THE USE OF SHARED-READING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION.

(1)

THE USE OF SHARED-READING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE

STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION

(A Quasi-Experimental Study Involving Seventh Grade Students of a Junior High School in Cirebon, West Java)

Thesis

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

Master’s Degree in English Education

By M U D A S I R

1204684

ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that the board of supervisors has approved the thesis of

Mudasir entitled “THE USE OF SHARED READING STRATEGY TO

IMPROVE STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION (A Quasi

-Experimental Study Involving Seventh Grade Students of a Junior High School in Cirebon, West Java).

Bandung, August 2014

Main Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Nenden Sri Lengkanawati, M.Pd. NIP. 195111241985032001

Co-Supervisor

Bachrudin Musthafa, M.A., Ph.D NIP. 195703101987031001

Examiner I

Dr. Rd. Safrina Noorman, M.A. NIP: 196207291987032003

(3)

Prof. Emi Emilia, M.Ed., Ph.D. NIP. 196609161990012001

DECLARATION

I hereby certify that this thesis entitled “THE USE OF SHARED READING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ READING

COMPREHENSION (A Quasi-Experimental Study Involving Seventh Grade Students of a Junior High School in Cirebon, West Java)” is completely my own work. I am fully aware that I have quoted some statements and ideas from various sources. All quotations are properly acknowledged in the text.

Bandung, August 2014

(4)

(5)

Mudasir, 2014

The use of shared reading strategy to improve student reading comprehension

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

THE USE OF SHARED READING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE

STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION

M u d a s i r 1204684

ABSTRACT

This study aims to investigate how shared reading strategy was implemented in the teaching and learning process and how the students responded to this strategy. It was conducted in a class of seventh grades of a junior high school in Cirebon Regency. The experimental group was treated using shared reading strategy and the control group was not. This study applied a quasi-experiment with survey design. The data were obtained from tests, questionnaires, and interview. The tests were conducted to find out the effects of shared reading strategy on improving

students’ reading comprehension. It was found that the students in the

experimental group were better than those in the control group in improving their reading comprehension. The questionnaires were administered to identify the

students’ responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy and showed that almost all of the students were interested, motivated, and becoming more active in the learning process.

(6)

Mudasir, 2014

CHAPTER I I N T R O D U C T I O N

1.1 Background of the Study

Reading is very important for all of us. We can obtain information, knowledge, pleasure, and broaden our horizon by reading. Reading, especially for students of junior high schools, is very useful to understand all the lessons taught at school because the more they read, the better they get. Reading, related to reading the English texts, also has a positive effect on students’ vocabulary knowledge, on their spelling and on their writing (Harmer, 2007).

As stated in the standard competence of English in international standard schools (Depdiknas, 2007), there are four language skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The skills must be learned by students of secondary schools to develop their English. In the reading skill, the students are expected to be able to deduce meaning from simple transactional and interpersonal written texts, in formal and informal situations, in different text types such as: recount, narrative, procedure, descriptive, report, in daily life contexts (Depdiknas, 2007 in Emilia, 2010).

However, the problem with reading skill exists to the students who learn English as a foreign language and read the English reading texts for the first time, for example: the Indonesian seventh grade junior high school students. They will face difficulties in mastering English vocabularies, reading fluency and comprehending the English reading texts. Another problem is that the students have their own local languages or Bahasa Indonesia and English is a foreign language.

(7)

Mudasir, 2014

The use of shared reading strategy to improve student reading comprehension

foreign language (Kasim, 2012 in Afifah, 2012). This makes the students, who continue their study to junior high school, become unfamiliar with English language yet and the English teachers in seventh grade will have to deal with the difficulty in teaching them English. Here, the teachers should be well-informed, creative, and innovative (Depdiknas, 2007) in understanding and implementing theories, approaches, methods, models, media, or findings in teaching students. Therefore, the teachers are required to have opportunities to experiment the various approaches, models or methods (Arends and Kilcher, 2010 in Suarman, 2013). One of them is shared reading strategy.

Shared reading is a teaching strategy and has its bases in learning experiences similar to the bedtime story situation (Holdaway, 1979) wherein the students join in the reading of a big book or other enlarged text as guided by a teacher or other experienced reader (Holdaway, 1979; Tierney, Readence, & Dishner, 1990; Dahl, et al., 2001). The teacher exemplifies the students how to read the words by reading the text aloud by using a pointer to track the text (Tompkins, 2006 in Reading, 2008) and uses illustrations to support the English vocabulary development, to integrate verbal interactions (Gibbons, 1993) and to build background knowledge and experiences to support students’ reading comprehension (Herrell & Jordan, 2004).

Some studies have been conducted to investigate shared reading strategy to solve the reading problems and to prove that shared reading positively affects student achievement. The first is the positive impact that shared readings held on

kindergarten students’ and children’s vocabulary (Coyne, Simmons, Kame’enui,

(8)

Mudasir, 2014

Shared reading is also suitable for older readers, to support fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (Herrell & Jordan, 2004).

Although the previous studies above described the success of shared reading strategy for beginning readers, most of the studies were conducted in other countries. There were only some essays related to shared reading strategy from Indonesia. They are about the influence of the shared reading towards inside-out domain in emergent literacy (Kusumaningtyas, 2007), shared reading strategy based on multimedia in relation to reading comprehension in elementary school (Safitri, 2012), and the implementation of shared reading in reading the story text for children (Munggaran 2013). They were not conducted in English lesson class, written in Bahasa Indonesia, and conducted in elementary schools. So, the researcher thinks it is still important to conduct a study on shared reading strategy in a higher level. It is expected that this strategy would be suitable for the seventh grade students of junior high schools in Indonesia because it can support the

students’ reading fluency, vocabulary mastery, and reading comprehension in

English reading texts (Gibbons, 1993; Herrell & Jordan, 2004).

Therefore, considering the benefits of shared reading strategy, this study

attempts to explain the effects of shared reading strategy on students’ reading

comprehension and their responses towards its implementation.

