A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

(1)

ii ABSTRACT

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE

TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

AYU PRATAMI PUTRI

The reading skill becomes very important in the education field, and reading is indispensable for the students because the success of their study depends on their ability to read. Therefore, the researcher intends to compare graphic organizer and literal translation for teaching reading. The objectives of the research are to find out whether there is significant difference in the improvement of students reading comprehension achievement of English narrative text between students taught through graphic organizer and taught through literal translationand to find out which one is more effective technique. The research was conducted at SMAN 1 Natar especially the first grade. To gain the objective of the research, the researcher conducted quantitative design with pre-test posttest experimental group design.

The test result showed that the mean of posttest in the experimental group one was 79.8and the mean of the posttest in the experimental class two was 72, probability level (p) was 0.000. The experimental class two gained the lower average score in posttest than experimental class one. The mean difference was 7.87. It was lower than 0.05. It means that H1was accepted and H0was rejected since 0.00<0.05. It proves that the treatments given by the researcher had

better effect of the students’ achievement. Based on the data, the researcher concludes that the application of graphic organizer improves students’ reading comprehension achievement

(2)

ADMITTED BY

1. Examination Committee

Chairperson :Prof. Dr.CucuSutarsyah, M.A. ………

Examiner : UjangSuparman, S.Pd., M.A., Ph.D. ………

Secretary : Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A. ………

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. Hi.BujangRahman, M.Si. NIP. 19600315 198503 1 003

(3)

(4)

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

Ayu Pratami Putri

A Script

Submitted in a Partial Fulfilment of The Requirements for S-1 Degree

The Language and Arts Education Department of The Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG BANDAR LAMPUNG

(5)

Research Title : A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’

READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

Student’s Name : Ayu Pratami Putri

Student’s Number : 0913042031

Department : Language and Arts Education Study Program : English Education

Faculty : Teacher Training and Education Faculty

APPROVED BY Advisory Committee

Advisor Co-Advisor

Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M. A. NIP 19570406 198603 1 002 NIP 19810326 200501 1 002

The Chairpersons of

The Department of language and arts Education

Dr. Muhammad Fuad, M.Hum. NIP 19590722198603 1 003

(6)

ADMITTED BY

1. Examination Committee

Chairperson : Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. ………

Examiner : H.M. Ujang Suparman, M.A., Ph.D. ………

Secretary : Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M. A. ………

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. H. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. NIP 19600315 198303 1 003

(7)

APPROVAL FOR JOURNAL

Research Title : A Comparative Study of Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement of Narrative Text between Students who are taught through Graphic Organizer and through Literal Translation at the first grade of SMAN 1 Natar.

Student’s Name : AyuPratamiPutri

Student’s Number : 0913042031

Department : Language and Arts Education Study Program : English Education

Faculty : Teacher Training and Education Faculty

APPROVED BY Advisory Committee

Advisor 1 Co-Advisor

Prof. Dr. CucuSutarsyah, M.A. Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A. NIP 19570406 198603 1 001 NIP19810326200501 1 002

(8)

KEMENTERIAN PENDIDIKAN NASIONAL UNIVERSITAS LAMPUNG

FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN JURUSAN PENDIDIKAN BAHASA DAN SENI

Jl. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1 Kampus Gedung Meneng Bandar Lampung

Hal : Undangan Seminar Hasil KepadaYth.

Bapak/Ibu …

di tempat

Denganhormat,

Sehubungandenganakandiadakan seminar proposalmahasiswiberikut: Nama : Ayu Pratami Putri

NPM : 0913042031

Judul : A Comparative Study of Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement of Narrative Text between Students who are Taught through Graphic Organizer and through Literal Translation at the first grade of SMAN 1 Natar.

Pembimbing : 1. Prof. Dr. CucuSutarsyah, M.A. 2. Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A. Pembahas : H. M. Ujang Suparman, M. A., Ph.D,

Maka kami mengundangBapak/Ibupada seminar yang akandilaksanakanpada: Hari/tanggal : Selasa/ Maret 2013

Pukul : 10.00 WIB s.d.selesai

Tempat : Ruang Seminar Bahasa FKIP Unila

Demikianundanganini kami sampaikan.Atasperhatiannya kami ucapkanterimakasih. Bandar Lampung, Maret 2013

Mengetahui,

Koordinator Seminar

Drs. BasturiHasan, M.Pd. NIP 19540705 198603 1 003

(9)

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Table specification of try out... 37

2. The homogeneity test of the students’ Pre-test scores in both classes... 46

3. The homogeneity test of the students’ Post test scores in both classes...47

4. The students’ achievement in experimental class one... 46

5. The students’ achievement in experimental class two... 49

(10)

xii APPENDICES

Appendix Page

1. Try out test... 64

2. Lesson Plan I... 73

3. Lesson Plan II... 78

4. Lesson Plan III... 84

5. Pre-test/Post Test... 94

6. Upper Group Try Out Test... 105

7. Lower Group Try Out Test... 106

8. Difficulty Level and Discrimination Power of Try Out Test... 107

9. Reliability Analysis of Try Out Test... 108

10. Students’ Score of Pre-test and Post Test... 109

11. Table of Frequency of Pretest... 120

12. Table of Frequency of Post Test... 121

13. Random Test... 122

14. Normality Test... 123

15. The Homogeneity Test... 124

16. The Increase of Students’ Reading Comprehension... 125 17. Independent Group T-Test of Post Test in Experimental Class one and two 126

(11)

REFERENCES

Alyousef, H. S. 2005. Teaching reading comprehension to ESL/EFL learners. The reading matrix Vol. 5, No. 2, September 2005. Update on 5th January 2007. http.acrobat/rider.co.id.

Arthur, W. Heilman, TimothyR. Blair, and William H. Rupley. 1981. Principles and Practices of Teaching Reading: 5th edition. Ohio: Charles E. Merril Publishing Company

Brookbank, D., Grover, S., Kullberg, K., &Strawser, C. 1999. Improving student achievement through organization of student learning. Chicago: Master's Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University and IRI/Skylight. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED435094).

Depdiknas. 2006. Materisosialisasidanpenelitiankurikulumtingkatsatuan pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Doyle, B.S. 2004. Main idea and topic sentence. London: Ward Lock educational. Duke, N.K., Caughlan, S., Juzwik, M.M., & Martin, N. 2010. (in press). Doing

genre with purposein the K–8 classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Ellis, E., & Howard, P. 1998. Framing Main Ideas and Essential Details to

Promote Comprehension. University of Alabama.

www.GraphicOrganizers.com. Retrieved at 28 October 2012

Ellis, Edwin. 2004. Q & A: What’s the big deal about graphic organizers?

Retrieved at 22 November 2012. http//www.graphicorganizers.com Estes, Thomas H. 1991. Reading in Content Areas. University of Virginia.

http://www.readingquestorg/links.html. Retrieved at 23 October 2012 Fry, Ron. 1996. Improve Your Reading. Book-Mart Press: USA

Hatch, E &Farhady. 1982. Research design and statistics for apllied linguistic. University of California: Los Angeles Pers: Rowley, London, Tokyo. Heaton, J. 1975. English Language Tests: a Practical Guide for Teachers of

English as a Second or Foreign Language. Virginia: Longman. Langford, P. A., Rizzo, S. K., & Roth, J. M. 2003.Improving student

comprehension in content areas through the use of reading strategies. Illinois: M.A. Research Project, Saint Xavier University and Skylight

(12)

Professional Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478769.)

Meyen, E., &Vergason, G. 1996. Strategies for Teaching Exceptional Children in Inclusive Settings. Denver, CO: Love.

Meyer, D. J. 1995. The effects of graphic organizers on the creative writing of third grade students.Unpublished thesis.

Muth, K., and D. Alvermann. 1999. Teaching and learning in the middle grades. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn& Bacon.

Noviansari, Dian. 2012. The Use of Graphic Organizer Method to Teach Narrative Text in Senior High School. (Unpublished paper). Mojokerto: Muhammadiyah University.

Nuttal, C. 1985.Teaching reading skill in a foreign language.London : British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

Nuttal, C. 1982.Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

Potter, H. Abbot. 2008. Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge.

Richards, J. C. 1976. The role of vocabulary teaching.TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-89.

Simmons, D. C., Griffin, C. C., &Kameenui, E. J. (1988). Effects of teacher-constructed pre- and post-graphic organizer instruction on sixth-grade

science students’ comprehension and recall.Journal of Educational Research, 82 (1), 15-21.

Sinatra, R. C., Stahl-Gemake, J., & Berg, D. N. (1984).Improving reading comprehension of disabled readers through mapping.The Reading Teacher.

Shohamy, E. 1985.A Practical Handbook in Language Testing for the Second Language Teachers. Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University.

Smith, F. 1982. Understanding reading. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston. Suparman, U. 2005. Understanding and developing reading comprehension.

Bandar Lampung: Unila Press.

Thompson, Max., and Julia. 2004. Learning-Focused Strategies Notebook. Teacher materials. Boone: Learning Concepts, Inc.

(13)

Unila Press.

Yunita, B. F. 2008. Utilizing Graphic Organizer in Increasing Students’ reading comprehension Ability to the First Grade of SMA Negeri 10 Bandar Lampung. Bandar Lampung: Unpublished script

(14)

(15)

(16)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE... i

ABSTRACT... ii

ADMISSION...iii

CURRICULUM VITAE... iv

DEDICATION... v

MOTTO...vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT... vii

TABLE OF CONTENT... ix

LIST OF TABLES... xi

LIST OF APPENDICES... xii

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of Problem... 1

1.2 Identification of Problems...5

1.3

Limitation of Problems... 6

1.4 Formulation of The Problems... 6

1.5 Objectives of the Research... 6

1.6 Uses ofThe Research... 7

1.7 Scope of the Research... 7

1.8 Definition of Terms... 8

II. FRAME OF THEORIES 2.1 Review of Previous Research... 9

2.2 Concept of Reading ... 11

2.3 Concept of Reading Comprehension... 12

2.3.1 Literal comprehension... 12

2.3.2 Interpretative comprehension... 13

2.3.3 Critical Comprehension... 13

2.4 Concept of Teaching Reading... 14

2.5 Concept of Graphic Organizer... 15

2.6 The Advantages of Graphic Organizer... 17

2.7 The Disadvantages of Graphic Organizer... 18

2.8 Types of Graphic Organizer... 18

2.9 Concept of Literal Translation Technique... 21

2.10 The Advantages of Literal Translation... 22

2.11 The Disadvantages of Literal Translation... 22

2.12 Concept of Graphic Organizer and Reading Comprehension... 23

2.13 The Concept of Literal Translation and Reading Comprehension... 24

2.14 The Concept of Narrative Text... 25

(17)

2.16 Teaching Reading of Narrative Text using Literal

TranslationTechnique...

... 29

2.17 Theoretical Assumption... 30

2.18 Hypothesis... 30

III. RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 Research Design... 31

3.2 Population and Sample...32

3.2.1 Population... 32

3.2.2 Sample... 32

3.3 Data Collecting Technique...33

3.4 Research Procedures... 34

3.5 Criteria of Good Test... 36

3.6 Data Analysis... 40

3.7 Treatment of the Data... 40

3.8 Hypothesis Testing... 42

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Results of Research... 44

4.1.1 Result of TryOut Test... 44

4.1.2 Result of Pre-test... 45

4.1.3 Result of Post-test... 47

4.1.4 The Increase of Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement.... 48

4.2 Result of data treatment... 50

4.2.1 Random Test... 50

4.2.2 Normality Test... 50

4.2.3 Discussions of Findings... 51

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusion... 58

5.2 Suggestions...59

REFERENCES APPENDICES

(18)

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

AyuPratamiPutri, CucuSutarsyah, Budi Kadaryanto, Ujang Suparman Email: ayupratamiputri@ymail.com

Mobile Phone: +628996424551 Institution: Lampung University

Abstract:The reading skill becomes very important in the education field, and reading is indispensable for the students because the success of their study depends on their ability to read. Therefore, the researcher intends to comparegraphic organizer and literal translation for teaching reading. The objectives of the research are to find out whether there is significant difference in the improvement of students reading comprehension achievement of English narrative text between students taught through graphic organizer and taught through literal translationand to find out which one is more effective technique. The research was conducted at SMAN 1 Natar especially the first grade. To gain the objective of the research, the researcher conducted quantitative design with pre-test posttest experimental group design.

better effect of the students’ achievement. Based on the data, the researcher concludes that the application of graphic organizer improves students’ reading comprehension achievement

of narrative text.

(19)

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

AyuPratamiPutri, CucuSutarsyah, Budi Kadaryanto, Ujang Suparman Email: ayupratamiputri@ymail.com

Mobile Phone: +628996424551 Institution: Lampung University

Abstract:Kemampuanmembacamenjadisangatpenting di bidangpendidikan, danmembacajugasangatdibutuhkanparasiswakarenakesuksesanbelajarmerekatergantungpadak

emampuanmerekauntukmemahamibacaan. Olehkarenaitu,

penelitimencobamembandingkangraphic organizerdanliteral translation dalampengajaranmembaca.Tujuanpenelitianiniadalahuntukmenemukanapakahadaperbedaansi gnifikan di dalampeningkatanpembelajaranmembacapadateksnaratifyang diajarmelaluigraphic organizerdanmereka yang diajarmelaluiliteral translationdanuntukmenentukanteknikmana yang lebihefektif.Penelitiandilaksanakan di SMAN 1 Natarkhususnyakelassatu.Untukmemperolehsasarandalampenelitian, penelitimenggunakankwantitatifdesaindenganekperimenpre-testposttest.

Hasilpenelitianmenunjukkanbahwa rata-rata posttestpadakelaseksperimensatuadalah 79.8 dan rata-rata yang posttestpadakelaseksperimen II adalah 72.Kelaseksperimen IImemperolehnilai rata-rata posttestlebihrendahdibandingdengankelaseksperimen I. Rata-Rata perbedaanadalah 7.87, dimanatingkatanprobabilitas( p) adalah 0.000danlebihrendahdari 0.05. Iniberarti H1ituditerimadan H0ditolakkarena 0.00<0.05.Hal inimembuktikanbahwaperlakuanyang diberiolehpenelitimemberihasil yang lebihbaikterhadappencapaiansiswa.Berdasarkanpada datadapatdisimpulkanbahwapenerapangraphic

organizermeningkatkanprestasipembacaansiswatentangteksnaratif.

(20)

INTRODUCTION

Transferring new modern science, technology, and information can be done through reading process. Almost at all of Senior High School, applying teaching reading has less the effectiveness so the students feel boring in reading process. The reading skill becomes very important in the education field, and reading is also something crucial and indispensable for the students because the success of their study depends on the greater part of their ability to read.Smith (1982) says that reading certainly implies comprehension, and reading is something that makes sense to the reader. The reader tries to understand and get the meaning and information in the written texts form of symbols, letters, graphs, etc. Thus, they grasp the

writers’ messages from the texts.

Meanwhile Nuttal (1985) defines reading as the meaningful interpretation of printed or written symbols. It means that reading is a result of the interaction between the perception of

graphic symbols that represent language and the readers’ language skills, cognitive skills, and the knowledge of the world. In this process, the reader tries to recreate the meaning intended by the writer.

According to Doyle (2004), comprehension is a skill in attaching meaning beginning at the same level and proceeding to attaching meaning to an entire reading selection. All

comprehension revolves around the readers’ ability in finding and determining main idea and

topic sentence from the text.

(21)

comprehension into three levels of comprehension; literal comprehension, interpretative comprehension, and critical comprehension.

According to School Based Curriculum or Kurikulum Tingkat SatuanPendidikan (KTSP) for the first grade of Senior High School, the students are expected to be able to construct meaning from text. Basically it is the same as comprehending the stated and unstated information from a text.

In addition, on the Passing Grades Standard (Standard KompetensiKelulusan/SKL) of Senior High School for reading skill is stated that the students should be able to identify the main idea, explicit and implicit specific information, reference, the word meaning, phrase, and sentence of short simple text. It can be said that after graduating from Senior High School, students are expected to be good in reading, able to comprehend the simple text and to construct better understanding toward the content of the text before they continue their study to the higher level.

To solve the problem, teachers are requiredto provide effective and applicable technique for their students. They must invent potential problems that arise during the reading classroom instruction and put some efforts to find or create the effective techniques that are important to improving students’ reading comprehension achievement. Alyousef (2005:143) says that in reading, contemporary reading tasks, unlike the traditional materials, involve three-phase procedures: pre-, while-, and last-reading stages. In teaching reading, appropriate and possible strategy should be applied based on the purpose of reading in order to get the comprehension. They use reading strategy to make their reading efficient and effective.

(22)

Graphic organizer would be possible to be applied by the Senior High School students in their reading.

According to Meyen, Vergason and Whelan (1996) graphic organizer is “visual displays teachers use to organize information in a manner that makes information easier to understand

and learn” (p.132). They will be interested to the text or learning material that consist of picture or other non-verbal information such as diagram, tables, graphs, graphic, etc. Based on this reason, the researcher is interested to apply graphic organizer in teaching reading comprehension. Classroom activities that encourage interaction with texts, like graphic organizer, may improve students' reading comprehension. Graphic organizer is basically visual ways to represent information. Graphic organizer helps the readers to visualize the main concept of what they are reading, thus, graphic organizer ease the readers comprehend the text.

Graphic Organizer improves reading comprehension by emphasizing text structures such as story maps and improves different aspects of comprehension, such as literal and relational comprehension, recall, and vocabulary learning. Graphic organizer pairs with strategy instruction can be more effective than traditional basal instruction and can be used effectively as advance organizers prior to reading (Simmons et al., 1988).

Graphic organizer is a general term for schematic diagrams that help students identify key concepts and make relationships among them (Muth&Alvermann, 1999). It provides students with visual clues that they can relate to the written or spoken words to which they are exposed.

Translation is one of technique that can be used for teaching reading. Richards (1976:1) says that translation is general term referring to the transfer of thought and ideas from one

(23)

language (source of language) to other language (target language) whether the language in written or spoken forms. It means that translation is the process of giving the closest meaning or natural equivalent of the words, phases, and sentences of one language into another language whether in written or spoken forms.

This research focuses on the improvement of students’ reading comprehension achievement by comparing graphic organizer and literal translation. The participants of this research are the first year of SMAN 1 Natar. In this research, the researcher would focus on narrative text

because the students’ comprehension in reading narrative is still low. They still have difficulty in finding the main idea and specific information of narrative text.According to Potter (2008:13), narrative is the representative of an event or a series of events. In addition,

prince stated, “narrative is essentially mode of verbal presentation and involves the linguistic recounting or telling of events”. The purpose of narrative stories may have other purposes

such as for explaining a phenomenon (myth and legend). Meanwhile, according Duke et al (2010) reading narrative is making students to share and make meaning of experience, as with fairy tales, realistic fiction, and many true stories.

According to Max and Julia Thompson (2004:10), there are five main categories of graphic organizer. They are Venn diagram, story board, story map, tree map, and cause effect. The focused type of graphic organizer researcher used is story map. This type is recommended to help students in reading comprehension achievement of narrative text by emphasizing text structures. The reading comprehension here is involving achievement of identifying the main idea, specification information, vocabulary, inference, and reference. The text uses as the material in this research is narrative text covered in the Kurikulum Tingkat SatuanPendidikan (KTSP) for the first grade of SMA students.

(24)

METHOD

In this research, the researcher intends to find out the significant increase of students’ reading comprehension achievement by comparing graphic organizer and literal translation in reading. To gain the objectives of the research, the researcher conducted quantitative design with pretestposttest experimental group design. The researcher selected two classes, one as the experimental group one and another as the experimental group two. According to Hatch and Farhady (1982:22) the design of the research is described as follows:

G1 : T1 X1 T2

G2 : T1 X2 T2

Notes:

G1 : experimental group one G2 : experimental group two T1 : pre-test

T2 : post-test

X1 : treatment for Experimental Group one (Graphic Organizer Technique) X2 : treatment for Experimental Group Two (Literal Translation Technique)

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

This study has shown that the use of graphic organizer could improve students’ reading

comprehension of narrative text. The graphic organizer made the students aware of the relationship of the ideas and made the students comprehend the message in the text. This

(25)

statement was supported by Ellis’s study (2004:2) that by showing how information is

structured can be powerful way to facilitate understanding.

The explanations of Graphic Organizer made students active in the class. They always asked every step they need to do. Similar experiences were also encountered by Yunita (2007) when she applied Graphic Organizer. It seems that students would be active if they should apply a strategy they have never faced before in a reading comprehension lesson. Graphic Organizer improved students’ ability to find detailed information of the text. Meanwhile,Brookbank had done previous research in 1999, he investigated graphic organizer can help students in comprehending the text and mastering vocabulary.

The increase of students’ reading comprehension achievement is proven by the data thatthe experimental class one, there was increased 528 point for the total point after being given the treatments. The highest score, 80 in pretest increased into 92 in the posttest, and the lowest score in pretest improved from 48 into 60 in the posttest. Moreover, the mean of the pretest that was 63.375 increased to be 79.875 in the posttest.Besides, the students’ reading comprehension score also increased in the experimental class two even though it was not as significant as in the experimental class one. Intable 2 describes that the experimental class two, there was increased 260 point for the total point after being given the treatments. The highest score, 80 in pretest increased into 84 in the posttest, and the lowest score in pretest improved from 48 into 56 in the posttest. Moreover, the mean of the pretest that was 63.875increased to be 72 in the posttest.

Table 1.The comparison of Students’ Reading Comprehension Score in Both Classes

Posttest

Scores

Class Mean

Mean Difference

Significant value

(26)

Class One

Experimental Class Two

By observing the Table 1 above, there are three aspects that are compared. The first is the mean of both classes; 79.875 for experimental class one and 72 for experimental class two. The experimental class two gained the lower average score in posttest than experimental class one. The mean difference was 7.87. The second is the significant value of students, that was

0,000 (p=0,000). Based on the table above, it can be found that the students’ significant score

was lower than 0.05 (0,000<0.05). The last was t-ratio>t-table (4.190>2.000) and therefore, H0 was rejected. In other words, H1 is accepted that there was a significant difference of

students’ reading comprehension achievement between those who were taught through

graphic organizer and those taught through literal translation. Lastly, the increase of both classes was gained significantly different.

Since the students who were taught through graphic organizer gave higher result than those who were taught through literal translation, it was considered graphic organizer was better than literal translation. Besides, it was also because graphic organizer was designed to teach students to be active and to determine the main idea, supporting details, the reference of the noun, the new vocabulary and the generic structure of the text without they have to fully understand the meaning of sentence in the text. Although literal translation was also applied

Independent Samples Test

,471 ,495 4,190 62 ,000 7,87500 1,87930 4,11834 11,63166 4,190 61,895 ,000 7,87500 1,87930 4,11821 11,63179 Equal v ariances

assumed Equal v ariances not assumed Ttest

F Sig.

Lev ene's Test f or Equality of Variances

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Dif f erence

Std. Error

Dif f erence Lower Upper 95% Conf idence

Interv al of the Dif f erence t-test f or Equality of Means

(27)

in class, but the result was not as effective as the graphic organizer. It was the students which were taught through literal translation were not well structured. But, it is the strength of the literal translation when they translate the sentence in the text, they can really understand the meaning then see main idea and details in the text, but it also is a problem because teaching learning process run passively so that those who are good are getting better, who are bad are getting worse. After all, graphic organizer was more appropriate and possible to use to

increase student’s reading comprehension achievement of English narrative text significantly and applying graphic organizer can help students in reading comprehension of narrative text.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

In line with the results of the data analysis and discussion, the following conclusions are drawn:

a. There was a significant difference of students’ reading comprehension achievement between those who were taught through graphic organizer and those who were taught through literal translation at the first grade of SMAN 1 Natar. The mean or average score of posttest in experimental class one is higher than experimental class two (79.87> 72). The mean difference is 7.87, meaning that the experimental class one gained 7.87 score, higher than experimental class two in posttest. Besides that, the significant value of the posttest in both classes was 0,000 that was lower than 0.05 (0,000<0.05). T-value is higher than T-table (4.190>2.000).

(28)

was higher than in experimental class two. The significance value (2-tailed) in experimental class was p = 0.00<0.05 that meant there was a significant difference. It was also found that the students followed the reading class enthusiastically in experimental class. They enjoyed working in group and the media attracted and helped them much. Discussion happened during the class since the teacher monitored them.

According to the conclusion above, the researcher suggests that the teacher should apply graphic organizer in teaching because the technique has advantages:

1. The teacher can use graphic organizer as an alternative way in teaching reading since

it can be used to improve the students’ reading comprehension achievement.

2. The teacher should pay more attention to students’ difficulty dealing with determining main idea of a text and comprehending unfamiliar vocabulary. This can be done while the reading process. The teacher can ask the students to get used to determining main ideas and supporting details. The teacher also should give more examples in doing this correctly.

3. The further researchers should apply graphic organizer to improve the students’ reading comprehension achievement. They should apply other kinds of texts, i.e., descriptive, exposition, spoof, report text, etc.

REFERENCES

Alyousef, H. S. 2005. Teaching reading comprehension to ESL/EFL learners.The reading matrix Vol. 5, No. 2, September 2005. Update on 5th January 2007. http.acrobat/rider.co.id.

Arthur, W. Heilman, TimothyR. Blair, and William H. Rupley. 1981. Principles and Practices of Teaching Reading: 5th edition. Ohio: Charles E. Merril Publishing Company

Brookbank, D., Grover, S., Kullberg, K., &Strawser, C. 1999. Improving student achievement through organization of student learning. Chicago: Master's Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University and IRI/Skylight. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED435094).

(29)

Depdiknas. 2006. Materisosialisasidanpenelitiankurikulumtingkatsatuan pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Doyle, B.S. 2004. Main idea and topic sentence. London: Ward Lock educational.

Duke, N.K., Caughlan, S., Juzwik, M.M., & Martin, N. 2010. (in press). Doing genre with purposein the K–8 classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Ellis, Edwin. 2004. Q & A: What’s the big deal about graphic organizers? Retrieved at 22

November 2012. http//www.graphicorganizers.com

Hatch, E &Farhady. 1982. Research design and statistics for apllied linguistic. University of California: Los Angeles Pers: Rowley, London, Tokyo.

Meyen, E., &Vergason, G. 1996. Strategies for Teaching Exceptional Children in Inclusive Settings. Denver, CO: Love.

Muth, K., and D. Alvermann. 1999. Teaching and learning in the middle grades. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn& Bacon.

Nuttal, C. 1985.Teaching reading skill in a foreign language.London : British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

Potter, H. Abbot. 2008. Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge.

Richards, J. C. 1976. The role of vocabulary teaching.TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-89.

Simmons, D. C., Griffin, C. C., &Kameenui, E. J. (1988). Effects of teacher-constructed pre- and post-graphic organizer instruction on sixth-grade science students’ comprehension and recall.Journal of Educational Research, 82 (1), 15-21.

Smith, F. 1982. Understanding reading. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Thompson, Max., and Julia. 2004. Learning-Focused Strategies Notebook. Teacher materials. Boone: Learning Concepts, Inc.

Universitas Lampung. 2000. Pedomanpenulisankaryailmiah. Bandar Lampung: Unila Press.

Yunita, B. F. 2008. Utilizing Graphic Organizer in Increasing Students’ reading comprehension Ability to the First Grade of SMA Negeri 10 Bandar Lampung. Bandar

(30)

I. INTRODUCTION

This chapter concerns certain points.Introduction deals with background of the problem, formulation of the problems, objective of the research, uses of the research, scope of the research, and definition of terms clarified like the following.

1.1 Background of Problem

Transferring new modern science, technology, and information can be done through reading process. Almost at all of Senior High School, applying teaching reading has less the effectiveness so the students feel boring in reading process. This problem is also happened at SMAN 1 Natar. The reading skill becomes very important in the education field, and reading is also something crucial and indispensable for the students because the success of their study depends on the greater part of their ability to read.Based on this statement the researcher considers that reading is a very

important skill in order to increase our knowledge and our way of thinking.

There are four skills of language to be mastered in learning English. They are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Regarding the reason that the students are expected to read and to get information for increasing their knowledge that is mostly written in English, reading dominates the teaching materials in almost English textbook.

(31)

comprehend the simple text and to construct better understanding toward the content of the text before they continue their study to the higher level.

Many students at SMAN 1 Natar still get low score in their reading comprehension achievement. It is supported by the data of semester test the English teacher from recent examination test. There are only 93 students from 288 students who can pass the standard mastery learning. It means that only 32.29 % students who can answer the question correctly and there is 61.25% students who cannot answer the question correctly. The minimum standard score of SMAN 1 Natar is 65. It means that there are more than 50% students of class XI-1 SMAN 1 Natar who cannotpass minimum standard score, the researcherargues that student still have difficulty in

comprehending the idea in reading a text. Some factors that may cause the students difficulties in reading comprehension are: (1) lack of motivation, (2) insufficient

(32)

English skill that can support the reading comprehension; reading, writing, speaking, and listening, (3) difficulties in finding the main idea and its detail information, (4) lack of background knowledge, (5) lack of vocabulary mastery, and (6) ignoring reading technique.

In classrooms, teaching learning of English, especially in reading lesson, often appears monotonous and boring. It still depends primarily on media such as a textbook, a workbook, a reader book, or a reference book. Teaching learning, which should be interesting and enjoyable remains tend to be boring for the students. Teacher only brings materials that are stated in the textbook or guidance book.

Seeing this opinion, teachers are requiredto provide effective and applicable

technique for their students. They must invent potential problems that arise during the reading classroom instruction and put some efforts to find or create the effective

techniques that are important to improving students’ reading comprehension

achievement. It is also urgent to create good condition related to students’ motivation in reading, so that reading class can be more meaningful and enjoyable be doing those

ways, teacher can attract the students’ interest in reading so that it can help students

to improve their achievement on reading comprehension of English text.

Furthermore, most of the students are visual learner. According to Meyen, Vergason and Whelan (1996) graphic organizer is “visual displays teachers use to organize information in a manner that makes information easier to understand and learn” (p.132). They will be interested to the text or learning material that consist of picture

(33)

or other non-verbal information such as diagram, tables, graphs, graphic, etc. Based on this reason, the researcher is interested to apply graphic organizer in teaching reading comprehension. Classroom activities that encourage interaction with texts, like graphic organizer,may improve students' reading comprehension.Graphic organizer is basically visual ways to represent information. Graphic organizer helps the readers to visualize the main concept of what they are reading, thus, graphic organizer ease the readers comprehend the text.

The graphic organizer can be used to improve anyone’s’ learning ability in any kinds of texts, and the kinds of graphic organizer itselfis unlimited. Anyone can create a new kind of graphic organizer anytime. One common trait finds among graphic organizer is that they show the order and the completeness of a students’ thought process-strengths and weakness of understanding become clearly evident. The use of graphic organizer helps students comprehend better and students’ master key

vocabulary skills and also students’ critical thinking skills are enhanced. Regarding all the aforementioned above, the researcher assumes that graphic organizer is a teaching reading technique that can be used as an alternative way in

teaching students’ reading comprehension.Therefore, the researcher tries to find out whether there is any significant improvement of students’ reading comprehension achievement through implementing graphic organizer or not and to find out whether graphic organizer is effective to improvement the students’ reading comprehension of English text.

