The findings of the research deal with the effectiveness of using team word- webbing in teaching reading comprehension which consists of the students’
improvement of literal reading comprehension (in term main idea and supporting details).
1. The improvement of using team word-webbing in teaching reading comprehension in term main idea and supporting details
The students’ literal comprehension in reading can be seen in the following table:
Table 1 : The improvement of students’ in literal reading comprehension
Indicator
Mean score
Improvement Pretest Posttest
Main Idea 48.8 85.2
74.59%
supporting Details
50.8 90.4 77.95%
Table 1 indicates that the students score in posttest improves after teaching reading comprehension by using Team Word Webbing for literal level. Before applying treatment the students’ mean score in pretest for literal comprehension in the term of main idea was 48.8 and the students’ mean score in pretest in the term supporting details was 50.8. These results are classified into poor. However, after giving treatment the score of the students’ had improve. It showed in posttest wihch the students’ mean score in the term of main idea was 85.2 and the students’ mean score in the term of supporting details was 90.4.
Chart 1 : The precentage of the students' Improvement
The chart 1 showed that there was improvement of students’ achievement in literal Comprehension in the term of main idea was 74.59% and in the term supporting details was 77.95. It meant that the applying of The Team Word
72.00%
74.00%
76.00%
78.00%
Improvement 74.59%
77.95%
The precentage of the students' Improvement
Main Idea
Supporting Details
Webbing Technique was good to improve the students’ reading comprehension in terms of main idea and supporting details.
a. The Classification of the Students’ Pre-Test Score 1) Pre- Test Score of Main Idea
Table 2 : The Rate Percentage Score of Main Idea
No. Classification Score Frequency Percentage
1 Excellent 9.6 – 10 - -
2 very good 8.6 – 9.5 - -
3 Good 7.6 – 8.5 2 8%
4 Fairly good 6.6 – 7.5 3 12%
5 Fairly 5.6 – 6.5 5 20%
6 Poor 3.6 – 5.5 10 40%
7 Very Poor 0 – 3.5 5 20%
TOTAL 25 100%
The table 2 shows that there were 2 (8%) students classified into good score, there were 3 (12%) students classified into fairly good score, there were 5 (20%) students classified into fairly score, there were 10 (40%) students classified into poor score, there were 5 (20%) students classified into very poor score, and none of students (0%) classified into excellent and very good
score. From the result it can be concluded that the students’ to increase reading comprehension achievement on pre- test of main idea ranges from good to very poor classification.
2) Pre- Test Score of Supporting Details
Table 3 : The Rate Percentage Score of Supporting Details No. Classification Score Frequency Percentage
1 Excellent 9.6 – 10 - -
2 very good 8.6 – 9.5 1 4%
3 Good 7.6 – 8.5 2 8%
4 Fairly good 6.6 – 7.5 3 12%
5 Fairly 5.6 – 6.5 4 16%
6 Poor 3.6 – 5.5 11 44%
7 Very Poor 0 – 3.5 4 16%
TOTAL 25 100%
The table 3 shows that there was 1 (4%) student classified into very good score, there were 2 (8%) students classified into good score, there were 3 (12%) students classified into fairly good score, there were 4 (16%) students classified into fairly score, there were 11 (44%) students classified into poor score, there were 4 (16%) students classified very poor score and none of the students (0%)
classified into excellent score. From the result it can be concluded that the students’ to increase reading comprehension achievement on pre- test of supporting details ranges from very good to very poor classification.
b. The Classification of the Students’ Post-Test Score 1) Post- Test score of Main Idea
Table 4 : The Rate Percentage Score of Main Idea
No. Classification Score Frequency Percentage
1 Excellent 9.6 – 10 6 24%
2 very good 8.6 – 9.5 5 20%
3 Good 7.6 – 8.5 10 40%
4 Fairly good 6.6 – 7.5 4 16%
5 Fairly 5.6 – 6.5 - -
6 Poor 3.6 – 5.5 - -
7 Very Poor 0 – 3.5 - -
TOTAL 25 100%
After treatment, the researcher conducted the post-test. The results of all students could be seen in the data in table 4. There were 6 (24%) students classified into excellent score, there were 5 (20%) students classified into very good score, there were 10 (40%) students classified into good score, there were
4 (16%) students classified into fairly good score and none of the students (0%) classified into fairly, poor, and very poor score. From the result it can be concluded that the student achievement in improving reading comprehension in the post-test of main idea ranges from excellent to fairly good classifications.
