i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL SHEET ….……… i
AKNOWLEDGMENTS …….……… ii
DECLARATION …….……… iii
ABSTRACT ………..….……… iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS …..……… v
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ……… 1
1.1Background …….……… 1
1.2Research Questions ………….……… 3
1.3The Purpose of the Study….……… 4
1.4The Scope of the Study ……… 4
1.5The Significance of the Study ………. 5
1.6Clarification Terms ………….……… 5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ……… 7
2.1The Nature of Reading ……… 7
2.2The Purpose of Reading …..……… 10
2.3The Process of Reading …...……… 12
2.4Reading Strategies ………..……… 16
2.5Students’ Reading Strategies ..……… 21
2.5.1 Memory Strategy …..……… 21
2.5.2 Cognitive Strategy ….……… 24
2.5.3 Compensation Strategy ………. 28
2.5.4 Metacognitive Strategy ………. 29
2.5.5 Affective Strategy ….……… 32
2.5.6 Social Strategy …….……….……… 34
2.6Reading Comprehension Skills ..……… 34
2.7Chapter Summary ………..……… 40
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..……… 42
3.1Research Design ………….……… 42
3.1.1 Research Site ………..……… 42
3.1.2 Research Participants ……… 42
3.1.3 Data Collection ..……….……… 43
ii
3.1.3.2Interview ……….……… 45
3.1.4 Data Analysis ……….……… 47
3.1.5 Chapter Summary …..……… 49
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ……… 50
4.1The Data from Questionnaire ……….… 50
4.1.1 Memory Strategy …….……… 51
4.1.2 Cognitive Strategy …..……… 55
4.1.3 Compensation Strategy ..……… 66
4.1.4 Metacognitive Strategy ..……… 68
4.1.5 Affective Strategy ..……… 73
4.1.6 Social Strategy ……… 75
4.1.7 The Similarities and Differences Reading Strategies ……… 79
4.2The Data from Interview ……… 82
4.2.1 Memory Strategy ……… 82
4.2.2 Cognitive Strategy ………..……… 85
4.2.3 Compensation Strategy……… 88
4.2.4 Metacognitive Strategy …...……… 89
4.2.5 Affective Strategy ………..……… 91
4.2.6 Social Strategy ……… 92
4.3Chapter Summary ……….……….……… 93
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..………… 95
5.1Conclusions ………..……… 95
5.2Recommendations ……….……… 96
References ……….……… 99
APPENDIXES …….……….……… 104
QUESTIONNAIRE .…...……… 104
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ...……… 111
QUESTIONNAIRE DATA ANALYSIS ..……… 114
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This study was intended to investigate the students’ reading strategies in
comprehending reading materials at one Senior High School in Ternate. This
chapter describes the background of the study, the research problems/questions
and the purpose of the study. Italso includes the clarifications terms, the scope of
the study and the significance of the study.
1.1 Background
One of the main objectives of teaching English in Senior High School is
to enable the students to read and comprehend reading materials. This objective is
also supported by the Regulation of National Education Ministry No. 23/2006
about Graduate Competence Standard (SKL) which emphasizes that students
should understand the meaning of interpersonal and transactional written
discourse, formal and non-formal, in the form of recount, narrative, procedure,
descriptive, news item, report, analytical exposition, hortatory exposition, spoof,
explanation, discussion, and review texts in daily life context.
In this case, students need some kinds of reading strategies to develop
their reading ability. Reading strategies are deliberate, goal directed attempts to
control and modify the readers’ efforts to decode text, understand words, and
construct meanings of text (International Reading Association, 2007, in
Ad-Heisat, 2009:311), reveal how the readers interact with the text, thus the task
2
they take when comprehension fails (Noor et al., 2009:139). Reading strategy is
also defined as the way of accessing the meanings of texts which are employed
flexibly and selectively in the course of reading (Richard & Schmidt, 2002:444).
Wallace (1993) states that the successful readers tend to select from a range of
strategies. For example, they skipped inessential words, guessed from context,
read in broad phrases, and continued reading the text where they were
unsuccessful in decoding a word or phrase (Wallace, 1993:8).
