THE EFFECT OF INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND SELF-EFFICACY ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN READING COMPREHENSION.

•

MILIK PERPUSTI\Kr>.I\N

lJ NIME.O

THE EFFECf OF INSTRUCflONAL STRATEGIES AND

SELF-EFFICACY

ON

sTUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT

IN

READING COMPREHENSION

A

THESIS

SubmUU4 to the Englislc Applid Lilfguistla

Study

program

111 Partilll F!dfaJbr&elll of the Requi«mL"t:sfor th•

»egru

of

MogistU flwnt"'lor•

By

PENERBIT

NO. INDUK

12

44

( l

'

ENGLISH .APPLlED UNGUlSTlCS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE \JNl'VERSlTY OF MEDAN

•

MILIK PERPUSTI\Kr>.I\N

lJ NIME.O

THE EFFECf OF INSTRUCflONAL STRATEGIES AND

SELF-EFFICACY

ON

sTUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT

IN

READING COMPREHENSION

A

THESIS

SubmUU4 to the Englislc Applid Lilfguistla

Study

program

111 Partilll F!dfaJbr&elll of the Requi«mL"t:sfor th•

»egru

of

MogistU flwnt"'lor•

By

PENERBIT

NO. INDUK

12

44

( l

'

ENGLISH .APPLlED UNGUlSTlCS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE \JNl'VERSlTY OF MEDAN

A THESIS

THE EFFECT OF INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND

SELF-EFFICACY ON STUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT

IN READING COMPREHENSION

By

LINDA FJTRI IBRAHIM

Registration Number: 809115012

English Applied Linguistics Study J>r'ogr1m State University of Medan

This Thesis was examined on December 01",1011 by tbe Board of Examiners

Approved By: Adviser Commission

Prof. Or. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd NIP. 19570615 198203 I 005

~eMII-el:~nglisb Applied nguislics Sl dy Progra.m

Adviser U

APPROVAL

This thesis

was

examined on December 0 I", 2011 by the Boord

Examiners:

&ard of Examiners

Prof. Dr. Berlin Siharani, M.Pd NIP. 19570615 198203 I 005

Dr. Oidik Sanro•o. M.Pd NIP. 196606 16 199 403 I 006

Prof. Dr. Ru•min Gurning, M.Pd NIP. 19590713 19860 1 I 001

Prof. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A., Pb.D Nll'. 19440302 196902 200 I

ABSTRACI'

Linda Fieri lbnohim. 809115012. Tbe Effect or ltutnctioaal Strategies and

ScM-efficacy on Students' Achievement in Reoding Comp nh<nsicn. A Thesis. English Applied Llngllislics Stady Program, State University ofMeclaa. 2011.

The objectives of lhis study are to find out whether. (I) instroctional strategies significantly affect students' achieveme nt in reading comprehension; (2) self .. mcacy significantly affects swdents' achievement in reading comprehension; and (3) tltere is any interaction between instructional strategies and sclf..:fficacy to students' achievement in reading comprehension. An experimental resea.rch with factorial design 2x2 was used in this swdy. n,e population of the study was a.ll students from grade XD of 201 112012

academic year of Madrasah Aliyab Negeri I Taltengon Kabupaten Aceb Ten81'h. There ,...,... four p;uallel classes were chooscn as the sample by applying cluster random

sampling technique. Each class consisted of 30 students. Th< instruments used for the

data collection were reading le$l and q.-ionnairc. The dais

w=

analyud by applying Two-way ANOVA. The resean:h findings show thai (I) instructional strategies significa.ndy affect students' achieve~m~~t in reading comprehension (F...,= 6.1> F -·

3 . 92~ (2) sclf..:fficacy signifiCalltly afl'ects students' achievement in reading comprehension (F-...= 5.9 > F-· 3.92); and (3) !here is an interaction between instructional strategies and self-<>nicacy to students' achievement in reading comprehension (F..., • 4.70 > F -· 3.92). Analysis of Tuckey test was used in this swdy to prove whether there is any interaction between instructional strategies and sell:

cnicRcy to the students' achievement in rendjng comprehension. Thus, instn1c1ionol strategies and self--efficacy significantly affect the students' achievement in reading comprehension. lt implies that in the ouempt to hnprove the students' achievement in

ABSTRAK

Undo Fitri lbn.him. 809115012. The Effect or Instnoctioaal Stnotegies aad Selr-efficacy on Students' Achievement Ia Readlac ComprehtDSioD. Tesis. Program Stud I Un.gubti.k Terapao Bahasa l nggrls, Universitas Ncgeri Med111. 2011.