1.2 Research Questions

Based on the explanation above, the study was intended to answer the following research questions.

1. Can shared reading strategy improve students’ reading comprehension? 2. What are the students’ responses towards the implementation of shared

reading strategy?

1.3 Purpose of the Study

(9)

Mudasir, 2014

1. whether shared reading strategy can improve students’ reading comprehension; and

2. the students’ responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy.

1.4 Scope of the Study

The study was focused on the use of shared reading strategy to improve

the students’ reading comprehension. The subjects of the study consist of two classes of seventh grade students of a junior high school in Arjawinangun, Cirebon, West Java, and they were divided into two groups: the experimental group and the control group.

1.5 Significance of the Study

This study is expected to provide its significance, at least in three points of view, as suggested by Creswell (2003).

Theoretically, this study is expected to enhance empirical support to the existing theories, literature, and scientific research findings of shared reading

strategy in teaching reading especially to improve students’ reading

comprehension.

Practically, by looking at the result of the study, it is expected that it can support to explain the benefits of the application of shared reading strategy in teaching reading. It is hoped that the teachers are able to replicate the study and apply shared reading strategy in their daily teaching learning process to improve

students’ reading comprehension.

(10)

Mudasir, 2014

1.6 Definition of Key Terms

The key terms used in this study were shared reading strategy and reading comprehension. First is shared reading strategy. It is a kind of strategy in teaching reading for young learners by reading books, charts, poetry, song lyrics, and other texts between teachers and students (Holdaway, 1979, Depree & Iverson, 1996, Tompkins, 1997). In this study, the shared reading strategy will be implemented in the selected class of seventh grade students of one of the junior high schools in Cirebon Regency as an experimental group in the teaching and learning process. A computer or laptop and a projector were used display the text on the screen in front of the students. It is to support and facilitate the teacher and students to read the text in big fonts on the screen so that they could see and read it easily and clearly. .

Secondly, reading comprehension is related to the students’ ability in

understanding the English texts given. In this study, the texts are in the types of descriptive and procedure and followed by a number of questions for each text.

1.7 Organization of the Thesis

(11)

Mudasir, 2014

(12)

Mudasir, 2014

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The previous chapter has presented the theoretical background of the study. It discusses literature review about reading comprehension, reading comprehension process, reading comprehension factors, teaching reading activities, assessing reading. It also discusses shared reading strategy, its purpose, its benefits, steps to implement it, and its previous studies.

This current chapter provides the information about the methodology of the research. It consists of: research site and participants, research design, subject of study, data collection methods from tests, questionnaire, and interview, and data analysis.

3.1 Research Site and Participants

The study was conducted in one of the junior high schools in Cirebon Regency, West Java province. There were some reasons why the school was chosen. Firstly, it was situated in the same town as the researcher. That way, the researcher could have the convenience in managing time and saving the cost in conducting the study. Secondly, the researcher was one of the teachers in this school. Therefore, the researcher had good and easy access to the site. Thirdly,

based on the researchers’ previous observation at the site, the English teachers in

the school had the necessary skill to help the researcher to implement the teaching procedures. Fourthly, some of its classes were equipped with computers, projectors, screens and sound systems. These could help the researcher to conduct the study since they were needed to display and enlarge the text on the screen in the teaching procedures.

(13)

Mudasir, 2014

The use of shared reading strategy to improve student reading comprehension

classes were chosen to be the samples of the study due to the time limitation and the permission from the school. The two classes were class E as the control group with 38 students and class F as the experimental group with 40 students. Both of them were chosen as the samples because: 1) they had the same English teacher 2) they were suggested by some teachers who taught them and 3) they had almost the same scores at the first daily test of English. According to Cohen, et al. (2007) for non-probability samples there are six strategies for survey sampling: 1) Convenience sampling, 2) Quota sampling, 3) Purposive sampling, 4) Dimensional sampling, 5) Snowball sampling, 6) Volunteer sampling, and 7) Theoretical sampling. In this study, the researcher applied purposive sampling because the sample was taken based on the specific needs and consideration. In purposive sampling, they explain that researchers handpick the cases to be included in the sample on the basis of their judgment of their typicality or possession of the particular characteristics being sought. In this way, researchers build up a sample that is satisfactory to their specific needs.

Besides, the participants were chosen based on their historical factors and pre-existing ability (Hatch & Farhady, 1982). Related to the historical factors, the participants had almost the same language learning experience background. They had been studying English at the same class for about half a year with the same teacher and the same materials. They had the same mother tongue, Bahasa Cirebon to speak and communicate with others, Bahasa Indonesia as their national language, and English was a foreign language for them. Considering the facts, the participants were assumed that they had the same prior knowledge (Hatch & Farhady, 1982). Also, they were selected based on the homogeneity of reading comprehension pre-test scores with no significant difference. In conclusion, they had similar pre-existing reading comprehension ability to be assigned as experimental and control groups.

(14)

Mudasir, 2014

The use of shared reading strategy to improve student reading comprehension

Based on the research questions and the purpose of the study (see Chapter I), the study was to investigate the hypothesis about the effects of using shared reading strategy to improve the students’ reading comprehension achievement. This study used a mixed method design combining both quantitative and qualitative instruments to complete the study. Mixed method design was the combination between two designs: quasi experimental and survey designs (Hatch & Farhady, 1982) involving both collecting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data (Creswell & Clark, 2007). In this study, the quasi-experimental design was applied to compare the effect of the independent variable: shared reading strategy on the dependent variable: reading comprehension. This type of research design has two groups: experimental and control without random sampling (Cohen, et al., 2007; Creswell, 2008, Nunan & Bailey, 2009). The experimental group was treated with shared reading strategy and the control group did not get any treatments. During the teaching programs, to obtain the additional evidence from this study, observations were conducted. After the teaching and learning processes, the questionnaires and interview were given to the students of experimental group and the teacher to know their responses towards the implementation of using shared reading strategy to elicit the better understanding of the findings (Creswell, 2008) and to obtain the students’ opinion about the effect of the teaching and learning process on their reading comprehension.

