Paper
This paper is presented into five chapters as follow:
In this chapter, the paper elaborates the background of the research. It discusses
reading comprehension which becomes the focus of the research and why
analyzing students’ reading comprehension is important. In addition, this chapter
states the research questions, the aims of the study, the limitation of the study, the
significance of the study, clarification of key terms, and organization of the paper.
CHAPTER II : THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
This chapter explains some theories in relation to reading, procedure text,
constructivist approach, and the elements of constructivist approach.
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter gives clear explanation about how the study is conducted and
analyzed. The data analysis also briefly explained.
CHAPTER IV : FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the findings of this research. In the discussion part, the
findings are clearly analyzed and explained.
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION
This chapter explains the conclusion and several suggestion of the research based
on the analysis in chapter four. The conclusion states the answer to the research
questions about the effectiveness of Constructivist Approach to enhance students’
reading comprehension in procedure text and also the students’ perceptions
toward the implementation of this approach. There are also several suggestions for
24
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Chapter three presents the methodology in conducting this study. This
chapter provides four main parts of the investigation: research design, data
collection technique, research procedures, and data analysis technique.
3.1 Research Design
Quantitative method in the form of quasi-experimental design was
employed in this study. The quasi experimental design is aimed at discovering the
influence of particular treatments (Sugiyono, 2009, p.77). In addition, the design
allows for attempts to fulfill standards of the true experimental design as closely
as possible (Hatch and Farhady, 1982). Schematically, the quasi-experimental
design can be depicted as follows:
Table 3. 1.
The Schematic of The Quasi experimental Design
Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test
Experimental O1 X O2
Control O3 - O4
Note:
- X represents the exposure of a group to an experimental
variable
- O refers to the process of observation or measurement
25
A variable can be defined as an attribute of a person or of an object which
varies from person to person or from object to object (Hatch and Farhady, 1982).
In research, variables can be classified as dependent and independent variables.
The independent variable is the variable which is selected, manipulated, and
measured by the researcher, while the dependent variable is the variable which a
researcher observes to determine the effect of the independent variable (Hatch and
Farhady, 1982). The independent variable of the present research is Constructivist
Approach and the dependent variable is the reading scores.
3.1.1 Hypothesis
Hypothesis is defined as a formal affirmative statement predicting a single
research outcome, a tentative explanation of the relationship between two or more
variables. It also limits the focus of the investigation to a definite target and
determines what observations are to be made (Best, 1981). However, the most
common hypothesis is the null hypothesis which states that there is no difference
between the outcome of experimental and control group (Hatch and Farhady,
1982). Meanwhile, the alternative hypothesis is the opposite of the hypothesis null
(Hatch and Farhady, 1982). Therefore, the hypotheses of this study are as follow:
H0 = There is no significance difference between students‟ post-test scores
in the experimental group and students‟ post-test scores in the control group. HA= There is a significance difference between students‟ post-test scores in
the experimental group and students‟ post-test scores in the control group.
Acceptance of null hypothesis is based on the result of independent t-test
and dependent test that is gained from the scores of pre-test and post-test in
experimental and control group. If the result from each test is similar or higher
26
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
comprehension. On the other hand, if the result is less than critical value of ∝= 0. 05, the null hypothesis is accepted which means that the use of Constructivist Approach does not enhance students‟ reading comprehension significantly.
3.2 Data Collection
3.2.1 Population and Sample
Population is defined as any group or individuals that have one or more
characteristics in common that are of interest of the researcher, while samples are
a small proportion of a population selected for observation and analysis (Best &
Khan, 1995, p.13). Since quasi-experimental design does not include random
selection of subjects, the sample of this study was chosen purposively, based on
the same number of students and absence of significant difference between scores
of the two groups. The difference was determined by the independent t-test.
In this research, the population was tenth grade students of one senior high
school in Cimahi, whereas the samples were only two classes, namely X-2 as the
control group and X-4 as the experimental group.
