CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, research subject and data analysis obtained from tests, observation, and documentation collected will be described. These data give information about how pre-reading activity which is used as motivating strategy in teaching reading influences the achievement of reading comprehension. It is then used in explaining the question that is proposed in Chapter One.
4.1 Description of the Subject
The setting of this research takes place at SMAN 2 Banjarmasin, Jl. Mulawarman No.21 South Kalimantan. The school has 25 classrooms that have good condition. Class X consists of 8 classes while Class XI consists of 9 classes and Class XII consists of 8 classes.
Totally there are 831 students and 64 teachers. The numbers of English teachers are 5 teachers. All of the background education of the teachers is Sarjana Pendidikan (S1) of English.
The subject of this research are the students of tenth grade of SMAN 2 Banjarmasin academic year 2011/2012 which consists of 256 students from eight classes. They are only 56 students who are taken as the sample. They are 28 students in class X4 and 28 students in class X8. The students of class X8 are taken as the subject for experimental class and given a treatment by pre-reading activity. Meanwhile class X4 is taken as the control class which is not given treatment by using pre-reading activity in teaching and learning process
4.2 Research Findings
This part is devoted to present the findings on the pre-test, findings on post-test, findings on the observation, and findings on documentation.
4.2.1 Findings on the Pre-test
The pre-test in control class and experimental class was conducted on Tuesday, 12th 2012. The purpose of pre-test was to know the students ability in comprehending news item text. Based on the calculation of pre-test score, in the experimental class, the students’ average score was 68.57. The result can be seen in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
The Result of Pre-Test of Experimental Class
No. | Score | Category | Frequency (f) | Percentage (%) |
1. | 90 – 100 | Excellent | 0 | 0 % |
2. | 80 – 89 | Good | 4 | 14.29 % |
3. | 70 – 79 | Fair | 15 | 53.57 % |
4. | 60 – 69 | Poor | 5 | 17.85 % |
5. | < 60 | Fail | 4 | 14.29 % |
Total | 28 | 100 % | ||
Based on the table above, there were 4 students (14.29 %) who were categorized in fail level and 5 students (17.85 %) in poor level. Furthermore, there were 15 students (53.57 %) who were categorized in fair level and 4 students (14.29 %) in good level. There was no student (0 %) who was categorized in excellent level. Therefore, from the result above it was found that the average score of pre-test in the experimental class was 68.57 (Appendix 1).
Whereas based on the calculation of pre-test scores, in control class, the students’ average score was 72 (Appendix 2). The result can be seen in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2
The Result of Pre-Test of Control Class
No. | Score | Category | Frequency (f) | Percentage (%) |
1. | 90 – 100 | Excellent | 0 | 0 % |
2. | 80 – 89 | Good | 4 | 14.29 % |
3. | 70 – 79 | Fair | 15 | 53.57 % |
4. | 60 – 69 | Poor | 9 | 32.14 % |
5. | < 60 | Fail | 0 | 0 % |
Total | 28 | 100 % | ||
It can be seen in the table above that there was no student (0 %) who was categorized fail and 9 students (32.14 %) were poor. Furthermore, there were 15 students (53.57 %) who were categorized in fair level and 4 students (14.29 %) in good level. There was no student (0 %) was categorized in excellent level.
Based on the pre-test result of both experimental and control class, it can be concluded that the students’ achievement of reading comprehension of control class is better than the students’ of experimental class. It can be seen from the average score of both classes, which shows that the average score of control class is 72 and the average score of experimental class is 68.57.
4.2.2 Findings on the Post-test
The post-test was held after the treatment. Post-test was conducted to both classes on Saturday, June 16th 2012. The post-test in experimental and control groups was taken by all students in each class who had got the pre-test a few days before. Both experiment and control class consisted of 28 students. Thus, totally there were 56 students.
The post test was conducted to both classes, so that the result can be compared to the result of pre-test. Therefore, the decision whether the use of pre-reading activity made different achievement of reading comprehension could be made. The students were asked to answer 25 item questions in the form of multiple choices. The time given was 80 minutes.
The post-test result of experimental class can be seen in Table 4.3:
Table 4.3
The Result of Post-Test of Experimental Class
No. | Score | Category | Frequency (f) | Percentage (%) |
1. | 90 – 100 | Excellent | 14 | 50 % |
2. | 80 – 89 | Good | 8 | 28.57 % |
3. | 70 – 79 | Fair | 6 | 21.43 % |
4. | 60 – 69 | Poor | 0 | 0 % |
5. | < 60 | Fail | 0 | 0 % |
Total | 28 | 100 % | ||
From Table 4.3, there were 6 students (21.43 %) who got fair score, 8 students (28.57 %) who were categorized as good, and 14 students (50 %) got excellent score. For that reason, the students’ post-test achievement in experiment class improved 16.71 points. The average score of experimental class increased to 85.28 (Appendix 3).