Pcnclitian ini bcrtujuan untuk meo0gecahui opakah: {I) strategi lnstnlksional secara signifikan mempengaruhi basil bclajar siswu dalam membaca; (2) self-.,ffieacy $ccant

signifikan mempengaruhi hasil bclajar siswo dalam membaca; dan (3) tcrdapat intcraksi antara strategi instruksiooal dan self-.,tncacy terhadap basil bclajar siswo dalam membaca. Penelitian ioi menggunakan desain Faktorial 2x'2. Populasi penclitian ini adalah semua siswa kelas XII tahun ajaran 2011/2012 Madrasah Aliyah Negeri I Takengoo Kabupaten Aceh Tengah. Ada empat kelas paralel yang dipilih sebagai sampel

dengan menggunakao teknik random k.lastcr sampling. Setiap kelas terdiri dari 30 siswa.

lnstrumcn yang digunakan untuk ,.,...gumpulkan data dalam penelitiao ini ada1ah tcs membaca dan angket. Dala diaoalisa dengan mcnggunakan ANA VA dua jalur. !Wil

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Bismillahirrahmonirrahim

First and foremost, praise and !hank

be

to Allah SWT for aU blessing, who

has granled countless opportunity, strength and knowledge to the writer so thai

she has been finally able to accomplish her thesis.

In !he process of writing this thesis, the writer would like to extend her

sincere and special

thanks.

Her gratitude

is

intended for her beloved parents, Ayah

(Ibrahim, SE) and Mamak (lsnaini, S.Pd) for

their

eodless love, prays and

supports. Thanks to her brothers Mizani Ibrahim, S.Pd and Alfath Putrn Ibrahim,

her sister Zuliana Ibrahim and the amazing fami ly for

aU

prays and supports.

O n this special occasion, she would like to extend her sincere appreciation

to Prof. Or. Berlin Sibar.mi, M.Pd., and Dr. Didik Santoso, M.Pd., her briliaot

advisers, who

has

given their valuable time in giving the encouragement.

guidance, suggestion, and ad vices until this thesis comes to its due time.

She would like to give her special thank; to her reviewers and examiners

Prof. Dr. Busmin Guming, M.Pd, l'rof. Tina Mariany Arifm, M.A., Ph.D and

Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., I' h. D for their valuable inputs for completion of this

thesis. She also wishes to express tl>anks to all lecturers who have given her the

valuable knowledge and science during her study at the English Applied

In particular, Her enormous appreciation

is

addressed to Prof.

Dr.

Busmin

Guming, M.Pd., lhe head of English Applied Linguistics Study Progxam and 10

Dr.

Anni

Holila Pulungan, M.Hwn., the secretary of English Applied Linguistics

Study Program.

Special thanks is extended to lhe headmaster of Madiasah Ali yah Negeri I

Takengon Aceb Tengah regency (Drs. M. lsa) who permits her to conduct the

research in lhe school. Thanks 10 the teacher (Salwa Husna, SS., M.Hum) who

helps her in conducting the treatment in the school. And those teachers and

students of Madrasah Ali yah Negeri I Takengon who gave supports to this study

and fo r their cooperative attitude and work during the research.

Thnnks to all my younger sisters in the

Kost Kece,

thnnks guys for your

attention, support, and time that

we

spent together. FinnUy, her appreciation goes

to all her friends Intake XVl at the English Applied Linguistics Study Program,

thanks guys for all the suggestion, friendship and cooperation, and helpful ideas in

various discussions.

Thank you fo r all, May Allah SWf blesses us ...

Medan, December 01111, 20 II

The writer,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

AUSTRACT ... ;

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v

LIST OF TABLES ... x

LIST OF FIGURES ... xii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ... I 1.1 The Background of Study ... I 1.2 The Problems ofSIUdy ... 7

1.3 TheObjectivesofSIUdy ...

7

1.4 The Scope ofSIUdy ... 7

1.5 The Significant of Study ...

9

CHAPTER U: REVJEW OF LITERATURE ... · ... I 0 2.1 Theoreticall'romcwork ... 10

2. 1.1 Achievement in Reading Comprehension... I 0 2.1.2 Reading ... 12

2.1.2.1 The Nature of Reading Comprehension... 12

2.1.2.2 Rcad.ing as Process ... 13

2.1.2.3 Schema Theory... 16

2.1.2.4 Types of Schema ... 18

2.1.2.5

Schema

Theory on

Reading

as

Process ... 19

2.1.3 Types of Reading Process ... 22

2.1.3.1 Bottom-up

Process ...

