CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
D. Research Instrument…
In this research, the researcher used one instrument for collecting data, it was Reading Test. The test used to acquire detail information about the students’ prior ability and the students’ achievement after the teaching and learning process ends. There were 5 questions in one essay test (descriptive text) in term of literal comprehension focus on main idea and supporting details based on the text.
E. Technique of Data Analysis
The data collect from the reading test analyzed quantitatively. The steps were listed as follow:
1. The criteria of students’ assessment
Rubric assessment literal comprehension (main idea) follow:
Tabel 3.1 Main Idea
No Criteria score
1 Clearly identified the main idea by providing strong evidence , details relating to the main idea
4 2 Identified the main idea and provided adequate evidence,
details relating to the main idea
3 3 Limited main idea identification and limited evidence,
details relating to the main idea
2 4 Did not identify the main idea of the story or provide any
evidence, details relating to the main idea
1
Rubric assessment literal comprehension (supporting details) follow Table 3.2 Supporting Details:
No Criteria score
1 Relevant telling quality details give reader important information that goes beyond the obvious or predictable
4
2 Supporting details or information were relevant, but one key issue almost unsupported or more predictable than others
3
3 Supporting idea or information were relevant, but one or more key issues almost unsupported or fairly predictable
2
4 Supporting idea or information were somewhat relevant, but several key issues were unsupported or all fairly predictable
1
To classify the students’ score, there are seven classifications which are used as followed:
Table 3.3 classify the students’ score.
No Classification Score
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7
Excellent Very good Good Fairly good Fair
Poor Very poor
96 – 100 86 – 95 76 – 85 66 – 75 56 – 65 36 – 55 0 – 35
Depdikbud (1994:6)
2. Scoring each the students’ answer by using the following formula:
- 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 =students′correct
𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑛 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 X100 Scoring maximum: 4
(Sudjana, 2005:43)
3. Calculating the mean score by using the following formula 𝑋̅ =∑X
N
Where:
X̅ = mean
∑X = the sum of the score
N = the total number of the students
Gay (1981:298) 4. To calculate percentage students’ reading comprehension researcher used
this formula:
P = 𝑭
𝑵 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎
P = Rate percentage F = Number of correct N = Number of sample
(Sudjana, 1990:83)
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Findings
After doing analyzing the research, it indicates that there is an improvement of the students’ reading comprehension through Think Pair and Share at the second grade students of SMP Negeri 40 Sinjai. The findings consisted of diagnostic test, students’ reading comprehension.
1. The students’ mean score in Literal Comprehension
The application of Think Pair and Share in improving the students’ reading comprehension can be seen on the following table:
Table 4.1 Students’ mean score in main ideas Non Method
Classification
The Application of Think Pair
and Share Classification
D-TEST Cycle Mean score
38.4 Poor Cycle I 59.6 Fair
Cycle II 88.4 Very Good
The table 1 above shows the means score of the students’ main idea. In the students’ reading D-test, the means score was 38.4. Then in the cycle I show that the means score of students’ reading was 59.6. In the cycle II show that the means score of students’ reading was 88.4.
The research findings from the table above, indicates that there is the improvement of the students’ mean score from cycle I to cycle II, where in cycle I the students’ mean score was 59.6, but after evaluation in cycle II the students’
reading becomes 88.4.
The data above can also be seen in form of diagram below:
Graphic 1. Students’ mean score in main idea
The graphic 1 above indicates that the mean score of D-test was 38.4, it is improving to be 59.6 in cycle I, and then, in cycle II, the mean score was 88.4. It indicates that the application of Think Pair and Share is significant in improving the students’ reading comprehension at the second grade students of SMP Negeri 40 Sinjai.
Table 4.2 Students’ mean score in supporting details Non Method
Classification
The Application of Think
Pair and Share Classification
D-TEST Cycle Mean score
53.8 Poor Cycle I 57.6 Fair
Cycle II 82.6 Good
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
MAIN IDEA
Main Idea
The table 2 above shows the means score of the students’ reading comprehension. In the students’ reading D-test, the means score was 53.8. Then in the cycle I show that the means score of students’ reading was 57.6. In the cycle II show that the means score of students’ reading was 82.6.
