C. The Concept of Reading Comprehension
6. Reading Process
There are three models of reading process namely: (1) Bottom – up model, (2) Top – down, and (3) interactive model.
1) Bottom – up model
Bottom-up processing occurs when a person tries to understand language by looking at the individual meanings or grammatical characteristics of the most basic units of text, (e.g. sounds for listening or words for reading), and switches from this to trying to understand the entire text. Bottom-up processing is not considered a very efficient way of approaching text at first, and is often compared to top-down processing, which is considered more efficient.
2) Top – down model
Top- down Reading means taking prior knowledge into account when discovering a new text, so that students' active scheme related to a particular topic or theme helps them incorporate what they learn from their reading. Furthermore, in the top down reading, students focus more on the overall meaning of a text rather than on individual words or phrases.
3) Interactive model
This interactive approach is a combination of a bottom-up reading model and a top-down reading. Reading text often requires a combination of the two models. This reading model will start with a bottom up then top down model, where students begin to recognize words, and then try to analyze sentences that are relatively difficult to understand.
An interactive model depicts a bottom-up model and a top- down model taking place simultaneously. This means that the reading process no longer shows a linear process, does not show a continuous sequential process, but is a simultaneous reciprocal process. If readers do not understand what is being read, they will continue the reading process by using the two models alternately, so that the integrated application of the two models will ensure accuracy and understanding.
7. The Purpose of Reading
According to Anderson (1992) there are seven objectives, namely reading, reading for details and facts, reading for main ideas, reading organizational sequences, reading for inference, classifying readings, reading to evaluate and comparing reading for contest.
a. Reading for details and facts: reading to find out what the story is about.
b. Read the main idea: read to get the problem statement.
c. Read in organizational order: read to see each part of the story.
d. Reading to the conclusion: reading to find out what the story writer meant.
e. Reading to categorize: reading to discover things that are out of the ordinary.
f. Reading to evaluate: reading to find out the value of the story.
D. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework below explains that the researcher applies Literature Circles in teaching English. In implementation this research will apply Pre-Experimental.
Figure 2.1. Conceptual Framework
In this research the researcher uses Literature Circles Strategy in pre- experimental research. It focuses on reading comprehension. The Literature Circles Strategy will help students‟ improvement reading comprehension. In reading comprehension, the scope only refers to literal comprehension (who, what, when and where question) and interpretive comprehension (what if, why
Literature Circles Pre-Experimental
Reading Comprehension
Interpretive Comprehension (What if, why and how
question) Literal Comprehension
(who, what, when and where question)
and how question). After the practice done, researcher will see the result of students‟ improvements in using Literature Circles Strategy.
E. Research Hypothesis
This research is to know whether using literature circles in teaching reading comprehension there is significant improvement or not. To find the answer of the problem, the writer should propose alternative hypothesis (H1) and null hypothesis (Ho) as below:
1. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant improvement of students‟
reading comprehension by using literature comprehension.
2. Null Hypothesis (Ho): There is no significant improvement of students‟
reading comprehension by using literature comprehension.
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
A. Research Design
In this research, the researcher conductive a quantitative type through a pre- experimental design. The researcher used a pre-experimental design because the researcher wants to improve students reading comprehension by using Literature Circles. In this research the researcher had taken one group or class to use pretest and posttest design to know the results of treatment.
The design involves one group which is pre-test (O1), expose to a treatment (X), and the post-test (O2). The design was as follows the figure below:
Figure 3.1. Research Design Explanation :
O1 : Pre-Test X : Treatment O2 : Post-Test
Adapted from Gay, L.R (1981:252)
O1 X O2
26
1. Pre-Test
Before give the treatment, the researcher gave a pre-test namely reading test.
2. Treatment
After giving the pre-test, the researcher gave a treatment by using the power of Literature Circles Strategy to increase the students‟ comprehension in English. The procedures of treatment are as follows:
a. The teacher makes groups of 4-5 students based on the selected reading. The teacher distributes different texts to each group.
b. Different groups read different texts.
c. The teacher will explain that in the LKS the teacher provides words that will be discussed by the students.
d. The teacher asks students to choose a leader in their group and determine the position of each member.
e. The students read the text.
f. Each member of the group performs their respective duties according to their duties.
g. Each group member shares and discusses their responses with their group members.
h. Each group leader reads the results of the group discussion.
i. The teacher asks the students' difficulties in the teaching and learning process.
j. The teacher asks the students to write the answers to the questions in the text after the students have read the text and after discussing them in the text.
k. The teacher reviews the meeting process.
l. The teacher asks students to complete the assignment that has been given by the teacher.