23

2.1.3.2 Top-down Process ...

24

2.1.3.3 Interactive Process ... 25

2.1.4

Reading

as Product... ... 25

2. 1.5 The Taxonomy of Reading Comprehension ... 26

2.1.5.1 Literal Comprehension ... 26

2. 1.5.2 Inferential Comprehension ... 27

2. 1.5.3 Evaluation ... 27

2. I .5.4 Appreciation ... 28

2.1.6 Factors A ffccting Reading Comprehension ... 28

2.1 .7 ·rhe Chamcteristics of Poor and Successful Readers .... 30

2.2 Survey. Connection, Read, Outline and Look Back (SCROL) Strategy . ... .... .. . .. . . . ... ... ... ... ... 31

2.2. I The Nature ofSCROI. Strategy ... 31

2.2.2 The Principle of SCROL Strategy ... 33

2.2.3 The Procedure ofSCROL strategy ... 35

2.2.3.2 Connection ... 35

2.2.3.3 Read ... ... 3S 2.2.3.4 Outline ... 35

2.2.3.5 Look Back ... 35

2.3 Predict, Organize. Search, Swnmnry and Evaluate (POSSE) Strategy ...

38

2.3.1 TheNatureofPOSSEStrategy ... 38

2.3.2 The Principle of POSSE Strategy ... 39

2.3.3 The Procedure of POSSE Strategy ... 39

2.4 Self-efficacy ... 42

2.4.1 The Nature of Self-efficacy ... 43

2.4.2 Sources of Self-efficacy ... 43

2.4.2. 1 Actual Experiences ... 44

2.4.2.2 Vicarious Experiences ... 45

2.4.2.3 Verbal Persuasion ... 45

2.4.2.4 Psychological Arousal ... 46

2.4.3 Consequences of Self-efficacy ... 46

2.5 Conceptual Framework ... 47

2.5. 1 The Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension of the Students Taught by Using SCROL and POSSE Strategies ... 47

2.5.2 The Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension the Students who have High Self-efficacy and Low Self-efficacy ... 49

2.5.3 The Interaction between Instructional Strategies and Students' Self- efficacy to the Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 51

2.6 Hypotheses ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .... 52

CHAPTER ill: RESEARCH METHOD ... S4 3.1 Research Design ... 54

3.2 Population and Sample ...

55

3.2. 1 Population ... SS 3.2.2 Sample ... S6 3.3 The Instrument for Collecting Data ... 56

3.3.1 Reading Comprehension Test ...

56

3.3.2 Questionnaire of Self-efficacy ...

57

3.4 Instrument Validation ... 58

3.4. 1 Validity of Reading Comprehension Test... ... ... 58

3.4.2 Validity of Questionnaire ...

59

3.5 Reliability ... 60

3.S.I Reliability ofTest ... 60

3.5.2 Reliabil ity of Questionnaire ... 61

3.6 The Procedure ofTreatment... ... 62

3.7.1 lntemal Validity ... 62

3. 7.2 External Validity ... 63

3.8 The Technique of Analyzing Data ... 63

3.9 Statistical Hypotheses ... .. ... 64

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 65

4.1 The Description of Research Data ... 65

4.1.1 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using SCROL Strategy ... 66

4.1.2 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using POSSE Strategy ... 67

4.1.3 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement of Group of Students with High Self-efficacy ... 69

4.1.4 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement of Group of Students with

Low

Self-efficacy ... 70

4.1.5 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using SCROL Strategy with High Self-efficacy ... ... ... ... 71

4.1.6 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using SCROL Strategy with

Low

Self-efficacy ... 73

4. 1.7 Students' Reading Comprehension Achicvcmcot Taught by Using POSSE Strategy with High Self-efficacy ... 74

4.1.8 Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using POSSE Strategy with

Low

Self-efficacy ... 76

4.2 Requirements of Data Analysis ... 77

4.2.1 Normality Test ... 77

4.2.2 Homogeneity Testing ... 78

4.2.2.1 Groups ofTcaching Strategies ... 79

4.2.2.2 Groups of Self-efficacy ... 79

4.2.2.3 Groups of Interaction ... 79

4.3 Hypothesis Testing ... 80

4.3.1 Instructional Strategies Significantly Affect Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 82

4.3.2 Se ll ~e fficacy Significantly Affect Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 82

4.3.3 The lntcruction between Instructional Strategies and Self-efficacy on Students' Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 83

4.4 Research Findinl!$ ... 86

4.5.1 The Effect of Instructional Strategies Significantly Affect Students' Achievement in Reading

Comprehension ... .... 87

4.5.2 The Effect of Self-efficacy on Students' Achievement

in

Reading Comprehension ... 88

4.5.3 The Interaction Bel'-'11 Instructional Strategies and Self-efficacy on Students' Achievement In Reading Comprehension ...