3.2.2 Research Instruments
Research instruments are media used by researcher in order to obtain
relevant data to research‟s project and there are many alternatives from which to
choose (Wilkinson & Birmingham, 2003, p. 3). The data were collected to answer
research questions of the study. There were four kinds of research instruments
utilized in this study, namely pilot test, pre-test, post-test, and interview. Based on
those instruments, the data collections were analyzed to determine whether Constructivist Approach enhance students‟ reading comprehension.
The pilot-test was employed in the class which was not selected for the
27
reliability, and difficulty of the items that would be administered in experimental
and control group.
The pre-test and post-test were conducted to generate scores that were
analyzed to find out whether or not Constructivist Approach is effective to enhance students‟ comprehension in reading procedure texts. The pre-test was conducted to both experimental and control group before the treatment, in order to
measure students‟ initial ability of reading procedure texts. On the other side, the
post-test was conducted to both groups after the treatments, in order to see whether or not there is an enhancement on students‟ comprehension of reading procedure texts.
After the post-test, interview was also conducted to six students in experimental group. The interview aims to find out the students‟ perceptions toward the implementation of Constructivist Approach. It was utilized as the
supporting data for this study. The open-ended questions in the interview allowed for an element of structure without compromising the interviewee‟s freedom to elaborate on topics of interest to him/her. Besides, the open-ended interview also
allows for spontaneous questions to be asked that come out of the interviewee‟s
comments (Bryman, 2004). Thus, interview was chosen as one of the research
instrument.
3.3 Research Procedure
Generally, the research procedures are:
1.Organizing the Teaching Procedures
In organizing teaching procedure, the researcher served as the teacher and
facilitator for both experimental and control groups. The teaching procedure
was organized into two steps. The first step was preparing appropriate
materials for the teaching and learning processes during the treatment. The
second step was organizing teaching procedure in experimental and control
28
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Constructivist Approach and in control group employed the
Teacher-centered Approach in which learners mostly only listen to the teacher‟s
explanation and do the exercise.
2.Organizing the Research Instrument
Organizing the research instruments included creating the test item for both
pre-test and post-test and constructing open-ended questions for the
interviews.
3.Testing the Validity and Reliability of the Pre-test and Post-test through the
Pilot Test
The pre-test and post-test were tested to find out whether or not the items
had possessed the validity and reliability. Moreover, it was intended to see
the difficulty index of items. The pilot-test items were tested to students in
seventh grader at the same school. The students who got the pilot test were
students who did not participate in control and experimental group. They
were students from other classes.
4.Administering Pre-test to Experimental and Control Group
Administering pre-test to experimental and control group was conducted
before conducting the treatment in order to portray the initial ability of
reading procedure texts.
5.Conducting the Treatment
The Constructivist Approach was conducted in the experimental group, on
the other hand the teacher-centered was carried out in the control group. It
29
Constructivist Approach could be measured. Further information related to
example of the process in conducting the treatment of both groups is
elaborated below:
a. Treatment 1
In the experimetal group, the first treatment applied the use of students‟ prior knowledge. In learning through Constructivist Approach, there is an important role of students‟ prior experience in the learning
process in order to build their understanding (Hoover, 1996 in Mvududu and
Burgess, 2012). In this stage, the researcher who also acted as the teacher
showed pictures of two famous chefs in Indonesia. Teacher asked some
questions in relation to the chefs that will guide students to the procedure text, such as: “Who are they?”, “What do they do?”, “What will you read if you want to cook delicious food like the chefs?”. After the interactive interaction that would remind them to recipes that they have ever read,
students were asked to play a game using food recipes, namely “Fly and Arrange Me” (detail procedure of this game can be seen in the Appendix E). Therefore, teacher divided the learners into six groups in which there was
one high achiever in each group. When students played the game, teacher took the role as the guide on side to control the students‟ participation. As suggested by Educational Broadcasting Corporation (2004), the roles of
constructivist teachers are to control the situation during the learning
activity, and to guide the learners to use their experiences and prior
knowledge. After each group finished arranging the recipe of a food, then
they discuss their result in front of the class. The discussion included the
structure of the recipe, the ingredients, and also the taste of the food. In this
stage, teacher gave further information or correction about the group results
to all students. This step is supported by Vygotsky (1978, in Forman &
Cazden, 2004, p. 181) that scaffolding or the assistance from adult is needed
30
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
In the control group, the Teacher-centered Approach was applied. At
the beginning of the lesson, teacher read procedure text of food recipe from a textbook, “Developing English Competencies for Senior High School Grade X”. Then, teacher asked three students to read loudly three food recipes in turn. After that, teacher translated to them the difficult vocabulary
and explained the generic structure of procedure text while students listened
and took note. In teacher-centered Approach, students put their focus on the
teacher, so that the activity asks the students to be quiet and exclusively listen to the teacher‟s talk (Concordia University Online, 2013). Next, students were asked to answer questions individually from the text book
about the food recipes that they had read. Then, the teacher gave the answer
on the board and asked the students to checked their answer. This in line
with Thirteen Ed (2004) that Teacher-centered Approach uses textbook as
the primary source and lets the students work individually.
b. Treatment 2
The topic of the second treatment was about drink recipes. In the
experimental group, firstly, students and teacher discussed what they had
learned in the previous meeting.After that, the teacher showed some sacks
of instant coffee and milk. The conversation about the pictures revealed that
they had taught procedure text of drink recipes in Junior High School. It means that the use of students‟ learning history which is one of the CA principles existed. Moreover, the social history of the learners is important
in the implementation of CA because the process when the past meets the
new experience makes students easier to remember the material (Clarkson
and Brook, 2004). Then, students were asked to play a group game, namely “Run for Your Life”. In this activity, the teacher read the definition of key word for the drink recipes, then, the students in each group discussed the
answer and chose one key word card provided on their table then ran to the
front and stuck it. This game involved students‟ interaction which is
31
the logic of learners and their modes of thinking are initially different from
adult. Thus, group work is necessary to be implemented. After students and
teacher checked the works, students were asked to complete a procedure text using the key words that they had got in „Run for Your Life‟ game. Meanwhile, teacher checked the discussion of each group to ensure that all
members of the group studied. It showed the role of constructivist teacher as
the guide and facilitator (Jonassen, 1997). At the end, all groups discussed
the answer together with the assistance of the teacher.
The topic for the second meeting in the control group was similar with
the experimental group, which was about drink recipe. At the beginning of
the lesson, teacher explained again what they had studied previously. After
that, teacher asked the students to open a page of a textbook and asked two
students to read the texts loudly. Next, teacher translated the unknown
vocabulary for the students and asked them to take note. Then, teacher
asked the students to do the exercises about the drink recipes and filled the
gap of the text. Finally, teacher checked their answers. These activities are
supported by Concordia University Online (2013) that during activities,
students work alone and collaboration is prohibited in Teacher-centered
Approach. Moreover, teacher in this approach does not allow students to
express themselves and ask questions because teacher takes full control of
the classroom (Concordia University Online, 2013).
c. Treatment 3
The third treatment applied Social Media as the topic. In learning
through CA, the researcher who also acted as the teacher showed four
symbols of famous social medias, such as Friendster, Instagram, Twitter,
32
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
had, teacher told to them that they were going to learn creating account of
social media. First, they had to predict the key words in creating social media using “Hang Man” game. As suggested by Halliday (2004, p. 13) that it is necessary to encourage language learners to be more interactive with
the other learners, and the teacher. He stated that this activity in CA
provides chances for learners to get new information and share
understanding which will help all learners in the classroom to construct their
comprehension. Thus, group work was also utilized in every meeting of the
experimental group. In the implementation, the students in every group were
asked to discuss and write down about how to create a facebook account but
at the first they watched a video in making a facebook account. The use of
problem-solving technique is one of the principles of CA (Christie, 2005).