The research findings from the table above, indicates that there is the improvement of the students’ mean score from cycle I to cycle II, where in cycle I the students’ mean score was 57.6, but after evaluation in cycle II the students’
reading becomes 82.6.
The data above can also be seen in form of diagram below:
Graphic 2. Students’ mean score in supporting details
The graphic 2 above indicates that the mean score of D-test was 53.8, it is improving to be 57.6 in cycle I, and then, in cycle II, the mean score was 82.6. It indicates that the application of Think Pair and Share is significant in improving
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
Supporting details
Supporting details
the students’ reading comprehension at the second grade students of Smp Negeri 40 Sinjai
2. Scoring Classification
It has been mentioned in the previous chapter that after tabulating and analyzing the students’ scores into percentage, then they are classified into seven levels based on Depdikbud classification namely: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, and Very Poor as can be seen in the following tables:
Table 4.3 Rate percentage and frequency
No Classification Range
Non Method The Application of Think Pair and Share
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II Freq % Fre
q % Fre
q %
1 Excellent 96 – 100 0 0 0 0 2 15%
2 Very good 86 – 95 0 0 1 8% 8 62%
3 Good 76 – 85 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 Fairly good 66 – 75 0 0 1 8% 2 15%
5 Fair 56 – 65 4 31% 5 38% 1 8%
6 Poor 36 – 55 8 61% 6 46% 0 0
7 Very poor 0 – 35 1 8% 0 0% 0 0
Total 13 100% 13 100% 13 100%
The data above can also be shown from the graphic below:
Graphic 3. Rate percentage and frequency
Based on the table and the grafic 3 above, it can show that D-Test there are 4 students (31%) get Fair score, 8 students (61%) get poor score and 1 students (8%) get very poor score . While in the cycle I there are 1 students (8%) get very good score, 1 students (8%) get fairly good score, 5 student (38%) get fair score, and 6 students (46%) get poor score.
In the cycle II there are no students get good, poor and very poor score.
There are 2 students (15%) get excellent score, 8 students (62%) get very good score, 2 (15%) get fairly good score, then 1 students (8%) get fair score.
3. The improvement of the students’ reading comprehension
In this case, the ultimate improvement of the students’ reading comprehension is calculated through the combination of the students’
improvement in literal comprehension. From the whole result of the students’
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Excellent Very good Good Fairly good Fair Poor Very poor D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
literal comprehension which are presented in the table above, the improvement of the students’ reading.
Table 4.4 improvement the students’ reading comprehension
Table 4.3 showed the students’ reading comprehension improved from D- test to cycle I and cycle II. In which, cycle II was the greatest of all. The mean score of students’ reading comprehension in cycle II was 85.5. Then the mean score of students in cycle I was 58.6 and the students got 46.1 in D-test.it indicated the improvement of the reading comprehension D-test to cycle I was 31.14%. The improvement from cycle I to cycle II was 45.85%, and the improvement from D-test to cycle II was 91.85%. It was conducted the students’
reading comprehension improved significantly by guided reading and supporting details (TPS) strategy.
Indicator Scores Improvement(%)
D-test Cycle I Cycle II
DT->CI CI-
>CII
DT- .CII Main idea 38.4 59.6 88.4 55.2 48.3 130.2 Supporting
details
53.8 57.6 82.6 7.06 43.4 53.5
𝚺X 92.2 117.2 171 62.26 91.7 183.7
X 46.1 58.6 85.5 31.13 45.85 91.85
B. Discussion
In this part, discussion deals with the interpretation of the findings derived from the result of statistical analysis and the researcher’s notes during the classroom interaction. It examines the result of treatment teaching and learning process toward the use of Think Pair and Share to improve students’ reading comprehension at the second grade of SMP Negeri 40 sinjai kab. Sinjai on 2020/2021 academic year which is conducted of two circles during 6 meetings.
