CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
B. Suggestion
As the result of the study reveals that the use of clustering technique had been effective way to improve the students’ reading comprehension, the researcher suggests the following things:
1. It is suggested to the English teacher to use Using jumbled paragraphs as one of technique in the teaching and learning process especially in teaching Reading comprehension.
32
2. It is suggested to the English teacher to use the interesting environmental to teach Reading to the students.
3. The teacher should invite and raise the students’ interest and motivation in learning by manipulating various ways in presenting productive skill, include Reading skill.
4. The result of this research also can be used as an additional reference or further research with different discussion for the next researcher.
BIBLIOGRAPHY .
Agustina, A. 2003. Increasing The Students’ Vocabulary Mastery Through Pictures. Makassar: Unpublished Thesis Submitted to FBS UNM.
Ainsworth, Alison. et. al. 1993. Read it Yourself: Thumbelina. Ladybird Books:
Auburn Maine.
Burns, Paul C. et. al. 1984. Teaching Reading In Today’s Elementary School.
Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston
Cooper, J. David. 1986. Improving Reading Comprehension. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
E.H. Lewis. 1894. The History of the English Paragraph. University of Chicago Press.
Firestone ,Mary. 2003. Paragraph Form: Definition, Types and Examples.
Retrieved from http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/paragraph- form-definition-types-examples.html#lesson. Accessed on December 22, 2014.
FNF. 2001. Dual Coding Theory. Dual Coding Theory and Visualization, Retrieved from http://www.hi.is/~joner/eaps/wh_dualc.htm. Accessed on August 13, 2014).
Gay,L.R.1981. Educational research competencies for analysis and aplication.London;publishing company
Hornby, A.S. 2000. Oxford: Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Sixth Edition.
Oxford University Press
Ilyas, Rosdiana. 2004. Students’ Ability in Using Past Tenses in Paragraph Writing. Makassar: Unpublished Thesis Submitted to FBS UNM
Indiana. 2011. Writing Tutorial services. Indiana University Bloomington.
Retrieved from www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/paragraphs.shtml.
Accessed on December 22, 2014.
Jitendra, A., & Gajria, M. 2003. Reading comprehension instruction for students with learning disabilities: Focus on Exceptional Children. Unpublished
Kustaryo, Sukirah. 1988. Reading Technique for College Students. Jakarta:
Depdikbud.
Mackey, W. F. 1971. Language Teaching Analysis. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Mayer. 2005. Partnership for Reading. Retrieved from
http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Reading_comprehension#Definition (references). Accessed on December 21, 2014
McFarland, Kim and Tom Vizzini. 1999. Essential Skills. Apharetta Hwy:
Rosweli.
Miller,D.2003.Reading with Meaning. Retrieved from
http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Reading_comprehension#Definition(refer ences). Accessed on December 21, 2014.
Mohammad Adnan Latief. 2010 Tanya Jawab Metode Penelitian Pembelajaran Bahasa. Malang University Press.
Nursyamsi. 2003. The Correlation between The Reading Comprehension and The Reading Speed of The Sixth Semester Students of English Education Department of FBS UNM. Makassar: Unpublished Thesis FBS UNM.
Potter, Beatrix. 1993. Peter Rabbit. Ladybird Books: Leicestershire UK.
Procter, Paul. et. al. 1995. Cambridge International Dictionary of English.
Cambridge University Press.
Rahman, Muhammad Asfah. 1985. Pictorial Image. Paper Educational Communication and Technology School of Education. University of Fittsburgh.
Rahman, Muhammad Asfah. 2005. Course Material: Statistics. State University of Makassar Press.
Salmi. 2012. Using Top Down Processing Strategy in Improving student’s reading comprehension.Thesis. English Department Faculty of Teacher Training and Education University of Muhammadiyah Makassar.
Sari. 1995. The Use of Picture in Teaching Reading. Ujung Pandang: Unpublished Thesis Submitted to FPBS IKIP Ujung Pandang
Simajuntak, Gloria Edithia. 1988. Developing Reading Skill for EFL Students.
Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Staff.highschool.spsd.org (2006). Retrieved from Reading rubric available in staff. highschool. spsd.org/.../Reading-rubric. On February 20, 2014.
Sudarwati, Th.M., Eudia Grace. 2005. Look A Head: An English Course for Senior High School Students Year X. Jakarta: Erlangga
Thompson, G. Brian, et al. 1993. Reading Acquisition Processes. Great Britain:
WBC Print.
Watson, Carol. et. al. 1981. Robbers. Usborne Story Books: London.
Whitlam, Gough. 1999. Australian Oxford Dictionary. Oxford University Press.