Moreover, procedure text has steps that should be in correct order to
accomplish the goal. Therefore, students were asked to solve the problem in
which how to create a Facebook account. In addition, constructivist teacher
must engage students in learning by the activity and the interaction because
students must apply their current understandings in new situation in order to
construct new knowledge (Hoover, 1996, cited in Mvududu & Burgess,
2012). As the consequence, at the end of every meeting in, teacher role
existed to brought more information or correction.
Meanwhile, in control group, the classroom remained orderly. The
students could not talk or discuss with other friends. In other words, they
had to be quiet and did what the teacher asked them to do by themselves.
The aim of those principles in Teacher-centered Approach is to avoid
students missing an important information in the learning process
(Concordia University of Portland, 2013). As the consequence, the activities
included students listened to teacher explanation about procedure text, three
students read aloud of the social media text while the other read it silently,
wrote note of new vocabulary, and did the exercise alone in their workbook.
33
Teacher-centered Approach are listening teacher‟s explanations, making
lists of difficult words, translating English text into first language, asking
learners to read loudly or silently, and getting students answer question
which relates to the text. Therefore, in the end of the lesson, teacher gave score to students‟ work and gave conclusion of the meeting.
Table 3. 2
The Schematic of Teaching Schedule
Day/ Date Activities
Experimental Group Control Group
20 August 2013
(Pilot test) -
August 27, 2013 Pre-test -
August 28, 2013 - Pre-test
September 3, 2013 Recipes (Food) -
September 4, 2013 - Recipes(Food)
September 6, 2013 Recipes (Drink) Recipes (Drink)
September 10, 2013 Social media -
September 11, 2013 - Social media
September 13, 2013 Operating Machine Operating Machine
September 17, 2013 Installing Software -
September 18, 2013 - Installing Software
September 20, 2013 Review Review
September 24, 2013 Post-test -
September 25, 2013 - Post-test
October 1, 2013 Interview -
34
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
After the treatment was given, post-test was administered to both
experimental and control groups at the end of the program in order to
investigate the effectiveness of Constructivist Approach in teaching reading
in procedure texts.
7.Conducting Interview
In order to find out the students‟ perception toward the implementation of Constructivist Approach, five open-ended questions were posed to several
students in experimental group in the interview sessions. The students were
chosen based on their achievement in the post-test and their performances
throughout the learning. Therefore, three high achiever students and three
low achiever students were chosen. The interview questions are shown
below:
Table 3. 3
The Interview Questions
No Interview Questions
1. What is your opinion about reading activity?
2. Which text type is considered difficult for you? How about procedure text?
3.
How is your feeling in learning with Constructivist Approach? Explain
your opinion.
4.
Does Constructivist Approach help you to understand the procedure text?
How?
5.
Does Constructivist Approach bring good influence to other language
35
3.4 Data Analysis on the Pilot Test
3.4.1 Scoring Technique
There are two types of formula in processing the score for multiple choice
test, those are with minus system and without minus system (Arikunto, 2012, p.
187). The research only used the formula without minus system in order to avoid
the negative score. The formula was proposed as follow:
Table 3. 4
The Scoring Technique of Multiple Choice Tests
S = R
S = Obtain score
R = Right answer
3. 4. 2 The Validity Tests of the Pilot test
The research employed content validity for validity testing. Content validity
can be made by comparing the contents of the draft with the instruments that have
been set (Sugiyono, 2009, p. 129-134). The data was calculated manually using
Microsoft Excel and SPSS 20.