The description of the data collected through reading test as explained in the previous section shows that the students’ reading comprehension was improved. It was supported by the frequency and the rate percentage of the students’ score in D-Test, cycle 1, and cycle 2.
Reading comprehension is the act of combining information in a passage with prior knowledge in order to construct meaning. In addition, reading comprehension can be defined as a thinking process through which readers become aware of an idea, understand it in terms of their experiential background, and interpret it in relation to their own needs and purposes (Khoiriyah:2010:1).
There were some previous studies about the different percentage improvement reading comprehension by using the Think Pair and Share.
According to Dino sugiarto, (2014) in his thesis “The implementation of think- pair-share model to improve students’ ability in reading narrative texts “have found that The data were gathered from reading test in the end of every cycle. It was found that the students’ ability in reading narrative texts improved after the implementation of Think-Pair-Share model.”
In this study, the researcher concluded that the use of Think Pair and Share was effective in improving students' reading comprehension skills through Think Pair and Share. As stated earlier, this study aims to improve the reading comprehension skills of grade VIII UPTD students at SMPN 40 Sinjai through Think Pair and Share. It deals with the statement of Riska Anggraini, (2018) In the thesis “Improving students’ ability in writing descriptive text through think pair share” during the teaching and learning process, they also showed positive response toward the lesson. The quantitative data of the students’ mean score was improved.
Kuliana (2007) in her thesis “the use of Think-Pair-Share technique in improving students reading comprehension achievement” also deals with this research. She found that cooperative learning can improve the students‟ reading comprehension achievement at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Kalisat Jember in the 2007/2008 academic year. She applied Think Pair-Share technique with two cycles. In the first cycle, the students did not reach the target score that was M=70-79 because the mean score of the first cycle was 61.35. Therefore the second cycle was conducted. The mean score in the second cycle was better (M=72.84) than in cycle one (M=61.35).
In the sixth meeting of treatment, the students more enthusiastic and interested in learning English. It is not match with the statement of English teacher when the researcher did observation before do this research. This is supported by Iddings, et al., (2006:99) who says that Think-Pair-Share technique is wonderful way to involve the students and to raise their confidence they need
through participating in a relatively relaxed manner. In addition, by applying Think-Pair-Share technique in teaching learning process, the students were motivated and also exited in learning English especially in reading class.
Based on the discussion above, we can know that there was different result between cycle 1 and cycle 2 in teaching reading through Think Pair and Share.
The researcher may say that teaching reading through Think Pair and Share is a good way to improving the students’ reading comprehension.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusion
Based on the research findings and discussion in the previous chapter, the following conclusions were Used Think Pair and Share was able to improved the students’ literal comprehension (main idea) at class VIII. It was proved by the students’ achievement in cycle II was is greater than cycle I and D-Test where in cycle I the students’ mean score literal comprehension becomes 45.3, cycle II 65.7 and before diagnostic test is 83.4.and then Used Think Pair and Share was able to improved the students’ supporting details it was proved by the students’
achievement in cycle II is higher than cycle I. Where the cycle I mean score is 65.3 and after evaluation in cycle II the students’ Supporting details become 80.7 and before diagnostic test is 50.3. Students’ Used Think Pair and Share was able to made the students more active in learning process, especially in reading activities.
B. Suggestions
In relation to the reading comprehension in terms of literal reading comprehension and summarizing in this thesis, the researcher would like to give some suggestions to the students (learners), the English teacher and the next researchers as follows:
1. For the English Teacher
The application of Think Pair and Share can improvement the students’
reading comprehension in terms of literal comprehension on word meaning with main idea at class VIII of Smp Negeri 40, Sinjai Regency. So it is strongly suggested to be applied in teaching reading in the classroom in order to increase the students’ reading comprehension.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anggraini, R. (2018). Improving Students' Ability in Writing a Descriptive Text Through Think Pair Share. Pontianak.