The use of reading strategy is useful to enable the students to
comprehend reading materials because reading is a purposeful process of
identifying, interpreting and evaluating ideas in terms of the mental content or
total awareness of the reader (Wallace, 1993:4, McGinnis & Smith 1982). In a
further explanation, Wallace explains that reading is a complex process that is
dependent upon the individual’s language development, cognitive ability, and
attitude toward reading while reading ability is the results from the application of
these factors as the individual attempts to identify, interpret, and evaluate ideas
from written materials (Wallace, 1993:14).
Based on those explanations above, the three aspects that must be put
into consideration in reading process are: (1) identifying the meaning of text, (2)
interpreting and (3) evaluating ideas from a text. Anderson (2003) explains that
reading is an essential skill for English learners and in a reading process, actually
a dialog takes place between readers and writers. The writer wants to share certain
information and the reader tries to understand the message from text (Grabe,
3
The study of Progress in International Reading Literacy (PIRLS) shows
that Indonesian students’ ability in reading is still in the lower level. From 45
countries that have been observed, Indonesia is on the level of 40
(http://edukasi.kompas.com). It indicates that in Indonesia, students’ strategies in
comprehending reading materials are still a problem and it could be affected by
the students’ reading ability. The other facts of students’ reading ability in English
language learning can be seen from the result of national examination 2010. The
result of national examination 2010 shows that: (1) 30. 94% students from MA
did not pass the national examination because they did not pass English subject
(www.viruscerdas.com), and (2) there are 1,496 students from 1,525 students
(Junior High School) in Makassar did not pass English subject in the national
examination 2010 (www.makassarterkini.com).
From those problems, this study investigated reading strategies employed
by the three categories of senior high school students, namely: high achiever
students, middle achiever students, and low achiever students at one Senior High
School in Ternate.
1.2Research Questions
(1) What strategies are employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low
achiever students in comprehending reading materials?
(2) What are the similarities and differences of reading strategies employed by
high achiever students, middle achiever students and low achiever students
4
(3) Why do high achiever students, middle achiever students and low achiever
students employ those strategies in comprehending reading materials?
1.3The Purpose of the Study
(1) To investigate the reading strategies which were employed by high
achiever students, middle achiever students and low achiever students in
comprehending reading materials.
(2) To investigate the similarities and differences of reading strategies which
were employed by high achiever students, middle achiever students and
low achiever students in comprehending reading materials.
(3) To investigate the students’ reasons in employing those reading strategies
to comprehend reading materials.
1.4The Scope of the Study
This study was conducted to investigate reading strategies which were
employed by high achiever students, middle achiever students and low achiever
students in comprehending reading materials, the similarities and differences of
reading strategies which were employed by high achiever students, middle
achiever students and low achiever students and the students’ reasons in
employing those strategies to comprehend reading materials. The study was
focused on direct strategy and indirect strategy. Direct strategy includes (1)
memory strategy, (2) cognitive strategy and (3) compensation strategy while
indirect strategy includes (1) metacognitive strategy, (2) affective strategy and (3)
social strategy (Oxford, 1990:16-21; Grabe & Stoller, 2002; Blachowicz & Ogle,
2008; Nunan, 2003; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Mikulecky & Jeffries, 1996:132;
5 1.5The Significance of the Study
Hopefully, the result of this study will give significant information to
English teachers, students, and the further study. The information about the
differences reading strategies which were used by high achiever students, middle
achiever students, and low achiever students in comprehending reading materials
will help English teachers to apply the appropriate treatment/method in teaching
English. For middle and low achiever students, the results of this study enable
them to improve their reading abilities by using reading strategies most frequently
employed by high achiever students. The result of this study also helps the further
researcher to study more deeply about students’ reading strategies.
1.6Clarification Terms
a) Reading strategy is the way to comprehend reading materials which
are related to the goal of reading, how to construct meanings of text
and how to understand the vocabulary from the text.
b) Reading materials/English texts in this study are the materials which
are used in teaching and learning process among others: procedure,
descriptive, recount, narrative, analytical and hortatory exposition, and
review text.
c) Students’ achievement is categorized based on the result of their final
grade. High achiever students are the students who get the final grade
(80-100), middle achiever students are the students who get the final
grade (70-80), and low achiever are the students who have the final
6
d) The similarities of reading strategies are the strategies which were
used by all levels of students, namely: high achiever students, middle
achiever students and low achiever students.
e) The differences of reading strategies are the strategies which were not
employed by the all level of students namely high achiever students,
42 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses the method of the study which is related to the
research design. This study was intended to investigate reading strategies which
were employed by the students in comprehending reading materials, the
similarities and differences of reading strategies and the students’ reasons in
employing those reading strategies as stated in chapter I. The discussions in this
chapter are focused on research site, participants, data collection and data
analysis.