89

4.6

The Limitation of Research ... 90

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMl'LlCATIONS AND SUGGEST IONS ... 92

5.1 Conclusions ... ... ... 92

5.2 Im plications ... ... 92

5.3 Suggestions ... 94

REFERENCES ... 95

LISTOFTADLES

Table

1.1 The Mean of the Students' score in English subject on UN examination at MAN I Takeogon Knbupaten

Page

Aceh Tengah . . .. . . .. .. . . .. . ... ... ... . ... .... . ... ... ... 4

2.1

An Overview of Two Comprehension Factor ...

29

2.2

The Characteristics of Poor and Successful Readers... 30

2.3 The Task for SCROL Strategy... 36

2.4 Procedure of POSSE Strategy .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .. .. .. . 40

2.5 The Chart of POSSE Strategy .. ... 41

3 .I Facto rial Research Design 2 x 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .... ... .. .... ..

55

3.2 The outline of Students' Reading Comprehension... 57

3.3 The Specification Table of Students' Self~fficacy Indicators ...

58

4.1 Summary of Research Dam Description ... 65

4.2 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students Taught By Using SCROL Strategy ... ... ... .... .... ... ... . ... 66

4.3 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students Taught By Using SCROL Strategy . .... . . .. ... .... .. .. .... ... .... . ... ... 68

4.4 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students with High Self- efficacy . . . .. . . . .. .. ... ... ... .... ... . ... . . ... ... . ... 69

4.5 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students witb Low Self -efficacy ... ... . .... ... .... ... ... ... .... . .... ... ... 70

4.6 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students Taught By Using SCROL Strategy with Iligh Self-efficacy ... 72

4.7 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students Taught By Using SCROL Strategy with Low Self-efficacy... 73

4.8 Frequency Distribution oftbc scores of the students Taught By Using POSSE Strategy with ~(jgh Self~fficacy ... 75

4.9 Frequency Distribution of the scores of the students Taught By Using POSSE Strategy with Low Self~fficaey ... 76

4.10 Summary on Result of Nonnality Test ... 78

4. 11 The Results of Homogeneity Test on Groups ofTeaching Strategies . .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. ... .. .. .. . .. ... .... .. . . . ... .... .. ... .. . .... 79

4. 12 Results of Homogeneity Test of Self-efficacy ... 79

4. 13 Summary on the Result of Homogeneity Teat on Group Interaction 79 4. 14 The Result of Homogeneity Test on fJach Sample Gro ups ... 80

4. 15 Two· Way ANOV A wiUt 2 x 2 Factorial Designs ... 81

4. 16 Summary o n the Calculation of Two-way ANOVA ... 81

[image:13.516.15.451.54.671.2]

U ST OF FIGURES

F'igure Page

2. 1 An Example of a Wall Chart for SCROL ... 37 4.1 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

Taught by Using SCROL Strotegy ... ... .... 67 4.2 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

Taught by Using POSSE Sl:nltegy ... 68 4.3 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

with High Self-efficacy ... 70 4.4 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

with Low Self-efficacy ... 7 1 4.5 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

Taught by Using SCROL Strotegy v.i !h High Self-efficacy ... 72 4.6 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprebension Achievement

Taught by Using SCROL Strotegy with Low Self-efficacy ... 74 4.7 Histogram on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

Taught by Using POSSE Sl:nltcgy with High Self-efficacy ... 75 4.8 Histogr.un on Students' Reading Comprehension Achievement

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

A Self-efficacy Questionnaire ... ... 98

B The Calculation of Self-efficacay Test ... ... 100

C Description of Students'

Score

on Self-efficacy Questionnaire... 101

D

Reading

Comprehension

Test ...

I

05 E The Procedure of Treatment in Two Group ... 116

F Learning Scenario of Using SCROL Strategy ... 121

G Learning Scenario of Using POSSE Strategy ... 123

H Description of Students'

Score ...

125

I Testing Hypothesis ... 128

J

Tuckey Test...