Chou, P. T.-M. (2011). The Effects of Vocabulary Knowledge and Background.
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching .
Depdikbud. (2004). Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta.
Farrell, T. S. (2009). Teaching Reading to English Language Learners: A Reflective Guide.
Fitriana, M. W. (2013). The Effectiveness of Using Summarization Technique in Teaching Reading Comprehension of the Second Year of MTSN Pucanglabang Tulungagung in academic year 2012/2013. Tulungagung.
Gay, L. (1992). educational research . Pearson Higher Education,.
Harmer. (2007). How to teach writing. England: Pearson education limited.
Hudri, m., & Irwandi. (2011). Improving Students’ Reading Skill Through Think- Pair-Share (TPS) Technique. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics (JELTL), 2.
Hudri, M., & Naim, J. (2017). An Analysis of Teacher Strategies in Teaching Reading at The First Years Students of Smk 2 Gerung in Academic Year 2016/2017. Lecturer of English Department Muhammadiyah University of Mataram.
Iddings, Ana Cristina, D. (2006). Cooperative Learning and Second Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. United State of America.
Kagan, s., & Kagan, m. (2009). Cooperative learning . Kagan Publishing.
Kartikawati, C. Y., & Purwanti, e. (2015). Penerapan Model Think Pair Share Dengan Media Video Untuk Meningkatkan Kualitas Pembelajaran Ips.
Joyful Learning Journal.
Klingner, Vaughn, & Broadman. (2004). Collaborative Strategic Reading.
Remedial and Special Education,.
Kuliana, I. (2007). Improving the Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement by Using Think-Pair-Share at the Tenth Grade of SMAN 1 Kalisat Jember in the 2007/2008 Academic Year. (Unpublished S1 Thesis)
Nurainun. (2017). Improving the Students' Reading Comprehension in Narrative Text by Using Concept Oriented Reading Interaction at the Grade VIII Private Islamic Junior high School Ali Imron Medan. Medan .
Pratiwi, A., & Tika. (2013). The Implementation of Think Pair and Share Technique to Improve Students Writing Skill for the Eighth Grade of Smp Muhammadiyah Ponorogo in the Academic Year of 2013/2014.
Prihastuti, Y. S. (2013). Improving The Reading Comprehension of the Eighth Grade Student of SMPN Wonosari by Using the Visualization Strategy in the Academic Year of 2012/2013 . Yogyakarta.
Robertson. (2006). Increase Students Interaction by Think-Pair-Share Technique.
Mexico City: Colorin Colorado.
Sapsuha, S., & Bugis, r. (2013). Think Pair Share Technique to Improve Students' Reading Comprehension. ICE-Ed conference. ELT Practices in Asia:
Challenges and Opportunities.
Setiawan, V. (2014). The Implementation of Think Pair and Share Technique to Improve Students’ Writing Skill for the Eight Grade of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Ponogoro in the Academic Year 2013/2014. Ponogoro.
Sudjana, n. (2006). Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT.
Remaja Rosdakarya.
Sugiarto, D. (2014). The Implementation of Think-Pair-Share Model to Improve Students’ Ability in Reading Narrative Texts. International Journal of English and Education.
A
P
P E N D I C E
S
Appendix A
TEACHING MATERIALS My black peci
I have some head covers. They are head cover, cap, and peci. I like my peci very much. Do you know what is peci? I am going to tell you now There are some terms or names for this kind of head cover. My father call it
“songkok” but some of my friends call it “kopiah”. I myself prefer to call this
head cove “peci”
Peci can produced in various colours. They may be sold in green, yellow, and brown colour. I do not like bright colour. So I bought my peci in dark colour. It is black.
My peci is number 5 in size. It has 6 cm in height. My black peci is made of a stiffened, black velvet-like fabric and fold flat. So it is truely dark, truely black.
My black peci has the shape of a truncated cone with embroidered felt in its sides.
