CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
B. Discussions
The improvement of students’ ability in identifying information of reading text by implementing collaborative learning is effective. The use of collaborative learning significantly influenced the students to identify information of reading text. Where, the researcher finds in the data source that the students only can get score 63.65. It means that it was far from the target, but after implemented collaborative learning the students could get the score under the target that was 73.46 in cycle 2.
The researcher taught about narrative text in the cycle 1 through collaborative learning in the class. The researcher found that the students still difficult to find the information of the reading text. They were still confused to answer the questions about the text. So the result of their
88.00%
90.00%
92.00%
94.00%
96.00%
98.00%
100.00%
Figure 4:The students’ presence and activeness in learning process through collaborative learning.
B. Discussion
The improvement of students’ ability in identifying information of reading text by implementing collaborative learning is effective. The use of collaborative learning significantly influenced the students to identify information of reading text. Where, the researcher finds in the data source that the students only can get score 63.65. It means that it was far from the target, but after implemented collaborative learning the students could get the score under the target that was 73.46 in cycle 2.
The researcher taught about narrative text in the cycle 1 through collaborative learning in the class. The researcher found that the students still difficult to find the information of the reading text. They were still confused to answer the questions about the text. So the result of their
88.00%
90.00%
92.00%
94.00%
96.00%
98.00%
100.00%
Firs meeting Second
meeting Third
meeting Fourth meeting 92.30% 92.30%
96.15%
100%
92.30%
96.15%
100% 100%
The students' presence and activeness
Figure 4:The students’ presence and activeness in learning process through collaborative learning.
B. Discussion
The improvement of students’ ability in identifying information of reading text by implementing collaborative learning is effective. The use of collaborative learning significantly influenced the students to identify information of reading text. Where, the researcher finds in the data source that the students only can get score 63.65. It means that it was far from the target, but after implemented collaborative learning the students could get the score under the target that was 73.46 in cycle 2.
The researcher taught about narrative text in the cycle 1 through collaborative learning in the class. The researcher found that the students still difficult to find the information of the reading text. They were still confused to answer the questions about the text. So the result of their
Fourth meeting
100%
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
information analysis of the reading text was still less. For example, they still confused to find the message of the story in narrative text.
The difficulty of the students had been analyzed, so the researcher had to think the solution of the problem. So, the researcher decided to do the cycle 2 by doing revision in the lesson plan which is prepared in revision planning of cycle 2.
The result of revision planning to solve the students’ difficulty in finding the message of the text was after the students discussed with their group what the textabout then they asked to retell the story used their own language and giving recommendation of the problem on the text. The researcher also changed teaching material of narrative text to analytical exposition text. It was done to avoid the repetition in learning and teaching material.
Based on the findings above, the researcher found there was a good response from the students about the implementation revision planning of collaborative learning. Where, the students’ means score could get bigger than the target score that was 73.43.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter presents the conclusions and suggestions based on the research findings and discussion of data analysis.
A. Conclusion
Based on the findings and discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher puts forward the conclusions as follows:
1. The implementation of collaborative learning can increase the students’
ability in identifying information of reading text of the class VIII.B of the Eight Grade at SMP 4 SATAP Bonggakaradeng Kab. Tana Toraja in academic year 2014/2015. It is an effective method in learning process and involved the students in learning actively. This is proved by the result of the test in cycle by mean score 63.65 become 73.46 in the second cycle test.
2. The achievment of students in identifying information of reading text thought collaborative learning of class action research are 1 (3.83%), ‘very good’, 2 (7.70%) ‘good’, 9 ( 34.62%) ‘fair score’, 11 ( 42.31%), ‘poor’ 3 (11.54%), ‘very poor’. Based on the result above, can it can be conglude that the rate presentage in post test was greater than the rate percentagr inn pretest.
3. The achievment of students in identifying information of reading text thought collaborative learning of class action research are 2 student (7.70%) ‘very good, 4 (15.38%) ‘good’, 14 (53.84%) ‘fairly good’, 4
(15.38%) ‘fair’, 2 (7.70%) ‘poor’. The data information that the score on pretest is good compared on post test.
B. Suggestion
Based on the result of data analysis and conclusion, the researcher proposes some suggestions, as follows:
1. It is suggested that the teacher apply the collaborative learning as one of alternative method in teaching and learning reading text.