(15)

Mudasir, 2014

There were two groups of seventh grade students of a junior high school in this study. Both groups had six reading sessions with six reading texts taken from the National Examination files, from the internet and from some English textbooks for junior high school. Each session lasted for 80 minutes. The experimental group was treated by using shared reading strategy to comprehend the reading text given to answer the questions related to the text in the form of multiple choices, skimming, and scanning. On the other side, the control group did not get any treatments, in which the students were given some questions related to the text with skimming (before reading activities) or scanning (after reading activities). Post-test was given to both groups, the experimental group and the control group (see Chapter IV section 4.2).

To strengthen the validity of the study, however, this study also used questionnaires to support the understanding of the whole phenomena under the study (see appendices 6 and 7).

3.3 Data Collection

This section discusses the data collection methods. In this study, the researcher used several types of instruments: reading comprehension test (pre-test and post-test), observations, questionnaires and interview to collect the data. The term instrumentation (Tuckman, 1999, in Nunan & Bailey, 2009) refers to the ―measurement or observation procedures used during an experiment.‖ Instrumentation includes tests, questionnaires, observation system, elicitation devices, audio and videotaping—in short, any means of collecting data.

. 3.3.1 Reading Comprehension Test.

(16)

Mudasir, 2014

the background knowledge of the students’ reading comprehension before giving them the treatments. Meanwhile, the post-test was given at the end of the meeting.

It was conducted to see the effect of the teaching programs on the students’

comprehension (Brown, 2005). Besides, it was intended to find out the significant difference between the mean scores of the experimental and control groups (Hatch and Farhady, 1982) compared with the pre-test scores and it is used to find out the effect of the use of shared reading strategy to improve the students’ reading comprehension. Some exercises were also given to the students at the end of every treatment to assess the students’ comprehension of the text given.

Both of the pre-test and post-test were arranged in the form of reading texts with multiple-choice which contain 40 items. Multiple choice test is a form of assessment in which respondents are asked to select the best possible answer (or answers) out of the choices from a list. As suggested by Heaton (1988 in Syafri, 2011), the multiple choice test offers a useful way of testing reading comprehension. There are some reasons: 1) the scoring in a multiple choice test is easier, quicker, and more objective comparing to other types of tests, 2) when it is used in large population and in limited time, multiple choice is very efficient and effective, 3) the reliability of multiple choice is higher than essay test (Brown, 2001; Surapranata, 2004 in Syafri, 2011).

(17)

Mudasir, 2014

was used to find out and measure the effectiveness of shared reading strategy to improve the students’ ability in reading comprehension achievement.

Related to the validity, some efforts were taken to uphold the content and face validity. The validity of a test is the extent to which it measures what it is supposed to measure and nothing else (Heaton, 1990). The test must aim to provide a true measure of the particular skill which it is intended to measure. There are three types of validity as he stated: face validity, content validity, and construct validity. To maintain the content validity (Hatch & Farhady, 1982) the arrangement of the test items was accorded to the reading comprehension levels and basic competence of the content standard (Depdiknas, 2006). The test can be said to have face validity (Hughes, 2003) if its performance, its contents organization, and its items composition make it look valid. The test not only has a quick and reasonable guide but also to a great concern with statistical analysis. The form of pre-test and post-test in this study was a multiple choice test. It has the characteristics as mentioned above. It fulfilled face validity because it has the same number of indicators, a similar organization, more or less similar length of answer options, and use the same numbering (A, B, C, and D). It also gives a quick and reasonable guide and facilitates to conduct the statistical analyses as done in this study.

The test was also adjusted with the curriculum level for seventh grade students of junior high school in reading (Depdiknas, 2006): descriptive and procedure texts to measure the students’ reading comprehension. So, the test materials have the content validity. Besides, the test materials had been consulted and validated by the advisors of this study at school of Post Graduate Studies of Indonesia University. Related to the questionnaires, they had been consulted to the advisors to have validation. They were intended to have logical validity and could be categorized to be valid.

(18)

Mudasir, 2014

scores from an instrument should be nearly the same or stable on repeated administrations of the instrument and that they should be free from sources of measurement error and consistent. In line with Creswell, Hatch and Farhady (1982) define that reliability is the extent to which a test produces consistent results when administered under similar conditions. As suggested by Arikunto (2002), the reliability of the test can be categorized as follows: 0.00 – 0.20 (low), 0.21 – 0.40 (moderate), 0.41 – 0.70 (high), and above 0.70 (very high).

The data on the reliability of the test which was calculated by ANATES Version 4.0.9 presented the total of odd score and even score of the items from the pre-test and post-test of the experimental and control groups. With reference to the Appendix 2, the data showed that the reliability index of the experimental pre-test is 0.89 and control group pre-test is 0.85. Meanwhile, the reliability index of the experimental post-test is 0.87 and control group post-test is 0.91. Following Arikunto, both pre-test and post-test of experimental and control groups reliability indexes were above 0.70 which means they were categorized as high reliability. So, the test could be classified as reliable (see appendix 2).

About the difficulty levels, Karnoto (1996, in Syafri, 2011) states that the calculating of items difficulty indexes should be classified into the criteria as follows: 1) 0% – 15% = very difficult, 2) 16% – 30% = difficult, 3) 31% – 70% = medium, 4) 71% – 85% = easy, and 5) 86% – 100% = very easy. By using ANATES Version 4.0.9 to calculate the item difficulty, it could be seen that there were the items with the following categories: very difficult, difficult, medium, easy, and very easy.

(19)

Mudasir, 2014

easy items, no one got very difficult or difficult items (see appendix 3). So, there were only 4 very easy items that would be repaired or eliminated from the test.