3. Post-Test
Post-test was be similar in the last meeting. The researcher employs post- test to find out the data of treatment. The test was be similar to pre-test, but in post-test using literature circles.
B. Research Variables and Indicators 1. Variables
There were two variables in this research that carried out by the researcher, namely independent and dependent variables as follows:
a. Independent Variable
Independent variable is variable which could give influence or response to dependent variable. In this research, the independent variable is literature circle strategy in improving students‟ reading comprehension.
b. Dependent Variable
Dependent variable is variable caused or influenced by the other variables.
Dependent variables in this research are improving reading comprehension in terms of literal and interpretive comprehension.
2. Indicators
The indicators of this research that carried out by the researcher as follows:
Table 3.1 Research Indicators
Variables Indicators
The students literal comprehension
a. Students recognize the true meaning of the words in the paragraph.
b. Students are able to identify reference words in the text.
c. Students can only distinguish facts and details.
d. Students are able to identify what the author wrote in the text.
e. Students can find out the main idea of the text.
The students interpretive comprehension
a. Students are able to describe facts and detailed information from the text.
b. Students are able to respond to the author's intent.
c. Students can infer main ideas when these are not explicitly stated in the
text.
d. Students are able to respond to opinions and provide general support and facts from the text.
e. Students are able to make conclusions on the text.
Adapted from Mahmudah, K (2017:2) C. Population and Sample
Students in this research are Senior High School. The subjects of this research are the second grade students of Senior High School in SMAN 10 Jeneponto in the academic year of 2020/2021.
a. Population
The population of this research is the 11th Grade Students of SMAN 10 Jeneponto which consist of eight classes, 4 classes of science and 4 classes of social. Each class consists of 40 students. The total populations are 160 students from science and 160 students from social.
b. Sample
The sample of this research was XI.IPA.1 of SMAN 10 Jeneponto. The sample is chosen by using cluster sampling. Total of the sample was 20 students.
D. Instrument of the Research
The researcher applied a research instrument namely reading test. Reading test aims to got information about students‟ reading comprehension. In pre-test and post-test, the researcher gave a reading text (narrative text) and asked the students to read carefully then the students answered the questions based on the text to measure the students‟ reading comprehension.
The researcher used test consisting of pre-test and post-test. To know whether students have progress or not, the researcher will use rubric to classify students answer:
Table. 3.2 Rubric of Literal Comprehension (Main Idea)
No Criteria Score
1 The answer included a clear generalization that the sates or implied the main idea
4
2 The answer stated or implied the main idea from the story 3 3 Indicator inccurated or incompleted understood of main idea 2 4 The answer included minimal or not understood main idea 1
(Michelle 2007)
Table. 3.3 Rubric of Interpretive Comprehension (Conclusion)
No Criteria Score
1 Conclusion reflect reading in development of idea.It is excellent 4 2 Conclusion reflects reading in development of idea. It is good 3
3 Conclusion reflects only reading in development of idea. It is poor
2
4 Conclusions there answer, but do not reflect any reading of resources in development idea.
1
(Pollard, 2007) E. Technique of Data Analysis
The data was collected through quantitative analysis. The steps were taken as follows:
a. To find out the students means score, the researcher apply the following formula:
̅=
Where:
X : Mean score
: The raw of the of all score N : The number of objects
(Gay, 1981: 298)
b. To calculate the percentage of the students score, the formula which use as follows:
X2-X1
P = x 100 % X1
Where: P = percentage
X1 = the mean score of pre-test X2 = the mean score of post-test
(Gay, 2006)
c. After collecting the data of the students, we classify the score of the students‟ into the following criteria
Table 3.4 Classification Criteria
Classification Score
Excellent 96-100
Very good 86-96
Good 66-85
Average 56-65
Poor 36-55
Very poor 0-35
(Gay, 2006)
d. To know the significant difference between the score of the pre-test and post-test, the researcher calculate the value of the test by using the following
Formula:
̅
√ ( ) ( )
Note:
t : Test of significant difference
D : The mean of the differences between the post-test ΣD2 : Sum of the squares of the differences between the
the pre-test and post-test
(ΣD2) : The square of the differences between the pre-test and post-test
N : The total number of sample.
`1 : Constant Number
(Gay, 2006)
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter consists of two parts, namely finding of the research and discussion. The findings of this study present a description of the data collected through tests, while in the discussion, the researcher analyzes and discusses all data in the findings section.