2. It is suggested that the teacher be creatively in teaching reading text in order to improve the students’ interest.
3. For the next researcher, they are suggested to determine the students’
motivation toward the use collaborative learning have effects on teaching and learning reading text that has not measure in this research.
4. English teacher should be more creative in closing the techniques that will be used in teaching.
40
REFERENCES
Abdullah. 2009. Improving Students’ Reading Ability through English Magazines using Threee-Phase Techniques. Thesis, UNISMUH Makassar.
Cuningsworth, Alan. 1984. Evaluating and Selecting EFL Teaching Materials.
Lodon: Heinemann Educational Books.
Dalle, Basri. 2010. Fundamentals of Research Methodology. Makassar:
Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar
Echol, John and Shadily, Hasan. 2002. Kamus Inggris Indonesia. Jakarta: PT.
Gramedia
Grellet, Francoise. 1981. Developing Reading Technique. Londoon: Cambridge.
Harmer, J. 1987. The Practice of english language teaching. New York: Longman Inc.
Hornby, A. S. 1994. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English.
Fourth edition. Oxford University Press.
Johnson, D.W.,R.T. Johnson and K.A. Smith. 1991. Cooperative Learning:
Increasing College Faculty. George Washington University.
Kusyantoro, Sukirah. 1988. Reading Techniques for College Students. Jakarta:
Depdikbud
Majid, Abdul. 2010. Teknik Penyusunan Proposal dan Laporan Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Makalah. Disajikan pada Seminar Pendidikan mahasiswa P2K angkatan ke-3 Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar pada Tanggal 9 Mei 2010 di Wisma Tani Maros.
Nurmasitah, Andi. 2009. The Effectiveness of Pre-Questioning on the Reading Comprehension Achievement of the First Grade Students of SMK Tri Tunggal 45 Makassar. Thesis, UNISMUH Makassar.
Nuttal, Christine. 1982. Teaching Reading Techniques in a Foreign Language.
London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Robert, D. Postman. 1985. College Reading and Study Technique. New York:
Macmillan Publishing Company.
Srinivas, Hari. 2009. Return to Collaborative Learning (Term and Definition).
Supiani. 2010. Improving the Students Ability to Read English Text through Skimming and Scanning Technique. Thesis UNISMUH Makassar.
Syarif, Rahma. 2007. The Use of Collaborative Learning Method to Increase Students’ Speaking Skill.Thesis UNISMUH Makassar.
Tarigan, Henry Guntur. 1986. Membaca Sebagai Suatu Keteranpilan Berbahasa.
Bandung: Angkasa.
Tiro, Muhammad Arif and Baharuddin Ilyas. 2002. Statistika Terapan untuk Ilmu Ekonomi dan Ilmu Sosial. Makassar: Andira Publisher
Tiro, Muhammad Arif. 2000. Dasar-Dasar Statistika. Makassar: State University of Makassar Press.
APPENDIXES
Table 1
The Students’ score for data source, cycle 1 and cycle2
No Student’s code
Score Data
source
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
1 Std-1 70 70 85
2 Std-2 60 60 75
3 Std-3 60 60 65
4 Std-4 60 60 70
5 Std-5 90 90 95
6 Std-6 55 60 65
7 Std-7 50 50 60
8 Std-8 70 75 80
9 Std-9 65 70 75
10 Std-10 60 65 70
11 Std-11 65 70 75
12 Std-12 50 55 65
13 Std-13 50 55 60
14 Std-14 60 60 65
15 Std-15 75 80 85
16 Std-16 70 70 75
17 Std-17 60 60 70
18 Std-18 60 65 70
19 Std-19 60 65 70
20 Std-20 65 70 75
21 Std-21 60 65 70
22 Std-22 70 70 75
23 Std-23 65 70 75
24 Std-24 80 85 90
25 Std-25 60 60 70
26 Std-26 65 70 80
Total score 1655 1730 1910
Mean score 63.65 66.54 73.46
Maximum score 90 90 95
Minimum score 50 50 60
Table 2
The students’ improvement from data source to cycle 1 and from cycle 1 to cycle 2
Mean Score Students’ improvement(%) Data
source
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Data source to cycle 1
Cycle 1 to cycle 2
66.63 66.54 73.46 2.22% 4.94%
Table 3
Frequency and ratepercentage of the students’ ability in identifying information of reading text in cycle 1
Frequency Percentage
No Classification Range (f) (%) 1
2 3 4 5 6 7
Excellent Very Good
Good Fairly Good
Fair Poor Very Poor
9.6-10 8.6-9.5 7.6-85 6.6-7.5 5.6-6.5 3.6-5.5 0-3.5