The items of the discriminating power index were also calculated by using ANATES Version 4.0.9. The data showed that the classification of the questions could be very good, good, medium, bad, or very bad. As suggested by Gronlund (1982, in Syafri, 2011) that in calculating the index of discrimination power items,

they could be classified into the criteria as follows: 1) D ≤ 0 = very bad, 2) 0,00 ˂

D ≤ 0.20 = bad, 3) 0.20 ˂D ≤ 0.40 = medium, 4) 0.40 ˂D ≤ 0.70 = good, and 5)

0.70 ˂D ≤ 1.00 = very good.

The resulting data of discrimination power analyses items showed that of all the pre-test discrimination power items; 30 items were good, 9 items were medium, 1 item was bad, no item was very good or very bad (see Appendix 3). So, only 1 item was fixed or eliminated. Meanwhile, from the data of the discrimination power items of post-test consisted 25 items were good, 9 items were medium, 6 items were bad, and no item was very good or very bad.

There were two variables in this study: independent variable and dependent variable. Nunan and Bailey (2009) explain ―when the researcher is testing the influence of one variable on another, the variable doing the influencing is called the independent variable, while the one being influenced is called dependent variable‖. Therefore, in this study could be explained that shared reading strategy was the independent variable and the students’ ability in reading comprehension was the dependent variable. This study has its characteristics as shown in the following table.

Table 3.2

The Characteristics of the Study Dependent Variable Reading Comprehension

Measurement Score (Interval)

Independent Variable Shared Reading Strategy

Measurement Treatment for the Experimental Group

(20)

Mudasir, 2014

post-test scores of experiment and control groups.

Research Hypothesis (H1) There is a significant difference between reading

post-test scores of experiment and control groups. Significant Level 0.05; two –tailed

Design Pre-test and Post-test

Statistical Procedure Independent t-test

3.3.2 Questionnaires

The questionnaires were employed after all the teaching and learning processes were finished. They were administered to the students in the experimental group as the population of the study and to the teacher who was involved in the activities. They were selected to explore the reasons and identify any comments from the students’ and teacher’s responses (Creswell, 2008). In this study, the questionnaires were aimed to survey the students’ and teacher’s responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy in the teaching and learning processes.

The questionnaire was developed based on the guideline from Oppenheim (1982) who states that the purpose of the questionnaire is attitude measurement, while the attitude is defined as a state of readiness, a tendency to act or react in a certain manner when confronted with certain stimuli. The questionnaires here were the printed form of data collection, which include questions or statements to which subject is expected to respond (Seliger & Shohamy, 1989). The questionnaire was presented in the form of Likert-Scale Questionnaire since it was simple, versatile and reliable (Dornyei, 2003, p.36). A Likert scale measured the extent to which a person agrees or disagrees with the question. The most common scale was 1 to 5. The scale will be 1 as ―strongly disagree‖, 2 as ―disagree‖, 3 as ―not sure‖, 4 as ‖agree‖, and 5 as ‖strongly agree‖.

(21)

Mudasir, 2014

students’ interest and activeness, vocabulary, language skills and structure. They were arranged randomly to ensure the students’ consistency, real perception, and to prevent guessing (Oppenheim, 1982). In this study, the questionnaires were in the type of close ended question (Creswell, 2008). It was intended to make it easier in processing and scoring the data by calculating the results related to the mean, frequency, percentages. The questionnaires were written in Bahasa Indonesia in order to avoid the misunderstanding of the students in comprehending all the statements given. Clear instructions were also given at the beginning of this session to the students both orally and written to make them easier for the students to complete the statements. The questionnaires can be seen in Appendix 6.

3.3.3 Interview

Interview was done at the end of activities after analyzing the post-test score and questionnaire. It was the interaction between the interviewer and the interviewee (Kvale, 2007 in Liamputtong, 2009) which aim to elicit rich information from the perspective of the participants in their own words, thoughts, perceptions, feelings and experiences (Liamputtong, 2009) in the type of focused group interviews (Creswell, 2008). In this study, it was intended to elicit the teachers’ and the students’ opinion about the effects of shared reading strategy on their teaching and learning reading strategies. It was done after the post-test and questionnaire were administered.

(22)

Mudasir, 2014

facilitation of the strategies to their learning and their reading comprehension. Here, the students and the teachers were given enough time to think and answer the questions. Nine students from experimental group were chosen purposefully (Creswell, 2008) from low, middle, and high achievers taken from the results of the post-test.

Table 3.1

The Research Questions and the Instruments

No. Research Questions Instruments

1 Can Shared Reading Strategy improve

students’ reading comprehension?

Reading Comprehension Test

2 What are the students’ responses towards the

implementation of the Shared Reading Strategy?

Questionnaire

Interview

3.4 Data Analysis

In this section, the data analyses were discussed. The analyses include the data collection techniques employed: tests, questionnaire and interview.

3.4.1 Pre-test and Post-test

(23)

Mudasir, 2014

one, SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) was originally developed by Nie, Bent and Hull (1970). It was used to calculate and analyze the quantitative data quickly and easily by clicking the menu on the software. It was to analyze the difference of means among the data from pre-test and post-test through an independent t - test.

All the data taken from the pretest and posttest of reading comprehension tests in the form of interval data were analyzed with an independent t - test by using case 2 t-test formula. It is used to compare the performance of two groups: experimental and control groups with the level significant of 0,05 (Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991). The means of the two groups were compared to find out their significant difference. There might be the difference between the mean score of the two groups if there is any. After the t-value has been obtained, the significant difference can be seen.

After the tobserved was found, the next step was to communicate the value

against the t-critical value in the t distribution table and to find out the degree of freedom, df = (n1 – 1 + n2– 1). To see whether Ho (null hypotheses) is accepted

or rejected (Hatch and Farhady, 1982), the hypothesis testing was conducted. Ho

will be accepted if 1) there is no significant difference between the pre-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups; 2) there is no significant difference between the post-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups. On the contrary, Ho will be rejected if 1) there is a significant difference between the

pre-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups; and 2) there is a significant difference between the post-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups. The results of the reading comprehension pre-test and post-test will be discussed in Chapter 4.

The procedures of analyzing the data from the pre-test and post-test were as follows.