131

K The Computation of Validity and Reliability of Reading Test... 133

L ·n,e Computation of Instrument Validation.... ... 137

M Computation of Validity and Reliability of Questionnaire ... 140

N Description of Researeh Data ... . ... 142

0

Reuirements of

Data

Analysis... 152

CHAPTER 1

MILIK PERPUSTAKAAN

__

U_t\1 I M E 0

lNTRODUCTI ON

1.1 The Background of Study

Reading is

a

means of communication, sharing infonnation and idellS.

Like

all language, it is

a

complex interaction between the text and reader which is

shaped by the reader's prior knowledge, experiences, attitude, and language

community which is culturally and socially situated. Readers use variety of

reading strategies to assist with decoding to U110Slate symbols intO SOWlds or

visual representations of speech and comprehension. Readers may use morpheme,

semantic, syntax and context clues to identify the meaning of unknown words and

readers imegrntc the words they have read into their existing framewo rk of

knowledge or schema.

One of important goals of education is to assist students to read and write

the te><t. The bllSic goal of reading is enable renders 10

gain

an understanding of

the text, to develop the appreciations and interest. Students need to be able to

leam fr om their readil\g because the successful of reading perfonnancc is a strong

ptedictor for students' academic perfonnance. Give the chi ldren reading

instruction, it means that give the children a prospective future to explore the

knowledge. The goal of reading help the readers to understand the text or to gain

what they intends from the text easily, moreover, the readers will enjoy their

2

Reading comprehension is characterized as an active process of

comprehending. Since infonnatioo, knowledge, science and technology can be

obtained from the internet, books, articles nod other rending materials in order to

improving the stu den l~' reading skill. The most important step to preparing

students to comprehend writing material is to help students understand the rending

comprehension. Reading comprehension

an:

influenced by reading material, the

tolal program of instruction, child's own personality, attitudes, interest,

motivation, self-efficacy, habit, environment and another factors.

We have probably beard that the education community emphasizing the

importance of reading comprehension, but we may not realize bow important

reading actuaUy is. Although strong reading skills can help children well in

language arts and reading class, that is only the beginning. Students have to usc

reading skills in every single subject they ever study and in almost every aspect of

life. For example, students need to comprehend challenging science textbooks as

well as directions and word problems on texu.

In the 2006 Educational Unit Level Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkot

Satuan Pendidikan: KTSP) of Senior High School reading is regarded as the

backbone of other language skills. It is clearly state that through reading students

con develop the other language skills such as writing and speaking. The students

of Senior High School arc expected to be able to comprehend the short functional

text and simple essay such as in report, nruntive and analytical exposition fom1 in

their daily lives context and the students con also grasp infonnation and improve

3

The objective of English teaching is the students can develop their

communicative competence both in oral or written forms. This communicative

competence involves lour language skills: listening, speaking, reading and

writing. The four skiJJs are important in communication; each of them must get

sufficient emphasis for development. Therefore, Indonesian government has been

always making an attempt to achieve the objectives by continuously improving

the English curriculum, from curriculum 2004 till the latest one used through out,

namely KTSP as the latest one.

Reading is not as simple as what most people think. It is not easy to have

the ability of drawing meaning from the printed page and interpret the information

appropriately. Consequently, students will need to read the text two or

three

times

to get even approximate sense. The reading is very difficult for th.c students tbat

they caOtlOt comprehend well.

Reading is a necessary skill that any Ieamer needs, unfortunately, how to

teaching rending bas not been given due care in the

school

The result in such

case, students lacked motivation to rend, even if they read, they show negative

attitudes such as they are not interest to reading or they are lazy to answer the

questions according to the text. 111e phenomenon can be seen from the data that is

obtained from Madrasah Aliyah Negeri I Tukengon Kabupaten Aceh Tengah. ll

showed that the students' achievement in reading skill of competence standard is

4

Table 1.1

Tbe Mean oft be StudenU' Score in English Subjed on UN Examination at MAN 1 Takengon IUbupalen Aceb Tengah

No. Academic Year _{Students' Score}

Lowest Score Highest Score

I. 2009 6.20 8.40

2. 2010 7.20 9.00

3.

2011 6.40 9.60

From the Table 1.1 it can be assumed that the students' score in English is

still low. From 2009 to 20 II, th score of English subject is 6.40 in 20 II academic

year.

These situations

was

caused by mnny factors. It can be from the students'

internal and external factors. The students' internal factor, such as age,

intelligence, ability, learning style, interest, attitude, motivation, self-efficacy and

o ther factors. The external factor includes teachers, coviroruncnt, materials,

strategy and o ther factors.