3.1Research Design
3.1.1 Research Site
The study was conducted at one Senior High School in Ternate. The
school was chosen as the setting of the study because it was easy to get the access
and communicate with the English teacher involved in this study. Second, the
school is one of the best in Ternate.
3.1.2 Research participants.
The participants of this research were 30 second grade students. The
researcher took them as the participants of the study because they have experience
in doing reading activities. In selecting the participants, the study used purposeful
sampling to gain the important information from research participants (Alwasilah,
43
The participants were categorized into lower achiever, middle achiever,
and high achiever students. The students’ achiever categorization levels were
based on their last final grade. The students who got the score ≤ 70 were
categorized as lower achiever students, 70-80 were middle achiever students, and
80 ≥ were high achiever students. The aim of students’ achiever categorization is
to know the various strategies which were employed by the students in
comprehending reading materials.
3.1.3 Data Collection
In collecting the data, the researcher used questionnaires and interviews.
3.1.3.1 Questionnaire
A questionnaire is not just a list of questions or a form to be filled out. It
is scientific instrument of measurement and for collection of particular kinds of
data (Oppenheim, 1982:2). The questionnaire in the study was adapted from SILL
(1990) Version 7.00 which includes Memory, Cognitive, Compensation,
Metacognitive, Affective, and Social reading strategies. The Questionnaire was
used to investigate the students’ strategies in comprehending reading materials. It
contains 30 multiple questions. The questions numbers 1,2,3 covered Memory
strategy, questions numbers 4-15 were used to investigate Cognitive strategy
while the questions numbers 16-24 were used to investigate Metacognitive
strategy. The questions numbers 25,26,27 were used to cover Affective strategy,
and the questions numbers 28,29,30 were used to investigate Social strategies.
The classification of the questions from the questionnaires can be seen from the
44
No Strategy Group Strategy Questions
1 Memory (1)Associating/ Elaborating; (2) Placing new words
into context; (3) Using imagery 1,2,3
2 Cognitive
(1)Repeating ;(2) Recognizing and using formula and pattern; (3) Practice naturalistically; (4) Skimming; (5) Scanning; (6) Using recourses for receiving messages; (7) Analyzing expression; (8) Reasoning deductively; (9) Translating; (10) Taking notes; (11) Summarizing; (12) Highlighting
4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11,12,13,14,15
3 Compensation (1)Using linguistic clues; (2) Using other clues; 16,17
4 Metacognitive
(1)Organizing; (2) Setting goals and objective;(3) Identifying the purpose of a language task; (4) Planning for a language task; (5) Seeking opportunities; (6) Self monitoring; (7) Self-evaluating;
18,19,20,21,21, 22,23,24
5 Affective (1)Using progressive relaxation; (2) Taking risk
wisely; (3) Writing a language learning diary 25,26,27,
6 Social
(1)Asking for clarification of verification; (2) Cooperate with peers; (3) Developing cultural understanding
28,29,30
The steps of data collection from the questionnaire are as follows: (1) the
researcher visited the principals of the school to ask permission to conduct the
research. (2) after getting the permission from the principal, the researcher made
coordination with the English teacher and students about the time to conduct the
research, (3) the researcher explained the items of questions from the
questionnaire to students before the questionnaire were distributed, (4) the
questionnaires were distributed to the students, then, students answered questions
from questionnaire and (5) The students’ answers from the questionnaires were
analyzed to find out the strategies most frequently used in comprehending reading
materials and the similarities and the differences of reading strategies which were
employed by the students in comprehending reading materials. The questionnaire
44
3.1.3.2Interview
The aim of the interview in this study is to gain the data about students’
reasons in employing reading strategies to comprehend reading materials. It is
also used to get useful information that can not be covered by the questionnaires,
and permit participants to describe detailed personal information, has better
control over type of information “filtered” through the views of interviewer
(Creswell, 2008:226). An interview is an important way for a researcher to check
the accuracy (Frankel & Wallen, 2007). Esterberg (2002) defines interviews as a
meeting of two persons to exchange information and idea through questions and
responses, resulting in communication and joint construction of meaning about a
particular topic (Esterberg, 2002, in Sugiono, 2008:72). This study used individual
interview to gain factual information, or opinions, and attitudes or narrative about
the students’ reasons in employing reading strategies (Flick et al., 1991, in Kvale,
1996:101) and it was based on semi-structured interview.