(24)

Mudasir, 2014

First, create a new file, choose and fill the number of participants and test items, enter the data related to the coded names of participants, enter the key answers into ANATES V.4.0.9. Enter the students’ answers in their columns one by one. The correct answers were scored, one correct answer got one score. To have percentage points, the sum of the correct answer was divided by the number of test items. Lastly, the reliability of the test, the average, the high and low achievers, discrimination power, the level of difficulty, and distracters’ quality of the items were analyzed automatically by clicking the menu and the data were saved in ANATES V.4.0.9.

2. Using SPSS V.19 to analyze independent t-test.

The SPSS V.19 software was utilized to calculate and analyze statistically the total scores gained from ANATES V.4.0.9. It was used to analyze the tests, normality test, homogeneity test, and t-independent test. This analysis was intended to identify the effect of the use of shared reading strategy in improving the students’ reading comprehension in general in the teaching and learning processes. The independent t-tests were chosen because there were two independent groups, the experimental and control groups (Hatch & Farhady, 1982; Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991). Since the participants consisted of more than 30 students, it was considered appropriate because the data were interval and assumed to have a normal distribution.

3.4.2 Questionnaire

(25)

Mudasir, 2014

comprehension. Then, the close-ended questions were analyzed quantitatively by using descriptive statistics in terms of mean, frequency, and percentage know the

students’ responses to the implementation of using shared reading strategy in their

learning processes.

To analyze the result of the questionnaire, the scores were in the form of Likert scale that measured the extent to which a person agrees or disagrees with the question. The score scale was 1 to 5. The scale was 1 as ―strongly disagree‖, 2 as ―disagree‖, 3 as ―not sure‖, 4 as ‖agree‖, and 5 as ‖strongly agree‖ (Dornyei, 2002; Creswell, 2008). All students’ checks were presented in the recapitulation table (see Appendices 6 and 7). The result of the analysis will be discussed in Chapter V.

3.4.3 Interview

The interview was conducted after all the teaching and learning processes were over. It was intended to answer the second research question, namely: what are the students’ responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy. The data taken from the interview were interpreted and described to support the findings for the research question. The recorded data were transcribed wherein the participants, the students’ and the teacher’s names, were coded or replaced with pseudonyms and symbols in the transcription to protect privacy (Silverman, 1993 in Suarman, 2013) and to guarantee the confidentiality (Kvale, 1996). After being transcribed, the data were categorized into themes which became the main concern of this study. Then, the obtained data were presented in a condensed body of information (Emilia, 2005) (see Appendices 9a and 9b).

3.8 Concluding Remarks

(26)

Mudasir, 2014

(27)

Mudasir, 2014

CHAPTER V

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS OF DATA FROM TESTS, QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEW

Chapter IV has presented information about how the implementation of shared reading strategy and non-shared reading strategy in teaching reading. It talked about the stages of the study and the comparison of the teaching procedures of shared and non-shared reading strategy.

This chapter presents the data obtained from the data collection techniques: the tests, questionnaires, and interview. They were reported and discussed independently. Meanwhile, the discussions section discussed the summarizing and interpretations of the results of the study.

5.1 Findings

This section reported the data gained from the tests, questionnaires, and interview. The finding of the reading comprehension tests (see Section 5.2) was aimed to answer the first research question: “Can Shared Reading Strategy improve students‟ reading comprehension?” The data showed that there was a significant difference between the post-test mean of the experimental and the control groups. It indicates that the use of shared reading strategy in teaching reading could be considered effective in improving the students‟ reading comprehension. Meanwhile, the findings from the questionnaire and interview were to answer the second research question: “What are the students‟ responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy?” The data showed that the students gave highly positive responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy in teaching reading. These findings from the questionnaire and interview (which will be discussed in Section 5.3 and 5.4) support the finding of the tests.

(28)

Mudasir, 2014

In this section, the findings from post-test scores of the experimental and control groups in reading comprehension will be presented successively. The presentation is related to the research questions (see Chapter I section 1.2): the effect of shared reading strategy on improving students‟ reading comprehension in general.

5.2.1 Post-test Scores

As mentioned in Chapter III (see section 3.3.1), the post-test was conducted after all the teaching programs which included the pre-test were done. It was one to see the effect of the use of shared reading strategy on the students‟ reading comprehension. The results of the post-test of both the experimental and the control groups were analyzed using the software of ANATES V. 4.0.9, and SPSS V.19. Both groups gained different scores after having the treatments. They got higher scores than they did in the pre-test. The results of the post-test can be seen in the following table.

Table 5.1: Descriptive Statistics of the Result of Post-test Scores of Experimental and Control Groups

Data N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Post-test

scores

Experiment Group 40 30.40 6.770 1.070

Control Group 38 26.32 6.739 1.093

(29)

Mudasir, 2014

of 38 students), the normality test was not necessary. As suggested by Hatch and Farhady (1982), the distribution of scores of random sample is close enough to a normal distribution if N (number of cases) is 30 or more. However, the standard deviation between the group was rather different. The experimental group gained 6.77 and the control group gained 6.74. It means that the variance or the range between the lowest score and the highest one in the experimental group was wider than in the control group (Hatch & Farhady, 1982).

Further, a Levene‟s test (F test) and an independent t-test analysis were done (Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991) to see the difference of means between the experimental and the control groups. The analyses were aimed to find out the equality of variances of both populations as the basis for analyzing the t-test for equality of means and the significance of difference between the means of the experimental and the control groups (Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991).

In the analysis, the following null hypothesis (H0) was tested.

H0 : There is no significant difference between the group applying

Shared Reading Strategy and the group applying non-shared reading strategy in their reading comprehension

By looking at Table 5.2, based on the Levene (F) test of reading comprehension post-test scores, it was found that the equality of variances was .331 and the level of probability was .567. This level of probability was greater than .05, (F = 0.331, p ޓ 0.05) indicating the equality of variances of the scores of both groups. This means that the t-test assumption was attained.