A. Findings
The findings of the research explain the results of student learning achievement on reading comprehension use the literature circles strategy in reading learning. In this study, the researcher wanted to find out whether the use of this method could improve reading comprehension in terms of students' literal comprehension and reading comprehension in terms of interpretive comprehension students‟. To find out the answer, the researcher conducted a test given twice, namely pre-test and post-test. Data collection was carried out from 20 students of class XI IPA 1 SMA Negeri 10 Jeneponto.
The following is the description of the data found which covers the rate percentage of the pre-test and post-test result, mean score and the result of the data analysis.
35
1. The Students Achievement in Reading Comprehension by the Use of Literature Circles
In analyzing the data, the achievement of students reading comprehension use of Literature Circles Strategy which was focused on literal and interpretive as indicators at SMA Negeri 10 Jeneponto as result of the students assessment pre- test and post-test is described as follows:
Indicators Mean Score Improvement
(%)
Pre-Test Post-Test
Literal 57.06 74.37 30.33
Interpretive 45 64.68 43.73
Total 102.06 139.05 74.06
Mean Score 51.03 69.52 37.03
Table 4.1. The Improvement of Students’ Reading Comprehension
The table above shows the students enhancement in reading comprehension score as result of calculating of students pre-test and post-test at students reading comprehension used Literature Circles Strategy. Where the students score in pre- test in literal comprehension are 57.06 and post-test 74.37 it means that there was improvement between pre-test and post-test 30.33%. The students score in pre-test in interpretive comprehension pre-test 45 and post-test are 64.68, therefore, the improvement 43.73%.
The research findings from the table above, indicates that there is the progress the students‟ score from pre-test to post-test after doing treatment using Literature Circles Strategy. To see clearly the progress of the students‟ reading comprehension can be presented as the following chart.
Figure 4.1. The Improvement of Students’ Reading Comprehension
Figure 4.1 shows the improvement of students reading comprehension score as result of calculating of students pre-test and post-test at students reading comprehension used Literature Circles Strategy. Based on the difference from the mean score students get, in literal term students show the improvement from pre- test to post-test where the increase of students increased by 30.33%. Also in interpretive, students also show the improvement increased by 43.73%. It means that in fluency, students showed improvement from pre-test to post-test.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Literal Interprative
57,06
45 74,37
64,68
Pre-Test Post-Test
2. The Percentage of the Students Achievement in Reading Comprehension
a. Literal
The following table shows the percentage of students‟ reading comprehension in literal after doing pre-test and post- test when the researcher using Literature Circles Strategy.
No
Classification Score
Literal Comprehension
Pre-Test Post-Test
F % F %
1. Excellent 96-100 0 0 0 0
2. Very Good 86-96 0 0 0 0
3. Good 66-85 1 5 20 100
4. Average 56-65 11 55 0 0
5. Fair 36-55 0 0 0 0
6. Poor 0-35 8 40 0 0
Total 20 100 20 100
Table 4.2 The Students’ Frequency and Percentage in Literal Comprehension
The table above shows that in pre-test there is no students get excellent, very good and good 1 student (5%). The students‟ who get average 11 students‟
(55%) and there is no students‟ get fair. 8 students‟ (40%) who gets poor. While post-test there is no students who get excellent and very good. 20 students‟
(100%) who get good. And there no student‟ who get average, fair and poor.
The data above can also be shown in the figure below:
The Figure 4.2: The Frequency and Percentage of Students’ Reading Comprehension in Literal
Figure 4.2 above shows that in pre-test there is no student who gets excellent and very good, 5% the students who gets good and 55% students who gets average, no one students get fair and 40% gets poor. While post-test there are 20 students‟ (100%) who gets good, and there no students who get excellent, very good, average, fair and poor.
b. Interpretive
The following table shows the percentage of students‟ reading comprehension in interpretive after doing pre-test and post- test when the researcher using Literature Circles Strategy.
0 5 10 15 20
Pre-Test Post-Test
0 1 0
20
0 0
11
0
0 0
8
Very good Good Excellent Average Fair Poor
No
Classification Score
Interpretive Comprehension
Pre-Test Post-Test
F % F %
1. Excellent 96-100 0 0 0 0
2. Very Good 86-96 0 0 0 0
3. Good 66-85 0 0 10 50
4. Average 56-65 1 5 10 50
5. Fair 36-55 0 0 0 0
6. Poor 0-35 19 95 0 0
Total 20 100 20 100
Table 4.3 The students’ frequency and percentage in interpretive comprehension
The table above shows the result of students reading comprehension in interpretive comprehension in pre-test and post-test. In pre-test, 1 student (5%) get average, 19 students‟ (95%) got poor, and there is no students‟ get excellent, very good, good and fair. While in post-test there were 10 students‟ (50%) get good, 10 Students‟ (50%) classified into average, and there is no students‟ get excellent, very good, fair and poor.