3.4.3 The Reliability Test of the Pilot test
This study employed reliability test in the pilot test. Reliability test was used
to see the consistency of the result in a test when it is administered under similar
conditions (Hatch and Farhady, 1982, p. 244). Split-half method was employed in
the research for testing the reliability which used Spearman-Brown formula. The
research used Microsoft Excell and SPSS 20 to process this test. After that, it was
36
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Table 3. 5
Category of Coefficient Correlation of Reliability
Coefficient Correlation Interpretation
0.0 – 0.20
0.20 – 0.40
0.40 – 0.70
0.70 – 1.00
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
3.4.4 The Difficulty Index
The difficulty index is an assumption that a good item should not be too
difficult or too easy (Arikunto, 2012, pp. 222-225). To measure the degree of
difficulty, the study used Microsoft Excell and SPSS 20 to process the test.
3.4.5 Data Analysis on the Pre-test and the Post-Test
3.4.5.1 The Normal Distribution Test
In order to test the distribution normality of the set of a data, the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used in this study. The test compares the scores in
the sample to a normally distributed set of scores with the same mean and
standard deviation (Field, 2009, p. 144). The test was employed through SPSS 20
for Windows.
37
output data. For the first step, the alpha level set is at 0.05 (two-tailed test) and the
hypotheses are as follow:
H0 = the score of the experimental and the control group are normally
distributed
HA = the score of the experimental and the control group are not normally
distributed
Then the data were analyzed by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov formula
through SPSS 20. Finally, the output data were interpreted by this way: if the
result is non-significant (p < 0.05) it means that the distribution of the sample is
significantly different from normal distribution and the null hypothesis is rejected.
If the result is significant (p > 0.05) then the distribution is approaching the
normal distribution and the null hypothesis is accepted (Field, 2009, p. 139).
3.4.5.2 The Homogeneity of Variance Test
In order to analyze the homogeneity of variance of the scores, Levene‟s test was employed in this study. The Levene‟s test checks the null hypothesis that the variances in the groups are equal. It means that the difference between the
variances is zero (Field, 2009, p. 150). The test was employed through SPSS 20
for Windows.
There were three steps in conducting the Levene‟s test. They are stating the hypothesis and setting the alpha level; analyzing the scores using Levene‟s test
through SPSS 20; and interpreting the output data.
The first step, the alpha level set is at 0.05 (α = .05). This is the maximum error points that can be tolerated. The hypotheses are as follow:
H0 = the variances of the control and experimental group are homogenous.
HA = the variances of the control and experimental groups are not
38
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Secondly, the data were analyzed by using Levene‟s test through SPSS 20. Thirdly, the output data were interpreted by this way: If the result of the test is
interpreted to be significant at p ≤ .05 and it means that the null hypothesis is
rejected and the variances are significantly difference. On the other hand, the
result is interpreted to be non-significant if p> .05 and it means that the null
hypothesis is accepted and the variances are approximately equal (Field, 2009, p.
150).
3.4.5.3 The Independent t-test
The independent group t-test is used to analyze a causative relationship
between the independent variable (treatment) and the dependent variable
(response) that is measured on experimental and control group. This test focuses
on determining whether or not there is a significant difference between the experimental and control groups‟ means on dependent variable (Coolidge, 2000, p. 141). There were three steps in conducting the independent group t-test: first is stating the hypothesis and setting the alpha level; second, analyzing the groups‟ scores using the independent group t-test in SPSS 20 for Windows which results
in the t value or tobt ; and third, comparing the tobt with the level of significance
for testing the hypothesis. For the first step, the alpha level set is at 0.05
(two-tailed test) and the hypotheses are as follow:
H0 = the two samples are from the same population; there is no significant
difference between the two samples.
HA = the two samples are from the same population; there is a significant
difference between the two samples.
Then, the data were analyzed by using the independent group t-test formula
39
means that there is a significant difference of mean between experimental and control group. In contrast, if the result ≤ 0.05 , the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant difference of mean between experimental
and control group.
3.3.3.4 The Dependent T-test
Dependent t-test (paired sample t-test) is used to analyze and compare the
difference of means between the scores of pre-test and post-test of each
group(Kranzel&Moursund, 1999). In the study, the dependent t-test was used to
the control and the experimental group. It was aimed at finding out whether or
not there was a significant difference between the scores of pre-test and post-test
of both groups. The test was calculated by the computation of SPSS Statistics 20
for Windows.