List of Vocabularies :
1. Covers : penutup 14. Height : tinggi
2. Kind : jenis 15. Made : dibuat
3. Prefer : lebih suka 16. Stiffened : bahan baku 4. Produce : produksi 17. Velvet : bludru
5. Various : berbagai 18. Truly : benar-benar 6. Sold : dijual 19. Shape : bentuk 7. Bright : terang 20. Cone : kerucut 8. Bought : beli
9. Dark : gelap 10. Size : ukuran 11. Wear : pakai 12. Just like : seperti 13. Southern : selatan
Bongo the orang utang
Bongo the orangutan there is an orangutan in the bandung zoo. people call her bongo. she comes from a dense forest on the island of kalimantan. she has physical features similar to a human. bongo has brownishfur, and walks with with two feet bongo is almost as big asa human. she is a mammal, that means she gives birth to her children amd breast feeds them.
List of Vocabularies :
1. There is : ada 11. Almost : hampir
2. Zoo : kebun binatang 12. Mammal : binatang menyusui
3. Her : dia (perempuan) 13. Mean : maksud
4. Dense : tebal 14. Breast feeds : menyusui
5. Forest : hutan 15. Birt :
6. Island : pulau 7. Has : memiliki 8. Similar : sama 9. Fur : bulu
Lake Toba
Lake toba is one of the most famous tourist attractions in Indonesia. Lake toba is located in North Sumatra, this lake is also the largest lake in Indonesia.
Because this lake has a length of 100 KM or 62 miles with a width of 30 KM or 9 miles and the depth of this lake is 505 meters.
Around lake toba has very amazing view , because around it are a lot of shady trees. So that makes us feel calm and comfortable while on vacation in this place.
List of Vocabularies :
1. One of : salah Satu 11. Length : panjang
2. Famous : terkenal 12. Width : lebar
3. Attractions : daya Tarik 13. Depth : kedalaman
4. Nort : utara 14. Makes : membuat
5. Largest : terbesar 15. Calm : teang
6. View : pemandangan 16. Comfortable : nyaman 7. A lot of : banyak 17. Around : sekitar
8. Shady : rindang 18. Place : tempat
9. While : saat 10. Has : memiliki
My Little Sister
My little sister is Fatimah Zahra. I usually call her dek mah. As a Little girl she is very cute and adorable. She is the youngest of three siblings.
She is a little bit fat and has chubby cheeks. She has long black and a bit wavy hair. Her eye’s color are black too and her skin is light brown. She loves to eat, especially candy and snack. That’s why she has those chubby cheeks. She likes most all food, but her favorite on is fried chicken.
The difficult vocabularies :
1. Usually : biasanya 11. Has : memiliki
2. Her : dia (perempuan) 12. Long : panjang
3. As : sebagai 13. Most : paling
4. Cute : imut 14. Wavy : geriting/
berombak
5. Adorable : manis 15. Skin : kulit
6. Youngest : termudah 16. Light : terang
7. Siblings : saudara 8. A little bit : sedikit 9. Fat : gemuk
10. Cheeks : pipi
MyHouse
My house is located in South Tangerang. They are several rooms in my house.
There are a living room, a large kitchen, three bathroom, a family room, a pray room, four bedroom and a warehouse. In the living room there is furniture including sofas, a big table, photo frames that hanging on the peach colored wall.
Family room is my favorite room. My family and I often watch movies together from the big flat screen TV. For the other rooms are normal, nothing special. Oh but in the warehouse there is a space for laundry. Although is not a big house, but it's like paradise for me, the place that I love, the place where I can find happiness
and care from my family. :) The difficult vocabularies :
1. South : selatan 2. Several : beberapa 3. Rooms : ruangan
4. Living room : ruang tamu 5. Kitchen : dapur
6. Bathroom : kamar mandi 7. Bedroom : kamar tidur 8. Warehouse : gudang 9. Furniture : barang-barang 10. Paradise : surge