- 1 2 9 11
3 -
- 3.84%
7.70%
34.61%
42.31%
11.54%
-
Total 26 100%
Mean Score 66.54
Table 4
Frequency and rate percentage of the students’ ability in identifying information of reading text in cycle 2
No Classification Range
Frequency Percentage
(f) (%)
1 2 3 4
Excellent Very Good
Good Fairly Good
9.6-10 8.6-9.5 7.6-85 6.6-7.5
- 2 4 14
- 7.70%
15.38%
53.84%
5 6 7
Fair Poor Very Poor
5.6-6.5 3.6-5.5 0-3.5
4 2 -
15.38%
7.70%
-
Total 26 100%
Mean Score 73.46
Table 5
The students’ presence and activeness toward the use ofcollaborative learning in identifying information of reading text
CYCLE MEETING
1 2 3 4
Cycle 1 92.30 92.30 96.15 100
Cycle 2 92.30 96.15 100 100
Figure 1
The students’ mean score inidentifying information of reading text
Figure 2
The students’ improvementfrom data source to cycle 1 and from cycle 1 to cycle 2 in identifying information of reading text
Figure 3
58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74
63.65
The students' mean score
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
4.54%
The students' improvement
Figure 2
The students’ improvementfrom data source to cycle 1 and from cycle 1 to cycle 2 in identifying information of reading text
Figure 3
63.65
66.54
73.46
The students' mean score
4.54%
10.40%
The students' improvement
the students' improvement from data source to cycle 1 the students' improvement from cycle 1 to cycle 2
Figure 2
The students’ improvementfrom data source to cycle 1 and from cycle 1 to cycle 2 in identifying information of reading text
Figure 3
Data source Cycle 1 Cycle 2
the students' improvement from data source to cycle 1 the students' improvement from cycle 1 to cycle 2
The students’ ability in identifying information of reading textin cycle 1 and cycle2
.
Figure 4
The students’ presence and activeness in learning process through collaborative learning.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Excellent Very Good
0 1
0
2
The students’ ability in identifying information of reading textin cycle 1 and cycle2
.
Figure 4
The students’ presence and activeness in learning process through collaborative learning.
Very
Good Good Fairly
Good Fair Poor Very
Poor
1 2
9
11
3
0 2
4
14
4
2
0
The students' scor clsassification
The students’ ability in identifying information of reading textin cycle 1 and cycle2
.
Figure 4
The students’ presence and activeness in learning process through collaborative learning.
Very Poor 0
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
88.00%
90.00%
92.00%
94.00%
96.00%
98.00%
100.00%
Firs meeting 92.30%92.30%
The students' presence and activeness Firs meeting Second
meeting Third
meeting Fourth meeting 92.30% 92.30%
96.15%
100%
92.30%
96.15%
100% 100%
The students' presence and activeness
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
CURRICULUM VITAE
Nur Isra is the third child of marriage Muh.
Sattu and Hamida Rembon. She was born on Juny 5nd, 1989 in Pinrang regency. She has one brother two sisters. She graduated his elementary school in 2002 at Alecalimpo, Pinrang regency.
In the same year she continued his study at SMPN 1 Pinrang and graduated in 2005. She then registered in SMAN 1 Pinrang and graduated in 2008. In 2008, She accepted at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar of English Education Department.
U N I VER.SITA S lvi U liAiviiviADi YA}i FIAKAS SAR.
FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PEhIDIDIKAI{
PR+GR{M STUDI PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGFJS
1 ITIE
Reg.Number Program
Fqn"l*.,
APPROVAL SHEET
increasing the Studenis' A-biiiry in ldentifying informaiion of Reading Text Through Collaborative Learning (A Classroom
a- a*iftE E-r-.- *-it o+ *Frs i-:-a!+ ,i-+.i- ++ SE-/aE .i a-+- - E---*---us.4P uviits6-
karadeng Kab.Tana Toraja)
*: -- -- !-. ---
10535 4075 09
English Eeiucation Department Strata
i
(Si)Pacnlt_r'of Teaeher Trai$ipg and Educatiou
Plakassar, 26 November 2015 Approved by:
Consultant
II
University
ilM -fr.stitusi
Cnnsrrltant
f
.&r --
-/
-u&ao or I,nd+t#ftlfr&aho+ nep
NBM:860 934