The post-test result of experimental class can be seen in Table 4.4:
Table 4.4
The Result of Post-Test of Control Class
No. | Score | Category | Frequency (f) | Percentage (%) |
1. | 90 – 100 | Excellent | 4 | 14.29 % |
2. | 80 – 89 | Good | 6 | 21.42 % |
3. | 70 – 79 | Fair | 14 | 50 % |
4. | 60 – 69 | Poor | 4 | 14.29 % |
5. | < 60 | Fail | 0 | 0 % |
Total | 28 | 100 % | ||
It can be seen from Table 4.4 that there were 4 students (14.29 %) who got poor score, 14 students (50 %) achieved as fair score, 6 students (21.42 %) were categorized as good, and 4 students (14.29 %) got excellent score. Thus, the students’ post-test achievement in control class improved 6.43 points. The average score of control class increased to 78.43 (Appendix 4).
Based on the result of post-test in both classes, it can be concluded that the students’ achievement of reading comprehension of experimental class was better than the students’ of control class. It can be seen from the improvement of average score of both classes. The average score of experimental class increased 16.71 points, from 68.57 to 85.28; Whereas the average score of control class only improved 6.43 points, from 72 to 78.43. The average score of experimental class was categorized as good, whereas the average score of control class was fair.
4.2.3 Findings on the Observation
Previously, in chapter 3 it had been mentioned that the observation was done by using observation sheet while the observation process is done by the researcher. The observation focused on the teacher and students’ performance in teaching and learning process in both experimental and control class.
Based on the observation sheet of the students’ performance, some information was analyzed. It can be seen in the table 4.5.
TABLE 4.5
The Interpretation of Students’ Performance
Meeting | Experimental Class | Control Class |
One | 70.83% | 65% |
Two | 83.33% | 75% |
Three | 100% | !00% |
The table above shows that in the first meeting, it is found that average percentage of students’ performance in experimental class is 70.83%, and in control class is 65%. In the second meeting, the average percentage of students’ performance in experimental class is 83.33%, and in the control class is 75%. Meanwhile in the third meeting, the percentage of experimental class and control class is 100%. It means that the result of observation in both control and experiment class is in accordance with the lesson plan made.
The next discussion is the findings on the teacher’s performance that is analyzed as it can be seen in the Table 4.6.
TABLE 4.6
The Interpretation of Teacher’s Performance
Meeting | Experimental Class | Control Class |
One | 84.21% | 88.33% |
Two | 94.74% | 95% |
Three | 100% | !00% |
Table 4.6 shows the teacher’s performance for both experimental and control class. It is found that the average percentage of teacher’s performance in experimental class is 84.21% in Meeting One, while in the control class the average is 88.33%. Then, in Meeting Two, the average percentage of teacher’s performance in experimental class is 94.74%, and in the control class is 95%. Finally, in Meeting Three, the average percentage of teacher’s performance increased to 100% in both classes. It can be concluded that the teacher’s performance is excellent. In other words, the teaching and learning process in the lesson plan has been fulfilled.
4.2.4 Findings on the Documentation
Syllabus and lesson plans of English subject for tenth grade students of SMAN 2 Banjarmasin as the documents needed were collected. In the syllabus, the students were expected to be able to answer the question about the news item text, identify the topic of the text they read, identify some particular information, identify the meaning of words and sentences in the text, identify the event in the text, identify the main point of news, identify the source of news, and identify the purpose of the text they read.
4.2.5 Validity and Reliability of the Test
Since the instrument of the research is a test, it is essential to measure how reliable and valid the instrument is before conducting the test to the sample. The test instrument which was used in pre-test and post-test had been tested to one of the tenth grade class of SMAN 2 Banjarmasin, that was X-7, which was not chosen either as the experimental or control group. The try-out test was conducted on Monday, June 11th 2012.
The test is proven valid because it has been made based on the school syllabus and the materials the students have gotten from the teacher in classroom. Therefore, the test is considered as valid because the content and the format of the test are familiar for the students, the content is based on reading material syllabus, and the test really measures what it should be measured.
In order to find how reliable the test instrument was, the Kuder-Richardson approach was used. The try-out test result (Appendix 5) was calculated with this formula and helped by SPSS program. The test was proven reliable because the result of every item that calculated was higher than the value of r-table. The value for r-table is 0,374 and the result of the calculation was 0.471.
In conclusion, the test used as the instrument of this research was valid and reliable to obtain the data needed.
4.2.6 Hypothesis Testing
Since the quasi-experimental was used, proving the improvement was not only by seeing the result from the result of pre-test and post-test, but also could be proved by the calculation of t-test. T-test also used to test the hypothesis that had been made at the beginning of this research.