(34)

1.2 Identification of Problems

1. The students get difficulties in comprehending the reading text. They get difficulties in getting information from the text, finding the main idea, finding the details, the answer to the questions based on the text and making inference from the text. As the results the students got difficulties in retelling or in transferring the information from the text.

2. The students are not aware of the appropriate technique of reading which are needed to be applied in various types of text they interact. During learning process, they only apply same technique for all types of reading texts. The result is that they do not have ideas in their mind of their reading

3. The students get difficulties in comprehending English text because there may be some misunderstandings from students and their English teacher in the teaching learning interaction.

4. The students’ motivations in learning English are still low. So it is difficult to improve their English ability well.

5. The students have no good self confidence in learning English. So it is difficult for them to learn English well because they regard that English is difficult to be learnt well.

6. The teachers use inappropriate materials in teaching English. So it is difficult for students to improve their English ability well.

7. The teachers use inappropriate media in teaching English. So it is difficult in helping students understand reading comprehension easier.

(35)

8. The students are lazy to memorize the words and practice English in their daily life. So they cannot use English well.

1.3 Limitation of Problems

In line with the identification of the problems, the researcher realizes her capability in doing her research. As the solution to overcome their difficulties, the researcher is interested in discussing teaching technique which is regarded to be effective in helping students in construct their schemata and give them the concrete illustration of the text that make it easier for the students to comprehend the text.

1.4 Formulation of Problems

In accordance with the limitation of the problems above, the formulation of the research problems is as follows:

1. Is there any difference in the improvement of students’ reading comprehension achievement of English narrative text between students taught through Graphic Organizer and those who are taught through Literal Translation technique? 2. Which technique is more effective in improving students’ reading comprehension

achievement of English narrative text? 1.5Objectives of Research

In relation to the research problems above, the objectives of this research are: 1. To find out whether there is difference in the improvement of students reading

comprehension achievement of English narrative text between students taught through Graphic Organizer and those whoare taught through Literal Translation technique.

(36)

2. To find out which technique is more effective in improving students’ reading comprehension achievement of English narrative text.

1.6 Uses of Research

The results of this study are expected to be beneficial both theoretically and practically as follows:

1. Theoretically

The result of this research is expected to support the existing theory on reading strategies and to give useful information for English teachers, students, and for the development of the theory on teaching reading. 2. Practically

This study can function as information to English teachers that Graphic Organizer can be used to help students in improving their reading comprehension achievement and understanding English text easily. 1.7 Scope of The Research

This research focuses on the improvement of students’ reading comprehension achievement by comparinggraphic organizer and literal translation. The focused type of graphic organizer researcher used is story map.This type isrecommended to help students in reading comprehension achievement of narrative text by emphasizing text structures. The reading comprehension here is involving achievement of identifying the main idea, specification information, vocabulary, inference, and reference. The text uses as the material in this research is narrative text covered in the Kurikulum Tingkat SatuanPendidikan (KTSP) for the first grade of SMA students.

(37)

1.8 Definition of Terms

1. Reading comprehension refers to an activity of understanding printed text through making sense a written text by relating written language to what we already know and to what we want to know.

2. Graphic Organizer is visual way to represent information on the text. It illustrates concepts and relationships between concepts in a text or using

diagrams. In addition, it employs lines, circles, and boxes to form images which depict four common ways information is typically organized: hierarchic,

cause/effect, compare/contrast, and cyclic or linear sequences. These images serve as a visual cue designed for student to gather information, to generate and develop ideas of text, to establish cause and effect, to think logically and to seek patterns, and to form opinionsabout text.

3. Narrative text is one of the texts that contain a series of events that is created in a constructive format that describes a sequence of fictional or non-fictional events. The purpose of narrative text is to amuse the readers with actual or imaginary experiences in difference ways.

(38)

II. FRAME OF THEORIES

This chapter discusses certain points related to the theories used in thisstudy, such as review of the previous research, concept of reading, concept of reading

comprehension, concept of teaching reading, concept of graphic organizer, types of graphic organizer and concept of narrative text, involving the procedures of teaching reading of narrative text using graphic organizer, theoretical assumptions, and hypothesis.

2.1 Review of Previous Research

The researcher interested in discussing review of previous research that investigate that reading to know Graphic Organizer or Literal Translation that was more effective in teaching reading of Narrative text. There had been several studies proving that study about graphic organizer.

Brookbank had done previous research in 1999, he investigated graphic organizer can help students in comprehending the text and mastering vocabulary.Meanwhile, Meyer in 1995 has the results of study to support the hypothesis that using GOs can improve the creative writing ability of third grade students. There was significant growth

(39)

between the mean scores of the samples to warrant the use of GOs in the third grade classroom.

Fitria in 2008 at SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung had done another previous research; she conducted an experiment using graphic organizer to find out whether it might

increase students’ reading comprehension. She found the students’ scores within

treatment class increased significantly from 60.75 to 74.00 point while the increase of

students’ score. She convinced that graphic organizer technique carries benefits

toward students’ reading comprehension.

Langford in 2003 implemented reading strategies focuses on advance organizers and self-assessment were selected as intervention strategies. Various graphic organizers, an observation checklist, and a document analysis were incorporated into the daily curriculum in the targeted classrooms. Post-intervention data indicated an

improvement in accessing prior knowledge, organizing ideas, and strengthening connections to understanding

On the other hand, the researcher would compare teaching reading of narrative text through graphic organizer and literal translation technique because of previous research that is not focused related kind of text.