2) Post- Test score of Supporting Details
Table 5 : The Rate Percentage Score of Supporting Details No. Classification Score Frequency Percentage
1 Excellent 9.6 – 10 13 52%
2 very good 8.6 – 9.5 3 12%
3 Good 7.6 – 8.5 6 24%
4 Fairly good 6.6 – 7.5 3 12%
5 Fairly 5.6 – 6.5 - -
6 Poor 3.6 – 5.5 - -
7 Very Poor 0 – 3.5 - -
TOTAL 25 100%
After treatment, the researcher conducted the post-test. The results of all students could be seen in the data in table 5. There were 13 (52%) students classified into excellent score, there were 3(12%) students classified into very good score, there are were 6 (24%) students classified into good score, there are were 3 (12%) students classified into fairly good score and none of the students (0%) classified into fairly, poor, and very poor score. From the result it can be concluded that the student achievement in improving reading
comprehension in the post-test of supporting details ranges from excellent to fairly good classifications.
3) The students’ mean score of main idea in pre-test and post-test Chart 2 : The students’ mean score of main idea
The chart 2 indicates that there is a significant difference in the mean score of students' literal reading comprehension in the term main idea between the pre-test and post-test. The data analysis shows the students mean score improved from pre-test to post-test. Before applying the treatment in pre-test, the students’ mean score for literal reading comprehension in the term of main idea was 48.8. After applying treatment and post-test the students’ mean score improved to be 85.2 for literal reading comprehension in the term of main idea. It could be seen in the chart.
4) The students’ mean score of supporting details in pre-test and post-test
48.8
85.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Mean score
Mean score of main idea
pre test post test
Chart 3 : The students’ mean score of supporting details
The chart 3 indicates that there is a significant difference in the mean score of students’supporting details in literal reading comprehension in the term supporting details between the pre-test and post-test. The data analysis shows the students mean score improved from pre-test to post-test. Before applying the treatment in pre-test, the students’ mean score for literal reading comprehension in the term of supporting details was 50.8. After applying treatment and post-test the students’ mean score improved to be 90.4 for literal reading comprehension in the term of supporting details. It could be seen in the chart.
5) Test of significance (t-test)
The hypothesis is tested by using interpretative analysis. In this case, the researcher used t-test (test of significance) for independent sample test,
50.8
90.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
mean score
Mean score of supporting details
pre test post test
that is, a test to know the significant difference between the result of students’ mean scores in pretest and posttest. Assuming that the level of significance (α) = 0.05, the only thing which is needed; the degree of freedom (df) = 24, where n-1 = 24. Where if the value is significant (2- tailed) p = 0.000 <0.05 indicates a significant difference between the initial variable and the final variable. H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. Whereas if the significant value (2-tailed)> 0.05 indicates that there is no significant difference between the initial variable and the final variable. H0 is accepted and h1 is rejected; then the result of t-test is presented in the following table
Table 6 : Test of significance (t-test)
Variables/Indicator t-test t-table Remarks Literal (Main Idea) 4.533 2.640 Significantly different Literal (Supporting
Details)
4.47 2.640 Significantly different
Based on the result of the data analysis as summarized in table 6 above on the researcher found that the t-test is greater than the level of significance at t-table and the degree of freedom 24. The t test for literal in the term main idea was 4.533 and supporting details was 4.47. Where the t-test is greater than t- table means that there is significantly difference between pretest and posttest after using treatment. It indicates that the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted and the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. It means that Team Word
Webbing significantly improve the students’ reading comprehension of literal level.
This means that the posttest data as the final result shows a significant increase. It is concluded that the use of Team Word Webbing is able to give greater contribution in teaching and learning reading comprehension.