This study also used open-ended questions to investigate students’
reasons in employing those reading strategies. Open-ended question permits the
persons being interviewed to respond in their own terms (Patton, 1987:122).
The interviewers in this study were 15 second year students which were
categorized into low, middle, and high achiever students. The researcher used tape
recorder to record the data from interviews because a tape recorder is a part of the
indispensable equipment of evaluators using qualitative method (Patton,
1987:137). The researcher also used note-taking during the interview process. It is
46
during the interview, notes will consist of primarily of key phrases, list of major
points made by the respondents, and the key terms or words shown quotation
marks that capture the interviewee’s own language (Patton, 1987:138). The
questions in the interview also consist of 30 questions.
The questions numbers 1,2,3 from the interview covered the students’
reasons in using memory strategy, questions numbers 4-15 were used to
investigate the students’ reasons in employing cognitive strategy while the
questions numbers 16-24 were used to find the students’ reasons in using
metacognitive strategy. The questions numbers 25,26,27 in this questionnaire
were used to cover students’ reasons in employing affective strategy, and the last
questions numbers 28,29,30 were used to find the students reasons in using social
strategy. All questions and strategies can be seen from the table below while the
interview protocol can be seen in appendix (2).
! " # $ $ % ! & '
("(&
" ) * + ! " + ,
! & # ! - . ! /
! 0 ' *
! 1 , % ! 2 + * ! 3 4 ! 5 4 . !
, ! " 6
-(/(0(1(2(3( 5( ( "( &( -( /
& ) ' ! " ' ! 0( 1
- * 7 , ! " 8 * ! &
9 .!
-# .! / .
! 0 ! 1 : * !
2( 3("5(" (" (
""("&("-/ * ' * % ! " 4 . .
$ ! & ;
"/("0("1(
0 . * ! "
) $ ! & < *
47
3.1.4 Data analysis
The data from questionnaire were analyzed by using Likert scale. Fraenkel
and Wallen (2007:127) named this scale as attitude scale. In addition, the basic
assumption that underlines all attitude scale is that it is possible to discover
attitudes by asking individual to respond to a series of statement. This scale also
can be used to measure a subject’s attitude toward a particular concept. Beside
attitude as stated by Fraenkel and Wallen (2007), the use of Likert scale is also
supported by Sugiyono (2008:134) who states that Likert scale is used to measure
attitude, opinion, and perception.
In this scale, the students were asked to answer each items of the
questionnaire based on five possible options provided: always, frequently/usually,
sometime, rarely and never. Each answer has its own score starting from 5 point
to 1 point. One point means that participants never used that kind of reading
strategy in comprehending reading text. Two points mean the participants rarely
used such strategy. Three points mean the participants sometime used, four points
mean the strategy is frequently/usually used and five points is for always used.
The scale of questionnaire and profile result can be seen from the table below.
= >
$ /
' >
-. :. &
+ 8 "
* .
7%
335?"3-The results of the students’ answers were divided with the total number
48
The data from students’ mean in their reading strategies were converted into
frequency scale. In this study, the scale was categorized into three scales as
follows: High, Medium, and Low. The students would be categorized into High
scale in employing reading strategies if they got the average of mean in 4.5 to 5.0.
The students who got the average of mean in 3.5 to 4.5 were categorized into
Medium while the students who got the average of mean in 1.5 to 2.4 and 1.0 to
1.4 were categorized into Low scale. The data about frequency, scale point and
categorization (SILL profile result) can be seen from table below.
SILL Profile of Result
= > ) ,
$
-@/ /@5 6
' >
. :. &@/
-@-+ 8 @/
"@-A $
* . @5
7% 335?&55
This study used five main approaches to analyze the data from interview
(Kvale, 1996:187), namely: categorization of meaning, condensation, structuring,
interpreting of meaning through narratives, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc
methods for generating meaning. The analysis was based on the research question
number 3 as stated in chapter I which is related to the student’s reasons to employ
reading strategies in comprehending reading materials. The data analysis process
from interview in this study include: (a) the interview data from recording were
transcribed, (b) in transcribing the interview data, the name of respondents were
coded to protect them confidently, (c) in order to avoid the misinterpretation
between the participants’ responses and the researcher when conducting
49
suggested by Alwasilah (2009:178), (d) the interview data were interpreted to
answer research questions and compared to the theory underpinning the study and
(e) the data from interview were used to gain indepth information concerning to
the research questions.