There are two hypothesis which have been used in this study:
1. Null Hypothesis (H0)
There is no different achievement of reading comprehension between students who are taught by using pre-reading activities and students who are not taught by using pre-reading activities.
2. Alternative Hypothesis (H1)
There is different achievement of reading comprehension between students who are taught by using pre-reading activities and students who are not taught by using pre-reading activities.
In this research, the hypothesis testing was calculated by using formula of t-test (Arikunto, 2010:354).
After the result of t-test was found, then it was compared with t-table. The result of t-test is 5.22. For significance level 0.05 and df is 56 then, it was found that the result of t-table 2.3056. It means that the result is higher than t- table (Appendix 8).
It can be concluded that alternative hypothesis (H1) in this research is accepted; There is different achievement of reading comprehension between students who are taught by using pre-reading activities and students who are not taught by using pre-reading activities.
4.3 Discussion
After the pre-test is conducted to both experimental and control class, a description of the students’ achievement of reading comprehension is given. Since the purpose of this research is finding out the use of pre-reading activities as motivating strategy while teaching reading skill, it is expected that these activities improve students’ achievement of reading comprehension. Therefore, the treatment was given to the experimental class. The treatment was using pre-reading activities as motivating strategy that the teacher used in building students’ background knowledge, motivating the students, and also setting the purpose of reading. After the treatment had been given to the experimental group, post-test was conducted in order to find out whether there is difference achievement of students’ reading comprehension between experimental and control group or not, and whether the students’ achievement of reading comprehension improve or not.
Using pre-reading activities as motivating strategy gave many advantages to the teacher and also to the students. Teacher could improvise their teaching method by using pre-reading activity. There were some activities that were used as pre-reading activities, such as: KWL chart, showing picture, showing video, pre-questioning, vocabulary building, and predicting based on title. Each activity had its own advantage to the students.
From observation, using KWL chart helped students making their purpose in a text they were going to read by writing down what they have known, what they want to know, and what they have learned. It could be seen from their activities during filling in the columns of KWL chart and answering the questions. It is in line with the statement of Sarimanah (2009) who explains that KWL is a strategy to help the students knowing what they know, what they want to learn, and what they have learned.
Furthermore, the teacher also showed pictures and played video by using the LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) and laptop. The main aim was to focus the students to the text they were going to read. Wallace (1992) states that pre-reading activities provide orientation to content and context. By showing picture and/ or video, students could get image of a text they were going to read. So that the students could be orientated to content and context of the text they would read by the image they got.
The observations showed that the teacher used pre-questioning strategy in the pre-reading stage by asking several questions related to the text to be read. The students answered the questions almost correctly because the topics were familiar to them such as the plane crash Sukoi and the concert of Korea Band. According to Peregoy and Boyle (2005) one of the purposes of pre-reading activities is to build students’ background knowledge. By pre-questioning, students could build their background knowledge to comprehend a text they would read. It means that the purpose of pre-reading activities could be reached by the used of pre-questioning as pre-reading activity.
Based on the reading syllabus of English on tenth grade of SMA, students are demanded to be able to identify the meaning of words in the text they read. Using vocabulary building helped students to enrich their vocabulary that they were going to use in comprehending the text. Thus, the use of vocabulary building as pre-reading activity could help the students to reach the objective in the syllabus.
From the observation on the last meeting, the teacher asked the students to predict the content of the text by telling them the text title. Most of the students could predict the content of the text even though a few students still could not. This is in line with what Tudor (1989) mentions about the five categories of content-related pre-reading activities. One of those categories is predicting based on title. Using predicting based on title helped students in conceptualizing what they were going to read. So it would help them in comprehending the text they would read.
The use of pre-reading activities has made different achievement of students’ reading comprehension between experimental and control class. It has also improved the students’ achievement of reading comprehension. It was proven by the results of pre-test and post-test of both classes.
The experimental class got 68.57 as the average score in the pre-test which has been categorized as poor, while in the post-test the average score is 85.28 which has been categorized as good. The result of post-test increases 16.71 points. Meanwhile, the average score in the pre-test of control class is 72 which has been categorized as fair, while the average score in the post-test is 78.43 which has been also categorized as fair. The result of post-test increases 6.43 points. It can be seen in the Diagram 4.1.
Diagram 4.1
The Result of Pre-test and Post-test of the Experimental and Control Class
From the diagram, both experimental and control class had proved that the students’ achievement was improved. But the improvement in control class was not as high as in experimental class. In other words, the improvement in control class was not significant. Experimental class had improved because the teacher taught the students by using pre-reading activity as motivating strategy in teaching reading. Moreover, the control class also showed the improvement after the students got the explanation about the news item text.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar