0.05 0.1
0.15 0.2
0.25
Experiment Gain Control Gain
The Gain Differences
Experiment Gain Control Gain
The table above shows that there is difference on both the experiment and control classes. It shows that students in the control class that is not taught by using
Think-Aloud also shows an improvement in the reading comprehension test result, and so do students in the experiment class that is taught by using Think-Aloud.
After being calculated, it shows that the gain difference on experiment class is higher than the gain difference on the control class. We can see that the gain achieved
by the control class is 0.137374, while the experiment class achieved the gain as much as 0.217446, which is higher. This result supports the independent t-test that
Think-Aloud significantly influence the reading comprehension skill on the experiment class.
The gain differences between the experiment and control class is illustrated on the bar diagram below.
Picture 4. 3 The Gain Differences on the Experiment and Control Classes The Questionnaire Analysis
Besides giving sets of reading test, to know the effectiveness of Think-Aloud toward students‟ reading skill the writer also gave sets of questionnaires namely
Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory MARSI. The questionnaires aims at investigating students‟ awareness in using reading strategies
whilst they are reading the text. The detail of the question on the questionnaire will be attached on the appendix of this paper.
The questionnaire was given twice that is before the students were given Think-Aloud and after the students were given treatment. The questionnaire was only
given to the experiment class as the questionnaire is analyzing the effectiveness of Think-Aloud. The scores gained by the experiment class are shown in the table below
Table 4.9 The Descriptive Statistics of the Questionnaire Result
Pre-Questionnaire Post-Questionnaire
N Valid
35 35
Missing Mean
2.4831 2.7500
Median 2.3200
2.6600 Mode
2.30 2.86
Std. Deviation .40685
.36612 Variance
.166 .134
Skewness 1.079
.692 Std. Error of
Skewness .398
.398 Kurtosis
.495 -.198
Std. Error of Kurtosis .778
.778 Range
1.70 1.44
Minimum 1.83
2.23 Maximum
3.53 3.67
Sum 86.91
96.25 From the table above, it can be seen that the mean of the pre-questionnaire
result is 2.4831, and according to the average key in MARSI, this mean score indicates that the students‟ has a low reading strategy. After the treatment, the same
questionnaire was given to the students. As mentioned in the table, the mean score of the post-questionnaire is 2.7500 which means that the students have a medium
reading strategy.
The increasing of the mean score in the questionnaire indicates that students have a better reading strategy after they are given Think-Aloud. The writer compare
the paper from some students and they shows that before given think-Aloud they seldom use context clue to help them better understanding the text, and they also
seldom guess uncommon words they found in the texts they circle or thick number 1 or 2 in the questionnaire. After they are given Think-Aloud and having some
exercise to do in the class, they started to use a smart guessing every time they find an uncommon word in the text. They also use a context to help them get a better
understanding of the text. Besides that, they also use a clue given in the text like a picture. The result of the questionnaire in detail is attached in the appendix of this
paper. Then, according to the hypothesis test result and the questionnaire analysis it
can be conclude that the significant difference on the test result from the experiment class is also followed by the higher reading strategy level, which is from low level
to the medium level.
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. CONCLUSION
From the data analysis and data interpretation in chapter 4, it is proven that the Think-Aloud
method has improved the ability of students‟ reading. Before being treated using Think-Aloud the experiment class gained a mean score 52.54 and after
the treatment is conducted, then the class gained the mean score 62.68. Then, from the hypothesis test, it is also revealed that the result shows a
significant differences result of pre-test and the post-test. The Independent t-test shows that the significant score is 0.02,
which is lower than the value of α 0.05. It indicates that Think Aloud has significantly influenced reading comprehension skill
on students‟ in the experiment class. Although students in the control class also increased their mean score in the post-test 0.137374, the increase of the mean
score of the experimental class is higher 0.217446. It means that Think-Aloud is proven to effectively increase students‟ reading ability in the class.
In the process of giving the treatment the students seemed to be confused at first but after the writer modelled the Think-Aloud and asked them to do Think-
Aloud in more than one phase, students were finally able to conduct the Think- Aloud.
Apart from the reading test result, the result from the questionnaire also shows an improvement of students‟ ability to use a strategy in their reading. For
instance, before using Think-Aloud students always confused when it came to them a difficult and uncommon word in the text. Then, instead of guessing the word from
the context, students often left the word behind. Then, after the Think-Aloud was given, students started to guess an uncommon word they found in the text.
B. SUGGESTION
From the research result, the writer suggests that Think-Aloud protocol should be applied to students for the sake of their reading comprehension ability.
43
Even though, Think Aloud is not so popular in Indonesia, its function that enables students to know and analyze what they think whilst they are reading can be put as a
consideration by teachers as a teaching reading technique. Moreover, in applying Think-Aloud teachers should begin with a story or a
text that is familiar to students or a text whose vocabularies is not too difficult for students. If the text is quite difficult for students, the students may get stressed out
and demotivated to conduct the Think-Aloud. In conducting Think-Aloud, teachers should also make sure that the text
either contains of common words and also pictures. Common words and pictures help students build their own reading strategy while they are reading.
Last but not least, it is important to model the Think-Aloud and make sure that students fully understand it before the teachers ask the students to do it.
Besides giving suggestion to the teacher, the writer also wants to address his advice concerning on Think-Aloud to another researcher for further researches. As
the writer conducted the research on the experiment class, the writer found that some of the participants did not do the Think-Aloud procedures exactly as what it is
told. Instead of conducting Think-Aloud to the text that was given to them, some students were translating the text into Bahasa Indonesia. Translating is different
from expressing out thought while we are reading. The writer admitted that he did not really reassure whether the participant understand how to conduct Think-Aloud.
The writer only explained the procedure twice. Thus, in the future research, it is highly recommended to make sure that the participants understand how to conduct -
Think-Aloud, and also to make them aware that Think-Aloud is different from translating a text.
REFERENCES
Adler, Mortimer, J. and Doren, Charles Van, How to Read a Book Revised Edition. Boca Grande: Simon Schuster, Inc., 1972.
Barber, Charles, et.al. The English Language A Historical Introduction Second Edition. United Kingdom: University Press Cambridge, 2009.
Bowels, Melissa A. The Think Aloud Controversy in Second Language Research. New York: Routledge, 2010.
Carbo, Marie. Becoming a Great Teacher of Reading. United State: A oint Publication, 2007.
Charters, Elizabeth, “The Use of Think Aloud in Qualitative Research; An
Introduction to Think Aloud Methods ”, Brock Education, Vo.12, No.2,
2003: 69 Creswell, John W., Educational Research; Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2008.
Day, Richard R. and Jeong- suk Park “Developing Reading Comprehension
Questions”, Reading in Foreign Language. Vol.17.No.1. 2005: 62 Farris, Pamela. et. Al. Teaching Reading
A Balanced Approach for Today’s Classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004.
Fraenkel , Jack R. and Norman E. Wallen, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education Fifth Edition, New York: McGraw- Hill, 2003.
Harmer, Jeremy, The Practice of English Language Teaching New Edition, New York: Longman Publishing, 1996.