The data above can also be shown in the graphic below:
The Figure 4.3: The Frequency and Percentage of Students’ Reading Comprehension in Interpretive
Figure 4.3 above shows that in pre-test there is no student who gets excellent, very good and good, 5% who get average. There is no students get fair and 95% student who gets poor. While post-test there are 50% students who gets good, and 50% students who gets average. And there no student who gets excellent, very good, fair and very poor.
3. Test of Significance Testing and Hypothesis
In order to know whether or not the mean score was different from two test (pre-test and post-test), the researcher used the t-table. The table 4.3 shows the result of the t-test calculation.
Pre-Test
0 0 0
10
0 1 0
10
0 0
19
Chart Title
Very good Good Excellent Average Fair Poor
a. The Value of T-test
Variable t-test t-table
Reading Comprehension 13.90 2.093
Table 4.4 the T-Test of Students’ Achievement
Table 4.4 indicates that the value of the t-test was higher than the value of the t-table. It was indicated that there was a significant difference between the result of the students‟ pre-test and post-test by using literature circles as strategy in teaching reading comprehension.
b. Hypothesis Testing
The researcher used t-test analysis for the level of significance (a) = 0.05 and the degree of freedom (df) = 20-1= 9. While the value of t-test is 13.90 and the value of t-table is 2.093, the table 4.4 showed that the result of t-test (13.90) was higher than the value of t-table (2.093). It‟s mean the Null (H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted. Therefore, there was significant difference between the students‟ reading comprehension in learning used Literature Circle Strategy.
B. Discussions
This section deals with the interpretation of the finding and also the description of data gained from the students‟ score before and after apply treatment in developing the students‟ reading comprehension. The description of data collected from the students‟ reading comprehension especially in literal comprehension and interpretive comprehension as explanation in the previous
section showed that the students‟ main ideas and conclusion in reading comprehension was improved. It was supported by mean score and percentage of students‟ pre-test and post-test result. Based on the finding above, the using Literature Circles Strategy made students had mean score that was approaching the standard in reading comprehension.
1. The Improvement of the Students Reading Comprehension in Term of Literal Comprehension
Reading Comprehension in terms of Literal Comprehension is about understanding in knowing the main idea of the test that has been given the form of the researcher and also in accordance with the needs and desires of students. That happens if students are more interested so that readers can understand and get information from the reading text they are reading. As Harmer (2007) states that reading for general understanding means not stopping for every word, not analyzing everything that the researcher includes in the text.
The results of data analysis through the reading test show that students' literal comprehension focused on the main idea has increased. It is indicated by the students' scores on the pre-test and post-test. The researcher determines the discussion by paying attention to literal comprehension. High school students are in the process of learning several skills in English, and one of them is reading. In the process research, from pre-test to post-test researchers analyzed students' ability to answer questions based on the text given is still lacking and needs improvement. Some students spend most of their time reading the whole text
without understanding the meaning of the text they are reading. It made them confused in answering some of the questions given during the research.
Most of the students cannot highlight the main idea and some important statements in the text that are answers to the question given. It is proven by the findings above that in the pre-test there is no students get excellent, very good and 1 student (5%) got good, 11 students (55%) got everage, and 8 students (40%) got poor score. All scores are only classified in the moderate to good score level because students are less able to understand the text literally, all 5 questions related to literal understanding are not fully answered by students.
Furthermore, after giving the treatment, the researcher applied Literature Circles Strategy to improve students' reading comprehension to more critically understand the entire text that has been given. They find it easier to find the literally correct answer to each question. After the treatment was given, the researcher gave a post-test to see the improvement or progress of students' reading comprehension skills especially in literal understanding. The results as stated above are that in the post-test, researchers found a significant increase in student scores from 20 samples. On post-test there are no students who get excellent and very good. 20 students (100%) got very good marks, and there are no students' who get average, fair and poor.
The percentage in the post-test that students scored very well was higher than the percentage in the pre-test. This shows that students are able to improve their reading comprehension skills, especially in literal comprehension of texts