There were three steps to use the dependent t-test. The first was stating the
hypothesis (H0= there is no significant difference between the scores of pre-test
and post-test of the group) and setting the alpha level of significance at 0.05. The
second was analyzing the scores of pre-test and post-test of the group. The lastwas
comparing the tobtwith the level of significance for testing the hypothesis(tcrit). If
the t-obtained > t-critical, it means that the null hypothesis is rejectedbecause
there is a significant difference between the scores of pre-test andpost-test of the
group(Field, 2005).
3.4. 6 Data Analysis on The Interview
In order to analyze the data from the interview, the interview was transcribed. The transcription was coded based on the respondents‟ answers, and then the answers were classified into smaller group of answers. At the end, the
transcription was used as the source in answering the second reseach question which asks about the students‟ perception toward the implementation of constructivist approach. The transcription of the interview can be found in
40
60
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
In this chapter, various findings of the research are drawn together, and
some theoretical as well as practical implications of these findings are suggested.
5.1 Conclusion
This study was concerned on the use of Constructivist Approach (CA) to
enhance students’ comprehension in readingprocedure text. It was conducted to
first graders in one senior high school in Bandung. There are two main purposes
of this study. The first was to find out whether or not the use of CAwas effective in improving students’ scores in reading procedure text and the second was to find out students’ perceptions toward the approach. The elaboration is presented below.
First, both Constructivist Approach and Teacher-centered Approach were
effective to enhance students’ comprehension in reading procedure text. It was
supported by the results of the dependent t-test computation of both groups. The
result of the dependent t-test computation of the control group showed that tobt =
-5.719, which was greater than tcrit = 2.0017. Meanwhile, the result of the
dependent t-test computation of the experimental group presented thattobt was
higher than tcrit (-13.220> 2.0017). However, the use of CA was more effective
than Teacher-centered Approachtoimprove students’ scores in readingprocedure
text. The findingwas supported by the results of the independent t-test
computation in the post-test score. The mean score of the experimental group,
which employed CA, was higher than the mean score of the control group. The
result showed that the value of tobt was higher than tcrit (-2,907> 2.0017).
Second, the interview that has been distributed only to the experimental
61
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
werepositive. It was found that all students were interested in learning procedure
text through CA. They also agreed that the implementation of CA brought some
benefits for them, especially in building their comprehension of the procedure
text, improving their communication skill since there was a group work in the
activity, and helping them to remember the material better.
5.2 Suggestions
Based on the results of the study, there areseveral suggestions addressed to
English teachers and further researchers who are interested in the same field. First,
English teachers are suggested to implement Constructivist Approach in
readingprocedure text in order to encourage students to read in English and to
construct their understanding of the English text. In addition, English teachers are
suggested to makegroups that consist a combination of high-achiever and
low-achiever students. This is in order to ease the job of constructivist teacher which is
to control the classroom learning situation and to give directions and also
motivation to the students.
Second, there ia also a suggestionfor further researchers who are interested
in investigating the use of CA. Further researchers are suggested to apply
Constructivist Approach not only in reading skill but also in other skills due to its
References
Anderson, R. C. (2004). Roles of Readers’ Schema in Comprehension, Learning,
and Memory. USA: International Reading Association.
Anderson, M & Anderson, K. (2003). Text type in English, volume 1. Australia:
Macmillan Education.
Alderson, J. C., & Urquhart, A. H. (1984). Reading in a Foreign Language. New
York: Longman
Arikunto, S. (2012). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan (2nd ed.). Jakarta: Bumi
Aksara.
Best, J. W., & Khan, J. V. (1995). Research in education (7th ed.). New Delhi:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to
language pedagogy (2nd ed.). NY: Addison Wesley Longman
Choate & Rakes. (2001). Teaching reading in content areas. New York: Holt,
Rinehart.