3.1.5 Chapter Summary
This chapter has discussed the research design. In collecting the data, the
study used a qualitative method such as questionnaire and interview. The data
from questionnaire were analyzed by using Likert scale while the data from
interview were analyzed by using categorization of meaning, condensation,
95 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the conclussions of the research findings based on
the questions proposed in chapter one and some recommendations. The
discussions are divided into two parts. The first part concerns with conclussions
and the second part deals with recomendations of the study.
5.1 Conclusions
This study investigated reading strategies which were employed by high
achiever students, middle achiever students and low achiever students in
comprehending reading materials, the similarities and differences strategies and
students’ reasons in employing those reading strategies. The strategy consists of
direct and indirect strategies. A direct strategy delas with memory, cognitive and
compensation strategies while an indirect strategy covers metacognitive, affective
and social strategies (Oxford, 1990).
The result of this study shows that all levels of students (high, middle,
and low achiever students) employed most of the reading strategies which were
suggested by Oxford (1990). High achiever students most frequently used
cognitive strategies followed by metacognitive, memory, compensation, affective,
and social strategies. Middle achiever students most frequently used cognitive
strategies followed by metacognitive, affective, and social strategy and memory
strategies while low achiever students most frequently used cognitive strategies
96
The result of the study also indicated that the different level of students
sometimes used the same types of strategies in different context. As an
illustration, all the students used 11 similarities of reading strategies in different
context. The use of placing new words into context, using imagery, and
developing cultural understanding strategies indicated that students need to create
or construct a context when reading English text. The students also need a process
of social interaction in trying to find the meaning of a text. It can be seen from
those strategies which were employed by all the levels of students such as: asking
for clarification or verification and cooperate with peers strategies. The use of
repeating, skimming, scanning, using recourses for receiving messages, planning
for a language task, and self monitoring strategies also indicated that students
actually have hard efforts in increasing their reading proficiency
(self-improvement).
The most distinctive of using reading strategy is to understand a text.
However, the low achiever students only used it to do their exercises which were
given by their English teacher. The strategies which were rarely or never used by
the all levels of students were writing a language learning diary and developing
cultural understanding. It means that most of the students did not have English
writing skills and also did not like to learn the foreign culture.
5.2Recommendations
Based on the findings of the study, the researcher gives some
97
reading materials. The recommendations are aimed for further research, English
teacher and government.
One of the data collection techniques was used of this study is
questionnaire. Moreover, the researcher did not use interviews to validate the data
from the questionnaires. In the case, the further research is suggested to use
interview in order to validate the data from questionnaire. In addition, the options
from the questionnaire (always, usually, often, rarely, never) should be stated
more operational to make the students are easy to understand. This study was
focused on the investigation of reading strategies and students’ arguments in
employing those strategies. In this case, the next studies are recommended to
consider on how to apply those strategies in improving the low achiever students’
abilities in reading comprhension.
For English teacher, the use of reading strategy is useful for students in
increasing their reading comprehensions. In this case, the teachers are
recommended to encourage the low achiever students to employ those reading
strategies which were most frequently used by high achiever students. Besides
that, the English teachers are also recommended to use authentic materials when
teaching such as: magazine and newspaper in English because those materials will
encourage the students to learn many English words in different context.
For the government, this study recommends to conduct teaching training
for English teacher in terms of how to improve students’ reading proficiency. The
98
newspaper in English for all senior high schools. By preparing those facilities,
99
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. C. (2009). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Dasar-dasar Merancang dan
Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Dunia Pustaka Jaya.
Ad-Heisat, at,al (2009). The use of Reading Strategies in Developing Student’s
Reading Competency Among Primary School Teacher in Malaysia.
European journal of Social Science, Vol.12 no.2
Alyousef, H.S. (2005). Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners.
The Reading Matrix. Vol.5 No.2.
Anderson, J. N. (2003). Scrolling, Clicking, and Reading English: On line
Reading Strategies in a Second/Foreign Language. The Reading
Matrix Vol.3. No.3, November 2003
Blachowicz, C. & Ogle, D. (2008). Reading Comprehension. Second Edition.