WikEd. .Reading Comprehension. Retrieved from
http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/
Reading_comprehension#Definition#Definition). Accessed on August 12nd, 2014.
Wright, Andrew. 1989. Pictures for Language Learning. Melbourne and Sydney:
Cambridge University Press.
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Page Table 1: The Mean Score of the Students’ Literal Reading
Comprehension in Pre-Test and Post-Test ... 25
Table 2: The Comparison of T-test and T-table Score of the Students
in Reading Comprehension ...... 27
xii
LIST OF GRAPHICS
Page Graphic 1. The Improvement of the Students’ Literal
Comprehension ... 27
Graphic 2. The Improvement of the Students’ Summarizing
... 29
Graphic 3. The Improvement of the Students’ Reading
Comprehension ... 31
Graphic 4. The Observation Result of the Students’ Activeness
in Learning Process ... 33
xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A.1 The Students’ Row Scores Of Pre-Test Appendix A.2 The Students’ Row Scores Of Post-Test
Appendix A.3 Table Of Students Achievement In Literal Reading Comprehension
Appendix A.4 Calculating The T-Test Values Of Literal Reading Comprehension.
Appendix A.5 The Student’s Mean Score Of The Pre-Test And Post-Test Appendix A.6 The Percentage Of The Students’ Development In Literal
Reading Comprehension
Appendix A.7 Classification Of Students’ Scores In Literal Reading Comprehension
Appendix A.8 Table Distribution Of T-Value Appendix A.9 Lesson Plan
APPROVAL SHEET
Title : USING JUMBLED PARAGRAPHS TECHNIQUE TO
IMPROVE THE STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION (An Experimental Research at the First Year Students of Yayasan SMA Perguruan Islam Makassar)
Name : MUHAMMAD ALES
Reg. Number : 10535 4196 09
Program : ENGLISH DEPARTMENT/ STRATA SATU (S1)
After being checked and observed this thesis had been fiil qualification to be examined.
Makassar, January 2014
Approved by Consultant I
Dr. Fahmi Room, M.Hum
Consultant II
Dra. Hasnawati Latief, M.Pd
Dean of FKIP Head of English Unismuh Makassar Education Department
Dr. A. Sukri Syamsuri, M.Hum Erwin Akib, S.Pd,.M.Pd
df α (For one group sample)
0, 25 0, 10 0, 05 0, 02 0, 01 0, 005
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11..
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
40.
60.
120.
1,000 0,816 0,765 0,741 0,727 0,718 0,711 0,706 0,703 0,700 0,697 0,695 0,694 0,692 0,691 0,690 0,689 0,688 0,688 0,687 0,66 0,686 0,685 0,685 0,684 0,684 0,684 0,683 0,683 0,683 0,681 0,679 0,677 0,674
3,078 1,886 1,638 1,533 1,476 1,440 1,415 1,397 1,383 1,372 1,363 1,356 1,350 1,345 1,341 1,337 1,333 1,330 1,328 1,325 1,323 1,321 1,319 1,318 1,316 1,315 1,314 1,313 1,311 1,310 1,303 1,296 1,289 1,282
6,314 2,920 2,353 2,132 2,015 1,943 1,895 1,860 1,833 1,812 1,796 1,782 1,771 1,761 1,753 1,746 1,740 1,734 1,729 1,725 1,721 1,717 1,714 1,711 1,708 1,706 1,703 1,701 1,699 1,697 1,684 1,671 1,658 1,645
12,706 4,303 3,182 2,766 2,571 2,447 2, 365
2,306 2,262 2,228 2,201 2,178 2,160 2,145 2,132 2,120 2,110 2,101 2,093 2,086 2,080 2,074 2,069 2,064 2,060 2,056 2,052 2,048 2,045 2,042 2,021 2,000 1,980 1,960