Table 5.2: Independent Sample t-Test of the Reading Comprehension Scores of Experimental and Control Groups

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df

S ig . (2 -tailed ) M ea n Diffe re n ce S td . Err o r Diffe re n

ce 95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

(30)

Mudasir, 2014

Da

ta

Equal variances

assumed

.331 .567 2.669 76 .009 4.084 1.530 1.037 7.132

Equal variances

not assumed

2.669 75.830 .009 4.084 1.530 1.037 7.132

Meanwhile, based on the data analysis from the independent t-test SPPSS V.19, Table 4.5 above shows that t-value was = 2.669 with degrees of freedom (n1 + n2-2 = 78-2 = 76, obtained t-table = 1.991 with α = 0.05 and the Sig. (2 -tailed) = 0.009 ޒ 0.05. Thus, it can be concluded that t-value was higher than the alpha (α = 0.05). It could be explained that there was a significant difference between the post-test mean scores of the experimental and control groups (Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991). Thus, Ho (null hypothesis) was rejected meaning that there

was a significant difference between the two groups in their reading comprehension.

The above finding supports of the benefits and positive effect of applying shared reading strategy in teaching and learning reading comprehension. This is in line with the previous studies which indicated that shared reading influenced students‟ reading comprehension ability and reading motivation (Leou et al., 2009), and engaged young readers with text through shared reading experiences (Honchell & Schulz, 2012).

(31)

Mudasir, 2014

(2011, 2013), Ukrainetz et al. (2000), Justice et al. (2005), Ziolkowski and Goldstein (2008), Levya et al. (2012) and Honchell and Schulz (2012).

5.2.2 Summary of Discussion of Data from Test.

Comparing the results from pre-test and post-test scores, the data analysis of pre-test mean scores from the independent t-test (see Table 4.4 in Chapter IV, section 4,2,2) shows that the mean score of Class 7F as the experimental group was 23.95, and the mean score of Class 7E as the control group was 23.89 Meanwhile, the data analysis of post-test mean score (see Table 5.1 section 5.2.2) shows that the mean experimental group was 30.40 and the mean score of the control group was 26.32. By looking at the explanation above, there were significant increases of both groups from their pre-test mean scores to their post-test mean scores. The experimental group‟s mean score increased from 23.95 to 30.40. It means that there was an increase of 6.45 points, while the control group‟s increased from 23.89 to 26.32. It means that there was an increase of 2.43 points. From the explanation above, it shows that the experimental group with shared reading strategy got a higher increase than the control group with non-shared strategy, although both groups had the same reading texts, practices, and assessments (see Chapter IV section 4.2.1). As suggested by Hatch and Farhady (1982) and Hatch and Lazaraton (1991), the similarities of the texts were to maintain the internal validity of the study. It indicates that the use of shared reading strategy had more a significant effect on the students‟ reading comprehension achievement scores than the non-shared reading strategy. It can be concluded that the use of shared reading strategy improved the students‟ reading comprehension compared to the use of non-shared reading strategy. This is in line with the results of the previous studies done by Coyne et al. (2004), Farrant and Zubrick (2011, 2013), Ukrainetz et al. (2000), Justice et al. (2005), Ziolkowski and Goldstein (2008), Levya et al. (2012) and Honchell and Schulz (2012).

(32)

Mudasir, 2014

The questionnaire was given to the forty students of the experimental group after the post-test activities (see Chapter III Section 3.3.2). This was aimed to measure the students‟ responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy to improve their reading comprehension as stated in the second research question (see Chapter I section 1.2). All of the students in the experimental group had to choose one out of five indicators for each questionnaire, depending on their own attitude towards the implementation of shared reading strategy. Following Dornyei (2002), they had to choose whether they were „strongly agree‟, „agree‟, „not sure‟, „disagree‟, or „strongly disagree‟ towards the statements given. All the students‟ responses were explained in appendix 7 by using a descriptive statistical analysis. The following is the explanation.

(33)

Mudasir, 2014

The use of shared reading strategy to improve student reading comprehension

(mean = 4.08, item number 13). No students responded „disagree‟ and „strongly disagree‟ to any of the each item. It could indicate that all students had a highly positive attitude to the implementation of shared reading strategy in the classroom activities.

5.3.1 The Effect of Shared Reading Strategy on the Students’ Interest and

Activeness

[image:33.595.107.518.366.662.2]

In terms of the students‟ interest and activeness, the analysis of the result of the questionnaire (see appendix 7.2) shows that the responses of 40 students of experimental group were positive towards 4 items of the questionnaires given. The results of the questionnaires on students‟ interest and activeness can be seen in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.3 The Questionnaire Responses on Students‟ Interest and Activeness towards the Implementation of Shared Reading Strategy.

No Statements

Students‟ Response

Number and %

Strongly

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly

Disagree Mean

1

Shared reading strategy helps to increase students' interest in learning English

Number 33 7 0 0 0

4.83

% 82.50 17.50 0.00 0.00 0.00

2

Shared reading Strategy helps students to enjoy learning English

Number 31 8 1 0 0

4.75 % 77.50 20.00 2.50 0.00 0.00

3

Shared reading strategy can motivate students to learn English

Number 26 10 4 0 0

4.55 % 65.00 25.00 10.00 0.00 0.00

4

Shared reading strategy can activate students to learn English in the classroom

Number 14 18 8 0 0

4.13

(34)

Mudasir, 2014

Recapitulation of all

Number 104 69 16 0 0

4.57

[image:34.595.108.517.84.148.2]

% 65 26.88 8.13 0.00 0.00

Table 5.1 shows the responses to the statement #1 „shared reading strategy increases their interest to learn English‟ were very positive. 40 students in the experimental group (100%) responded „strongly agree‟ and „agree‟. It indicates that almost all students agreed that shared reading strategy increased their interest to learn English.

This finding suggests that shared reading strategy helps the students increase their interest to learn English. As suggested by Musthafa (2008), the teacher should keep shared reading sessions lively, relaxed, non-competitive, and always focused on meaning to attract students‟ interest in reading. This atmosphere allows all of the students to learn and to participate to gain confidence in their ability to develop as language learners.