New York: The Guilford Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Third Edition.
New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Debate, V. E. (2006). Applying Current Approaches to the Teaching of Reading.
English Teaching Forum Journal, No. I.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2007). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. 6th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Garnasih, N. M. (2006). Reading Strategies Most Frequently Employed by the
High and the Low Proficiency Readers of Third Grade Students of
100
Gebhard, J. G. (1996). Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language. A Self
Development and Methodology Guide. Michigan: The University of
Michigan Press.
Grabe,W. & Stoller, F.L. (2002). Teaching and Researching Reading. Great
Britain: Pearson Education.
Harrison, C. (2004). Understanding Reading Development. London: SAGE
Publication, Ltd.
Hood, at al. (1996). Focusing on Reading. New Edition. Sidney: Macquarie
University.
http://www.viruscerdas.com Accessed on April, 2010. 14.670 Siswa SMA/MA
Tidak Lulus UN Ulangan.
http://www.makassarterkini.com Accessed on April, 2010. 1.525 Siswa SMP di
Makassar Tak Lulus UN
Jennings, J.H. at al. (2006) Reading Problems. 5th Edition. Boston: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Johary (2003). The Effect of Reading Paraphrasing Strategies in Students’
Reading Comprehension. A thesis.
http://kesehatan.kompas.com/read/2009/10/28 Accessed on, Mach, 2, 2010.
Kemampuan Membaca Anak Indonesia Masih Rendah.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into Second Language Reading. A Cross-Linguistics
Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Konstant, T. (2003). Speed Reading. London: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews. An Introduction to Qualitative Research
101
Lems, K. at al. (2010). Teaching Reading to English Language Learners. Insight
from Linguistics. New York: The Guilford Press.
McGinnis, D. J. & Smith, D.E. (1982). Analyzing and Treating Reading Problem.
New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Merriam, S.B. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative
Approach. California: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Mikulecky, B. S. & Jeffries, L. (1996). More Reading Power. Bentley:
Addision-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Merawati, MV.J (2003). Improving Reading Strategies and Skills through
Guessing Meanings from Context. A Thesis.
Moreillon, J. (2007). Collaborative Strategies for Teaching Reading
Comprehension. Maximizing Your Impact. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Noor, at al (2009). Exploring the Use of Online Reading Strategies Among ELS
Learners. Proceeding of Conference on Applied Linguistics 2
(CANOPLIN 2).
Nurhadi (1987). Membaca Cepat dan Efektif. Bandung: Sinar Baru Agesindo.
Nunan, D. (1998). Language Teaching Methodology. A Textbook for Teacher.
London: Pearson Education Ltd.
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. New York:
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Nuttal, C. (1989). Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. Great Britain:
The Bath Press.
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies. Boston: Heinle & Heinle
102
O’Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second
Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oppenheim, A.N. (1982). Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement.
London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. London:
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional No.23 Tahun 2006 tentang Standar
Kompetensi Lulusan untuk Satuan Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah.
Richards, C. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching
and Applied Linguistics. Third Edition. London: Pearson Education
Limited.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. New York: PALGRAVE
MACMILLAN.
Silberstein, S. (1994). Techniques and Resources Teaching Reading. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Santiana (2009) investigated Students’ Reading Strategies and Their Reading
Comprehension. A case study at a Junior High School in Ciamis, West
Java. A Thesis.
Smith, F. (2004). Understanding Reading. A Psycholinguistics Analysis of
Reading and Learning to Read. 6th Edition. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Sugiyono (2008). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Tarigan, H.G. (1994). Membaca Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan Berbahasa.
103
Tampubolan, D P. (2008). Kemampuan Membaca: Teknik Membaca Efektif and
Efisien. Bandung: Penerbit Angkasa.
Tierney, J.R. at al. (1980). Reading Strategies and Practices: Guide Improving
Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Wallace, C. (1992). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walpole, S. & McKenna, M.C. (2007). Differentiated Reading Instruction.
Strategies for Primary Grades. New York: The Guilford Publication,
Inc.
Wenden, A & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner Strategies in Language Learning. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd.
Willis, J, MD. (2008). Teaching the Brain to Read. The Strategies for Improving
Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension. Alexandria: Association