31,821 6,965 4,541 3,747 3,365 3,143 2,998 2,896 2,821 2,764 2,718 2,681 2,650 2,624 2,623 2,583 2,567 2,552 2,539 2,528 2,518 2,508 2,500 2,492 2,485 2,479 2,473 2,467 2,462 2,457 2,423 2,390 2,358 2,326
63,657 9,925 5,841 4,604 4,032 3,707 3,499 3,355 3,250 3,169 3,106 3,055 3,012 2,977 2,947 2,921 2,898 2,878 2,861 2,845 2,831 2,819 2,807 2,797 2,787 2,779 2,771 2,763 2,756 2,750 2,704 2,660 2,617 2,676
APPENDIX A.1
The students’ row scores of pre-test
Respondents Pre-test
Literal Reading Comprehension
Ideas Specific Information Total score Final score Total score Final score
S-1 12 6 12 6
S-2 6 3 8 4
S-3 6 3 8 4
S-4 8 4 6 3
S-5 6 3 12 6
S-6 6 3 6 3
S-7 6 3 6 3
S-8 8 4 8 4
S-9 12 6 12 6
S-10 12 6 8 4
S-11 8 4 10 5
S-12 6 3 8 4
S-13 6 3 8 4
S-14 6 3 8 4
S-15 8 4 10 5
S-16 12 6 12 6
S-17 6 3 6 3
S-18 8 4 8 4
S-19 6 3 6 3
S-20 6 3 8 4
Total ∑ x=77 ∑ x=85
Mean score (X) X=3,85 X= 4,25
APPENDIX A.2
The students’ row scores of post-test
Respondents
Post-test
Literal Reading Comprehension
Ideas Specific Information
Total score Final score Total score Final score
S-1 20 10 20 10
S-2 12 6 16 8
S-3 12 6 16 8
S-4 16 8 16 8
S-5 16 8 16 8
S-6 12 6 12 6
S-7 10 5 16 8
S-8 12 6 16 8
S-9 16 8 16 8
S-10 18 9 18 9
S-11 14 7 12 6
S-12 14 7 12 6
S-13 12 6 12 6
S-14 12 6 16 8
S-15 20 10 20 10
S-16 14 7 18 9
S-17 10 5 12 6
S-18 16 8 16 8
S-19 16 8 16 8
S-20 16 8 16 8
Total ∑ x=144 ∑ x=156
Mean score (X)
X=7,2 X=7,8
APPENDIX A.3
Table of students achievement in literal reading comprehension
Respondents Ideas Information
Pre-test Post-test D (x2-x1) D Pre-test Post-test D (x2-x1) D
S-1 6 10 4 16 6 10 4 16
S-2 3 6 3 9 4 8 4 16
S-3 3 6 3 9 4 8 4 16
S-4 4 8 4 16 3 8 5 25
S-5 3 8 5 25 6 8 2 4
S-6 3 6 3 9 3 6 3 9
S-7 3 5 2 4 3 8 5 25
S-8 4 6 2 4 4 8 4 16
S-9 6 8 2 4 6 8 2 4
S-10 6 9 3 9 4 9 5 25
S-11 4 7 3 9 5 6 1 1
S-12 3 7 4 16 4 6 2 4
S-13 3 6 3 9 4 6 2 4
S-14 3 6 3 9 4 8 4 16
S-15 4 10 6 36 5 10 5 25
S-16 6 7 1 1 6 9 3 9
S-17 3 5 2 4 3 6 3 9
S-18 4 8 4 16 4 8 4 16
S-19 3 8 5 25 3 8 5 25
S-20 3 8 5 25 4 8 4 16
Total ∑ x=144 ∑ D=67 ∑D2
=255
∑ x =156 ∑ D =71 ∑D2= 281
APPENDIX A.4
Calculating the t-test values of literal reading comprehension.
a. Calculating the t-test analysis of reading some ideas.
𝐷̅ =𝛴𝐷 𝑁
= 67 20
= 3,35
) 1 (
)
( 2
2
N N
N D D
t D
) 1 20 ( 20
20 ) 67 255 (
35 . 3
2
t
) 19 ( 20
20 255 4489
35 . 3
t
380 45 , 224 255
35 . 3
t
380 55 , 30
35 .
3 t
08 . 0
35 .
3 t
3 . 0
35 .
3 t
t= 11
b. Calculating the t-test analysis of reading for specific information.
𝐷̅ =𝛴𝐷 𝑁
= 71 20
= 3.55
) 1 (
) ( 55 , 3
2 2
N N
N D D
t
) 1 20 ( 20
20 ) 71 281 (
55 . 3
2
t
) 19 ( 20
20 281 5041
55 . 3
t
380 05 . 252 281
55 . 3
t
380 95 , 28
55 .
3 t
07 . 0
55 .
3 t
26 . 0
55 .
3 t
t= 13.65
APPENDIX A.5
a. The student’s mean score of the pre-test and post-test in reading for some ideas.
Pre- test: 𝑋̅1 = ∑ 𝑋𝑁
= 77 20 = 3,85
Post – test: 𝑋2̅̅̅̅ = ∑ 𝑋𝑁
= 144 20 = 7,2
b. The student’s mean score of the pre-test and post-test in reading for some specific information.