The responses of students to the statement #2 „learning by using shared reading strategy is very enjoyable‟ were different from statement #1. There were 31 students or 77.50% who responded „strongly agree’, 20% or 8 students chose „agree’, and only 2.5% or 1 student chose „neutral’ and its mean was 4.75. This fact indicates that shared reading strategy was responded positively by the students that it could help students enjoy learning English.

This finding indicates that the students realized the effect of shared reading strategy in that it could help them enjoy learning English. As suggested by Holdaway (1979) and Musthafa (2008), the text used and presented to the students should be interesting, enjoyable, nonthreatening, and presented in relaxed activities to maximizing the utility of the text.

(35)

Mudasir, 2014

chose „neutral’ and its mean was 4.55. These data indicate that most students were motivated to learn English with the use of shared reading strategy in their reading activities.

This finding implies that the teacher‟s role to motivate students is very important. As suggested by Herrell and Jordan (2004), the teacher should be able to motivate the students by asking them to say the words with him, help them discussing the certain difficult words, encourage them verbal interactions, and other activities that lead them motivated in learning English. These activities can be carried out in pre, while, and post-reading.

Further, the responses of the experimental group students to the statement #4 „they became more active in learning English with the use of shared reading‟ were positive. It can be seen by their responses with its mean 4.13, 45% or 18 students responded „agree’, 35% or 14 students „strongly agree’, and 20% or 8 students „neutral’. Not all students agreed with this statement. Nevertheless, it still indicates that most of the students agreed that shared reading strategy could motivate them to be more active in the classroom to learn English.

This finding suggests that shared reading strategy helped the students be more active in learning activities. As suggested by Musthafa (2008), the teacher can give opportunities for the students to attend what personally meaningful, interesting, and functional and to share it with others, and also enables them to share more about themselves by allowing them to have a self-correction and comprehend in a noncompetitive atmosphere.

(36)

Mudasir, 2014

[image:36.595.108.517.111.417.2]

Table 5.4 The Questionnaire Responses on Students‟ Vocabulary and Structure towards the Implementation of Shared Reading Strategy.

No Statements

Number and %

Strongly

Disagree Mean

5 Shared reading strategy helps students to pronounce English words better

Number 26 13 1 0 0

4.63

% 65.00 32.50 2.50 0.00 0.00

6

Shared reading strategy helps students to add more English words

vocabularies

Number 25 13 2 0 0

4.58

% 62.50 32.50 5.00 0.00 0.00

7

Shared reading strategy can improve students‟ ability to

understand English structure

Number 11 21 8 0 0

4.08 % 27.50 52.50 20.00 0.00 0.00

Number 62 47 11 0 0

4.43

% 51.67 39.17 9.16 0.00 0.00

[image:36.595.108.516.113.422.2]

(37)

Mudasir, 2014

item 6 in improving the students‟ vocabulary, in pronouncing and adding their new English vocabularies.

These findings suggest that in teaching reading, a teacher should teach the suitable strategies to predict the certain or unfamiliar words. The teacher (Herrell & Jordan, 2004; Tompkins, 2006; Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Victoria, Australia, 2008) can introduce the words by reading the text aloud, tracking them with the pointer to make sure that the students are looking at and saying the words. They will hear the teacher pronounce the words. A teacher can use the illustrations to help the students' understanding of the words or vocabulary and ask the students to point parts of the illustrations to show comprehension of words or events in the text.

Further, the responses to statement #7 „shared reading strategy can improve the students‟ ability to comprehend the English structure‟ varied. The students gave different responses to the above statement. The results of the questionnaire show that 27.50% or 11 students answered „strongly agree’, 52.50% or 21 of them „agree’, 20% or 8 of them „neutral’ and its mean was 4.08. This fact indicates that most of the students agreed that shared reading strategy could improve their ability to comprehend the English structure.

This finding implies, as suggested by Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Victoria, Australia (2008) that the teacher should also introduce and expose students to the English language structure and organizational features of written text in teaching reading.

5.3.3 The Effect of Shared Reading Strategy on Students’ Language Skills

(38)

Mudasir, 2014

[image:38.595.107.517.125.498.2]

Table 5.5 The Questionnaire Responses on Students‟ Language Skills towards the Implementation of Shared Reading Strategy

No Statements

Group and %

Strongly

Disagree Mean

8

Shared reading Strategy can

improve students‟

ability to listen to English

Number 20 20 0 0 0

4.50

% 50.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

9

Shared reading strategy can

improve students‟

ability to speak English

Number 21 16 3 0 0

4.45

% 52.50 40.00 7.50 0.00 0.00

10

improve students‟

ability to read English text.

Number 23 17 0 0 0

4.58

% 57.50 42.50 0.00 0.00 0.00

11

improve students‟

ability to write English

Number 13 23 4 0 0

4.23

% 32.50 57.50 10.00 0.00 0.00

Number 77 76 7 0 0

4.44

% 48.13 47.50 4.38 0.00 0.00

Table 5.5 shows that the majority of students gave positive responses towards the role of shared reading strategy to enhance their ability in the four language skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The students responses to the statement #8 “shared reading can improve students‟ listening skill” are: 50% or 20 students answered „strongly agree’, also 50% students „agree’ and its mean was 4.50. By looking at this data, it can be seen that all of them agreed that

(39)

Mudasir, 2014

This finding suggests that a reading teacher should exemplify reading aloud the words or text (Herrell & Jordan, 2004) clearly and correctly in order the students can read along with him. As suggested by Harmer (2007), by listening to the teacher reading the text, the students will hear or listen how to pronounce the words and understand English being spoken, absorb appropriate pitch and intonation, stress and the sounds of single words, phrases, or sentences. He adds that the more students listen, the better they get, not only in understanding speech, but also at speaking themselves.