Christie, A. (2013, October 10). Constructivism and its implications for
educators. Retrieved from:
http://alicechristie.com/edtech/learning/constructivism/index.htm
Clarkson, B., & Brook, C. (2004, December). I can’t understand why i didn’t
pass: Scaffolding student activities. Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings
of the 21st ASCILITE Conference, 190-196.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education. London:
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Coolidge, F. I. (2000). Statistics: A gentle introduction. London, Thousand Oaks,
New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Diamond, L., & Gutlohn, L. (2006). Teaching Reading. Retrieved from
http://72.14.235..213.search?q=chace:9irJGI-jPDMJ:www.readingrockets.
Field, A. (2009) Discovering statistic using SPSS (3rd ed.). Dubai: Oriental Press.
Forman, E. A., & Cazden, C. B. (2004). Exploring Vygotskian perspectives in
education: The cognitive value of peer interaction. USA: International
Reading Association, Inc.
Giezen, J. Constructivism: A Holistic Approach to teaching and learning.
Northern Illnois University.
Gerot, Linda & Wignell, P. (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar.
Sydney: Antipodean Educational Enterprise.
Grazella, M. (2011). Indonesian youths show poor reading performance: OECD.
Jakarta: Jakarta Post.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2004). The Place of Dialogue in Children’s Construction of
Meaning. USA: International Reading Association, Inc.
Haris, D. D., & Sipay, L. (1980). Teaching Reading Vocabulary. New York: Holt
Rinehart.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). UK:
Pearson Longman.
Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied
Honebein, Peter. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning
environments. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications
Englewood Cliffs.
Ivone, F. M. (August, 2005). Teaching English as a Foreign Language in
Indonesia: The urge to improve classroom vocabulary instruction.
TEFLIN Journal, 16(2), 195-209.
Jonassen, D. H., (2006). A constructivist’s Perspective on Functional
Contextualism. Edu Technology Development, 54(1), 43-47.
Michigan Reading Association. (1985). Reading as exploration. New York:
Appleton Century.
Mikulecky, B. S., & Jeffries, L. (1996). More reading power. USA: Addison
Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Mvududu, N., & Burgess, J. T,. (2012, August). Constructivism in practice: the
case for english language learners. International Journal of Education,
4(3), 108-118.
Noor, N. M. (2011, July). Reading Habits and Preferences of EFL Post
Graduates: A case study. CONAPLIN Journal, 1(1).
Partnership for Reading. (2005). The definition of reading. Retrieved from
http://www.rand.org/multi/achievemenforal/reading/readreport.html
Phillips, D. C. (2000). Constructivist in education: Opinions and second opinion
on controversial issues. Chicago: Ninety-ninth Yearbook of the National
Society for the study of Education.
RAND Reading Study Group. (2004).A Research Agenda for Improving Reading
Aquilina Yunita, 2014
Rivers, W. M., &Temperley, M. S. (1978).A practical guide to the teaching of
English as a second or foreign Language. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1978.
Sahu & Kar. (1990). Effects of two types of prereading instruction on the
comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading Research
Quaterly, 26, 142-159.
Sugiyono. (2009). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R & D (7th ed.).
Bandung: CV. ALFABETA.
Sukayadi, D & Hasanah, E. U. (2010). Scaffolding students’ reading
comprehension with think-aloud strategy. Indonesia: The Language
Center, Indonesia University of Education.
Sunandar, Sunsun. (2006). Students’ Difficulty in Teaching Reading as a Foreign
Language. Makalah Guru Bahasa Inggris. Bandung: Unpublished
Thirteen Ed Online. (2004). Constructivist as a paradigm for teaching and
learning. Retrieved from
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html
Yang, C. C. (2002). Integration of laptops into a K-12 learning environment: A
case study of a teacher in a middle school. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Yusuf, F. N., & Amanda, R. A. (2012). Learning Strategies Towards Reading