Pre – test: 𝑋1̅̅̅̅ = ∑ 𝑋𝑁
= 85 20
= 4,25
Post–test: 𝑋̅2 = ∑ 𝑋𝑁
= 156 20 = 7,8
APPENDIX A.6
The percentage of the students’ development in literal reading comprehension a. Ideas
𝑃 =
X2−X1𝑋1× 100 %
𝑃 =
7.2−3.853.85× 100%
𝑃 = 3.353.85
× 100%
𝑃 = 75%
b. Specific Information
𝑃 =
X2−X1𝑋1× 100 %
𝑃 =
7.8−4.254.25× 100%
𝑃 = 3.554.25
× 100%
𝑃 = 83 %
APPENDIX A.7
Classification of students’ scores in literal reading comprehension 1. Classification of students’ score in reading for some ideas
respondents Pre-test Classification Post test Classification
S-1 6 Fairly 10 Excellent
S-2 3 Very poor 6 Fairly
S-3 3 Very poor 6 Fairly
S-4 4 Poor 8 Good
S-5 3 Very poor 8 Good
S-6 3 Very poor 6 Fairly
S-7 3 Very poor 5 Fairly
S-8 4 Poor 6 Fairly
S-9 6 Fairly 8 Good
S-10 6 Fairly 9 Very good
S-11 4 Poor 7 Fairly good
S-12 3 Very poor 7 Fairly good
S-13 3 Very Poor 6 Fairly
S-14 3 Very poor 6 Fairly
S-15 4 Poor 10 Excellent
S-16 6 Fairly 7 Fairly good
S-17 3 Very Poor 5 Fairly
S-18 4 poor 8 Good
S-19 3 Very poor 8 Good
S-20 3 Very poor 8 Good
2.Classification of students’ scores in specific information.
respondents Pre-test Classification Post test Classification
S-1 6 Fairly 10 Excellent
S-2 4 poor 8 Good
S-3 4 poor 8 Good
S-4 3 Very poor 8 Good
S-5 6 Fairly 8 Good
S-6 3 Very poor 6 Fairly
S-7 3 Very poor 8 Good
S-8 4 Poor 8 Good
S-9 6 Fairly 8 Good
S-10 4 Poor 9 Very good
S-11 5 Poor 6 Fairly
S-12 4 Poor 6 Fairly
S-13 4 Poor 6 Fairly
S-14 4 Poor 8 Good
S-15 5 Poor 10 Excellent
S-16 6 Fairly 9 Very good
S-17 3 Very Poor 6 Fairly
S-18 4 Poor 8 Good
S-19 3 Very poor 8 Good
S-20 4 Poor 8 Good
APPENDIX A.8
TABLE DISTRIBUTION OF T-VALUE α (For two groups sample)
df
0, 50 0, 20 0, 10 0, 05 0, 02 0, 1
α (For one group sample)
0, 25 0, 10 0, 05 0, 02 0, 01 0, 005
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11..
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
40.
60.
120.
1,000 0,816 0,765 0,741 0,727 0,718 0,711 0,706 0,703 0,700 0,697 0,695 0,694 0,692 0,691 0,690 0,689 0,688 0,688 0,687 0,66 0,686 0,685 0,685 0,684 0,684 0,684 0,683 0,683 0,683 0,681 0,679 0,677 0,674
3,078 1,886 1,638 1,533 1,476 1,440 1,415 1,397 1,383 1,372 1,363 1,356 1,350 1,345 1,341 1,337 1,333 1,330 1,328 1,325 1,323 1,321 1,319 1,318 1,316 1,315 1,314 1,313 1,311 1,310 1,303 1,296 1,289 1,282
6,314 2,920 2,353 2,132 2,015 1,943 1,895 1,860 1,833 1,812 1,796 1,782 1,771 1,761 1,753 1,746 1,740 1,734 1,729 1,725 1,721 1,717 1,714 1,711 1,708 1,706 1,703 1,701 1,699 1,697 1,684 1,671 1,658 1,645
12,706 4,303 3,182 2,766 2,571 2,447 2, 365
2,306 2,262 2,228 2,201 2,178 2,160 2,145 2,132 2,120 2,110 2,101 2,093 2,086 2,080 2,074 2,069 2,064 2,060 2,056 2,052 2,048 2,045 2,042 2,021 2,000 1,980 1,960
31,821 6,965 4,541 3,747 3,365 3,143 2,998 2,896 2,821 2,764 2,718 2,681 2,650 2,624 2,623 2,583 2,567 2,552 2,539 2,528 2,518 2,508 2,500 2,492 2,485 2,479 2,473 2,467 2,462 2,457 2,423 2,390 2,358 2,326
63,657 9,925 5,841 4,604 4,032 3,707 3,499 3,355 3,250 3,169 3,106 3,055 3,012 2,977 2,947 2,921 2,898 2,878 2,861 2,845 2,831 2,819 2,807 2,797 2,787 2,779 2,771 2,763 2,756 2,750 2,704 2,660 2,617 2,676