From the pheoomenon above, the teachers should have some strategies in

improving the students' skill in English. The application of the strntegy that used

by teacher must give further chance fo r the students. As a teacher, we need to

improve the quality of teaching process in the classroom. The teaching-learning

process will he interesting if the sttodents are active in responding the teacher's

stimuli and it can be done by offering some strategies that force them to

[image:19.516.29.447.50.561.2]

s

McNamara (2007:6) defines reading comprehension strategy us a

cognitive or behavioral action that is enacted under particular contextual

co:>ditions, with the goal of improving some aspect of comprehension. It means

that the successful readen know wllco and how to use deliberate strategies to

repair comprehension.

There is a great evidence of the in1portance of reading strategies. The

implication is that teaching reading strategies to struggling readers may be a key

toward helping them to improve comprehension. Teaching reading comprehension

fiom the illtemctive penpective consists of developing teaming strategies for

relation previously acquired knowledge towards the concepts of a text, monitoring

one's comprehension of text. and teaming bow to recognize uld knowledge with

knowledge ill the texL

Instructional strategies determine the approach for achieving the leamillg

objectives and arc included

in

the pre-instructional activities, information

presentation, Ieamer activities, testing, and follow-through. 'The strategies are

usually tied to the needs and interests of students to enhance learning and arc

based on many types of teaming styles. There arc many instnoctional strategies

which can be applied in tenching reading, in this study the researcher raises two

Strategies that have been done successfully by some linguist experts to be applied

to improve students' reading achievement in developed countries, they are

6

The

first

suategy is SCROL, SCROL is stand for

'Survey, Connection,

Read, Outline,

and

Look bock·.

This is a reading comprehension suategy designed for students to help

them

to read and Wlderstand textbooks and

a

variety of

soun:e

books,

the

strategy encourages students to

use

text headings to aid

their

comprehension and help them find and remember important information.

SCROL i~ strategic training for using text headings to improve students' processing of content. This is

a

reading comprehension strntegy for students to

help enable them to read and understand

a

variety of

source

books. It teaches

students to

use

text beadings to aid

their

comprehension and help them fmd and

remember

important information.

The other one is POSSE strategy, POSSE is stand for •

Predict, Organize,

&aarch, Summarize, and EvaluoJe

'.

POSSE is

a

reading strategy deals with

processing expository text. It is designed to activate students' prior knowledge

about o topic and to li~ it with new information contained in the text. Using the

POSSE procedure, students

are

trained to

predict

what happens in

a

text,

organize

those predictions,

search

for main ideas,

s11mmarize

the ideas, and

evaluote

the

text.

In the

process

of t.eaching and learning, it is not enough by applying some

suategies, to improve the qU3lity of teaching process in the classroom it is

important to included tne students' internal factors. such as self-efficacy.

Researchers have demonstrated that students with a high sense of

self-efficacy Lend to team and achieve more than students with low self-enicacy, even

7

Wl especially important construct, given that al!ention to Sll'ategy instruction alone

is not sufficient to produce llUIXimum reading growth.

In this research, there is M interest to conduct a research on in ~ iru c ti o nal

Sll'alegics and students' self-efficacy in order to develop students' achie vement in

reading comprebension. Finally she will

ftnd the best slnllegy

between them

that

can

be well-applied to improve the students' achievement in reading

comprehension.

1.2 The Problems or Srudy

In line with the background of study, the problems of study can be

fonnulated

as

the following:

I.

Do

instructional strategies significantl y affect studentS' achievement in

reading comprehension?

2.

Docs self-efficacy significantly affect students' achievement in reading

comprehension?

3. Is there any interaction between instructional strategies and self-efficacy to

students' achievement in reading comprehe ns ion?

1.3

The Objectives o f S t u dy

SCROI. and POSSE strategies are about reading strutegies and more

particularly, about bow reading strategies can be successfully ta ught and what

goes into successful teaching of reading strategies. Reading strategies are interest

not only for wbat they reveal about

the ways

readers manage their interaction with

8

reading comprehension. Related to the research problem specified before, this

study attempts to

ft.nd

out whether:

I. instructional strategies signiticantly affect students' achievement in

reading comprehension,

2. self-efficacy significantly affect students' achievement in reading

comprehension, and

3. there is any interaction between instructional strategies and self-efficacy to

students' achievement in readin,g comprehension.

1.4 The Scope of Study

There are o ther factors that enable the readers to comprehend a I'CIIding

text such as attitude, assumption toward reading, backg round knowledge,

language abilities, thinking abilities, purpose fo r reading, and affection that can be

citied the factors that affect reading texL This study deals with the instructional

strategies in reading comprehension. There are many instructional strategies that

can be applied in teaching reading and this study is limited to the SCROL and

POSSE strategies. There is students' sclf-etlicacy which in this study self-efficacy

is limited to high self-efficacy and low self-efficacy.