The responses to statement #9 „shared reading strategy can improve their English speaking skill‟ were positive. It can be seen from the data that 52.50% or 21 students answered „strongly agree’, 40% or 16 of them „agree’, only 7.50% or 3 of them „neutral’ with its mean being 4.45. It reflects that the majority of the students believed that shared reading strategy could enhance their English speaking ability.

This finding implies that as a model, as suggested by Harmer (2007), the teacher should practice himself to speak English better by listening to what people speaking in English, on TV or on the radio, in cinemas, on tape, CD‟s or other recorded media like MP3. In shared reading strategy, Herrell and Jordan (2004) states that the teacher can assist their students by encouraging them to talk about the content of the text and to give them chances to practice oral language and incorporate new vocabulary into their retelling the text.

Meanwhile, the responses to the statement #10 „shared reading strategy can improve the students‟ ability to read English text‟ show that 57.50% or 23 students „strongly agree’, 42.50% or 17 of them „agree’, and its mean 4.58. No one chose „neutral’, ‘disagree’, or even „strongly disagree’. It reflects that all students were sure that the shared reading strategy could improve their ability to read the English text.

(40)

Mudasir, 2014

and one of them is shared reading strategy. As suggested by Herrell and Jordan (2004), the teacher asks the students to join reading the text, stopping for discussion and prediction, encouraging verbal interactions, rereading for additional practice and exposure, and practicing with small versions of the text. Here the students, as suggested by Harmer (2007b), need to be involved in both extensive and intensive reading. In extensive reading, the teacher can encourage them to read for both pleasure and general language improvement. In intensive reading, he chooses and directs students to develop specific skills in reading such as reading for general understanding or skimming, reading for specific information or scanning, reading for detailed comprehension, reading for inference and attitude.

Further, the responses of the experimental group to the statement #11 „shared reading can improve students‟ writing skill‟ were positive. The data shows that 32.50% or 13 students responded ‘strongly agree’, 57.50% or 23 of them „agree’, 10% or 4 of them were „neutral’ and its mean was 4.23. It indicates that most of the students agreed that shared reading strategy could improve their writing English simple sentences.

This finding implies that in teaching reading with the use of shared reading strategy, as suggested by the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Victoria, Australia (2008) and Taberski (2000 in Erickson & Hanser, 2005), the teacher should provide students the text to read along with him, familiarize them with the conventions of written English, expose them to the organizational features of written text, and patterns of English to give experience for the students to improve their writing skill.

5.3.4 The Effect and the Use of Shared Reading Strategy on Students’ Understanding

(41)

Mudasir, 2014

[image:41.595.109.516.163.492.2]

statements of the questionnaires given. The results of questionnaire on these terms can be seen in Table 5.4 below.

Table 5.6 The Questionnaire Responses on Students‟ Understanding and the Usefulness of Shared Reading Strategy

No Statements

Students‟ Responses

Number and %

Strongly

Disagree Mean

12 Shared reading Strategy assists students to understand English text

Number 22 16 2 0 0

4.53

% 55.00 40.00 5.00 0.00 0.00

13 Shared reading strategy can improve students‟ ability to comprehend English text

Number 20 17 3 0 0

4.43

% 50.00 42.50 7.50 0.00 0.00

14

Shared reading strategy is very useful for students to learn English

Number 30 10 0 0 0

4.75

% 75.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Number 72 43 5 0 0

4.57

% 60.00 35.83 4.17 0.00 0.00

(42)

Mudasir, 2014

them chose „agree’, 5% or 2 of them „neutral’ and its mean was 4.43. Thus, both items show their relationship that the shared reading strategy could facilitate and improve their ability in English reading comprehension.

These findings imply that in shared reading strategy, as suggested by Holdaway (1979) and Musthafa (2008), the teacher should present interesting and enjoyable texts in relaxed activities, nonthreatening, and motivating setting to maximize the utility of the texts and promote reading as a pleasurable activity (Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Victoria, Australia, 2008). These learning activities could assist the students to understand English text and improve their ability to comprehend it.

Lastly, statement #14 states that „shared reading strategy is very useful for the students to learn English‟. The data indicates that the students had highly positive responses towards this item. From the results of the data can be seen that 75% or 30 students chose to ‘strongly agree’, 25% or 10 of them „agree’, and its mean was 4.75. No one was „neutral‟, „disagree‟, or even „strongly disagree‟. It can be interpreted that all students had the same opinion that the shared reading strategy was very useful for them to learn English.

This finding indicates that there was no doubt for students that shared reading strategy was very useful for them to learn English. This fact could be seen from all responses to the statements given in the questionnaire (Statement #1 to #14) that no student gave the response „disagree‟ or „strongly disagree‟. They agreed that they became more active, interested, and motivated in learning English with the use of shared reading strategy. They gave positive responses that the shared reading strategy could improve them to pronounce English words, have more new English vocabularies, and improve their understanding English structure. Besides, they agreed that the shared reading could improve their language (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) skills in learning English and could also assist and improve their ability in reading comprehension.

(43)

Mudasir, 2014

Comparing all the results of the questionnaire from statement #1 to #14, some indication can be summarized. Firstly, it was about the responses of the students‟ interest and activeness (see Table 5.1). It can be seen that, in all statements, all of the mean scores of four statements were positively high. The statement #1 which states that „shared reading helps to increase students‟ interest to learn English‟ got the highest mean score of 4.83, statement #2 got 4.75, statement #3 got 4.55, and statement #4 got the lowest mean score of 4.13. The average mean score for all of the statements was 4.57. Overall, from the above data, the students of the experimental group supported the use of shared reading strategy positively. These facts indicate that most of them agreed that shared reading strategy could help them increasing their interest and activeness in learning English (Holdaway, 1979; Herrell & Jordan, 2004; Musthafa, 2008).

Secondly, it was about the students‟ responses to their vocabulary and structure. It can be seen that most students gave positive responses towards the implementation of shared reading strategy. They agreed that it could increase their ability to pronounce the English vocabularies and add new ones. It could also increase their ability to comprehend the English structure. The data show that, in all statements, all of the mean scores of three statements are positively high. The statement #5 got the highest mean score of 4.63,