1be

study is focused on the

effect of instructional strategies and self-efficacy on students' achievement in

9

l.S The Significance or study

1l>e

research fmdings rue expceted to be useful for the development of

theory and practice, especially in the focus to improve the students' reading

comprehension. lbeoretically, it can add valuable finding in tlte area of teaching

reading and give positive contribution for teachers of English in ove-rcoming the

student's problem in reading comprehension. Students can use the srategies in

developing their reading comprehension and English teachers a~ giving

contribution for

them

to improve their ability in reading comprehension.

Practically, teacher may decide the

best

strategies and students take benefit being

taught. It is also expected

that

this lhesis will give contribution for those who are

CHAPTERV

MILIK PERPUSTAKAA N

UNIMEO

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICA TlONS AND S UGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the rcscach findings and discussion. it can be concluded that:

I. The students' achievement in reading ta11ght by using SCROL strntegy is

higher than of the students taught by using POSSE strategy.

2. llle students' achievement in

reading

that have high self..:fficacy is higber

than that have low self..:fficacy.

3. There is significant interaction between instructional strategies and

self-efficacy to students' achievement in reading comprehension.

4 . There is an interaction between SCROL and POSSE strategies and

etlicacy to students' achievement in reading comprehension. High

self-efficacy students showed significant effect on ~ding comprchnesioo, if

they were taught by using SCROL strategy. Whereas low sclf..:fficacy

students

sho"'-ed

significant effect in their reading comprehension, if they

were taught by using POSSE stratCb'Y·

5.2 Ln1plications

The finding of this study gives implication to the English teacher and the

s tudents who want to improve their achievement in reading comprehension. This

study bas tested reading comprehension instructional strategies; they are SCROL

93

students in order to know which strategies are suitable for them in improving the

students' achievement in reading comprehension.

The first finding,~ of this research reveals

that

instructional strntegies

significantly affect students' achievement in reading comprehension. Thus, it

implies that English teachers to apply SCROL and POSSE strategies because it

designed for students to add their comprehension. English teacher can use various

teaching strategies in order to enhance the students' reading comprehension since

the successful of reading influenced by many factors.

Second finding of this research reveals that students' self-efficacy

significantly affect students' achievement in reading comprehension. lt gives

implication to the English teachers that they should be aware of their students'

self-efficacy. The identification of students' self-efficacy can be a pnsilive step in

achieving l=ing goal. Understanding that students have different self-efficacy is

the key to success of the teaching since the teacher can decide which teaching

strategy is suitable to be applied for the students.

Finally, the third research finding of this study if there is significant

interaction between instructional strategies and students' self-efficacy on students'

achievement in reading comprehension. It leads to the implication that teaching

stmtcgics that applied by teachers should realatc to students self-efficacy. fiy

knowing the students' efficacy, which is divided into high and low

self-efficacy, the teachers can help their students to overcome their problem in

teaching learning process. English teachers are suggested using SCROL strategy

94

comprehension. For low self-efficacy, English teachers are suggested using

POSSE

strategy.

5.3

Suggestions

In connection to the conclusions, there are some suggestions staged as the

following:

I.

English teachers are recommer.ded using

SCROL

and

POSSE

sttategies in

teaching reading comprehension since these two strategies can improve

studeniS' achievement in reading comprehension.

2. For class dominated by high self-efficacy students, English teachers

are

recommended using

SCROL

strategy. for class dominated by low

self-efficacy, English teachers are advisable using

POSSE

strategy.

3.

English teachers should encourage low self-efficacy studeniS to participate

in study English in order to get better achievement in reading

comprehension.

4. Other researchers can develop further study in the area of

SCROL

and

POSSE

strategy that will improve studcniS' achievement in reading

95

REFERENCES

Alexander, 1. E. 199&. Teaching Reading. Boston: Foresman.

Algarabel, S., &. Dasi, C. 2001. The Definition of Achie>'ement and the

Construes/on of Tests for its Measurement. Madrid: Spanish Mioistty of

Education.

Ary, D. 1979. /ntroduction to Research Education. United Slate of America: Ilolt, Rencbal and Winston, Inc.

Bandura, A. 1986. Social Foundation.t of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice Hall.

-::----:-..,-·1994. Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramacbucdrnn (Ed.). 1998.

Encyclopedia of human behavior (VoL 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.

(Reprinted in H. Friedman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press.

_ _ _ _ .1996. Self-efficacy:

n,e

Exercise IJ[Control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A., B:u-barunelli, C., Cuprara, 0 . V., &. Pastorelli, C. 2001. Self-Efficacy Beliefs as Shapers of Children's Aspiration.! and Career Trajectories. Children De>elopment, 72 (I), 187-206.

Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An lnteracti•·e Appr(JOCh to

Language Pedai:of!Y. White Plains, New Yodc: Addison Wesley

Longman, Inc.

---,---,· 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. While Pluins, New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Bums., Paul. C., Roc., Betty. D., &. Ross, E. P. 1984. Teaching Reading In

Today 's Elementary Schools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Durkin, D. 1981. Rending Comprehension Instruction in five Basal Readers Series. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 5 I 5-544.

Goodman, K. 1976. Behind the Eye: WhaJ happen In Reading: In the reading

Process and Program. Urbana: National Council of Teacher of English.

_ _ _ _ . 1988. The Reading Process. In Carell P. L. Joanne, D. and Ouvid,

E. E (Eds).

Interactive Approache.Y to Second Language Reading.

96

Grant, R. 2000. Strategic Training for Using Text Heading to Improve Students' Processing of Content Journal of R~ading, 36 (6), 482-488.

Heilman, A. et al. 1981. Principle and Practices of Teaching Reading. Ohio:

Charles E. Merill.

Heslin, P. A., & Klebe, U. C. (2006). Self-efficacy. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.},

Encyclopedia of lndu.!triaVOrgorrizalionol Psychology (Vol. 2, pp.

705-708).

Knuth, R. A & Jones, B. F. 1991. Children as Strategic Readers. Oak Brook: NCRL.

Lems, K. et al. 2010. Teaching Reading to English Lo.rguoge Learners. New York: The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc.

McNamara. D. S. 2007. Reading CompreMn.sion Strategies: Theori~s.

lnt~rventions and Technologies. New Jersey: Lawrence Elbaum Associates, Inc.

McNeil, J. D. 1992. Reading Comprehension. New Direction for Classroom

Practice. New York: I larper Collins Publishers.

National Reading Panel. 2000. In G. E. Tompkins. 2010. Reading Comprehen.rlon

Factors. USA: Pearson Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall.

Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language TeachinK anJ Learning. Boston: Heinle &

Heinle Publishers.

Nunall, C. 1996. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. eeond Edition. Oxford: Heinemann.

Pajares, F. & Valiantc. G. 1997. Influence of Self- etlieaey on Elemenlary Students' Writing.Jour;ral of Education Research, 90, 353-360.

Payne. B. D. I 992. Basal Reader Josuuction: Effects of Comprehension Monitoring Training on Reading comprehension, strategy use and attitude.

Reading Research anJ Instruction, 32 (/), 29-38

Pintricb, P.R., & De

Groot.,

E. V. 1990. Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance. Journal of

Education P.1ychology, 82 (I). 22-40

Reid, R., & Torri 0. L. 2006. Strategy Instruction for Students with /..earning

Disabilitie.t. New York: The Guilford Press, A Division of Guilford

97

Rumelhart, 0.

E.

(1982). Schcmatft: The building blocks of cognition. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 3-26). New Yotk, DE: International Reading Association.

Schunk. 0. 1985. Self-efficacy and Cognitive Achievement: Implications for S tudents with Learning Problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22,

14- 22.

Stipek, 0. J. 2002. Motil'(Jtion to Learn: Inregrating Theory and Practice. Boston:

A Pearson Education Company.

Sudjana.

2001.

Metoda Swtisko. Bandung: Tarsi to

Sudiyono, A.

2009.

Pengantar SlatistiA: Pendidikon. Jak.ana: Rajawali Press.

Tompkins, G. E

2010.

Reading Comprehension Factors. USA: Pearson Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall.

Westwood, P. 2008. What Teacher need to blow about Reading and Writing Difficulties. Australia: ACER Press.

Widdowson, H. G. 1983. Learning Purpose and Language

Use.

Oxford: Oxford Uruvc.rsity Press in Ahmad Al-Issa. 2006. Journal of College Teaching and Learning.

J

(7), 4/-4 5.

Wingfield, A,. & Guthrie, J.

1997.

Relations of Children's Motivation for Reading to Amount and Breadth of 1heir Reading. Journal of Educafionlll Psychology, 89, 420-423.

Zimmerman, B. 1995.

Self-efficacy and Educational /Xve/opment.

In

A.

Bandura