(40)

2.2 Concept of Reading

Reading is important for human because they would deal with written text in their daily life. They do reading for searching information or only for pleasure (Fry:2006). Nevertheless, reading is not an easy activity. There are many definitions of reading from several experts.

Smith (1982) says that reading certainly implies comprehension, and reading is something that makes sense to the reader. The reader tries to understand and get the meaning and information in the written texts form of symbols, letters, graphs, etc.

Thus, they grasp the writers’ messages from the texts.Meanwhile Nuttal (1985)

defines reading as the meaningful interpretation of printed or written symbols. It means that reading is a result of the interaction between the perception of graphic

symbols that represent language and the readers’ language skills, cognitive skills, and

the knowledge of the world. In this process, the reader tries to recreate the meaning intended by the writer.

According to Doyle (2004), comprehension is a skill in attaching meaning beginning at the same level and proceeding to attaching meaning to an entire reading selection. All comprehension revolves around the readers’ ability in finding and determining main idea and topic sentence from the text.

From all theories that has been mentioned above, it can be assumed that reading is an active process of getting meaning or information from printed or written language transferred by the writer whereas reading comprehension is the level passage or text

(41)

understanding while reading. Comprehension occurs when studentsare able to

understand, remember, retell, and discuss with others about what they have read. One

aspect that becomes essential in students’ reading is the reading technique. It has direct “link” in comprehension and strategy or technique. The researcher assumes that

reading comprehension is students’ competence in comprehending the specific information, word and surface meaning in texts is described by students’ score with

an appropriate technique.

2.3 Concept of Reading Comprehension

There are two kinds of reading activity, namely reading aloud and silent reading. What the studentsare doing in silent reading is to use their eyes and their ability to understand the meaning of the written sign, thus comprehending the text would be given more emphasize in silent reading. Someone has a purpose when he is reading. Usually the purpose of reading a passage is to find ideas from the reading passage. As Suparman (2005:1) states that there are two major reasons for reading (1) reading for pleasure; (2) reading for information (in order to find out something or in order to do something with the information studentsget)

Reading comprehension is ability which depends on the accuracy and speed of grapheme perception, that is, perception of written symbol, control of language relationship and structure, knowledge of vocabulary items and lexical combination, awareness of redundancy, the ability to use contextual clues and recognition of cultural allusion.

(42)

Heilman, Blair, and Rupley (1981:242) said that reading comprehension was a process of making sense of written ideas through meaningful interpretation and interaction with language. Comprehension is the result of reading. Moreover, they categorize reading comprehension into three levels of comprehension; literal comprehension, interpretative comprehension, and critical comprehension.

Literal comprehension is the process of understanding the ideas and information explicitly stated in the passage such as: knowing the meaning of the words, recall of details directly stated or paraphrases in own words, understanding of grammatical clues, subject, verb, pronouns, and conjunction, so forth. Recall of main idea explicitly stated and knowledge of sequence of information presented in passage.

Here the researcher sees that in reading comprehension, it is important that the reader should be able to interpret what they read and associate with their experience, not only see and identify the symbol in front of them. This is necessary because when a reader reads a text, the communication process between the reader and the writer has happened. The reader tries to interact with print, his/her prior knowledge combined with the visual (written) information result in his comprehending the text. In short, the researcher argued about reading comprehension is a combination of recognition intellect and emotion interrelated with prior knowledge to understand the message communicated.

(43)

At last, literal comprehension has been considered as the way to comprehend the text in this research. The reason is that it is suitable to the level of the first grade of senior high school students as it only deals with understanding the ideas or information explicitly in the passage such as finding main ideas of paragraph, synonym of the words based on the context, and the information.

2.4 Concept of Teaching Reading

Alyousef (2005:143) says that in reading, contemporary reading tasks, unlike the traditional materials, involve three-phase procedures: pre-, while-, and last-reading stages. The pre-reading stage helps in activating the relevant schema. For example, the teachers can ask students questions that stimulate their interest while previewing the text. The aim of while-reading stage (or interactive process) is to develop

students’ ability in tackling texts by developing their linguistic and schematic

knowledge. The last reading includes activities, which enhance learning

comprehension using exercises, cloze exercises, out-up sentences, comprehension questions.

The aim of teaching reading is to develop students’ skills that they can read English texts effectively. To be able to do so the studentsshould have particular purposes in their mind before they interact with the text. Effective and efficient reading

techniques can be real when the students read and interact with various types of texts, i.e. functional and monologue texts.

(44)

In short, in teaching reading the teacher should provide strategy to the students with purpose for reading to anticipate different type of reading texts. Therefore, reading technique should be matched to reading purpose to read efficiently and effectively.

The researcher assumes that in teaching reading, appropriate and possible strategy should be applied based on the purpose of reading in order to get the comprehension. They use reading strategy to make their reading efficient and effective. Graphic organizerwould be possible to be applied by the Senior High School students in their reading.

2.5 Concept of Graphic Organizer

Graphic organizer is visual displays teachers use to organize information in a manner that makes the information easier to understand andlearn. Estes (1991:1) states that graphical organizers are composed of boxes (or other closed figures) and lines that show the basic expository pattern of the text. The boxes contain the basic ideas of the text and lines show the connections among ideas.

Graphic organizer illustrates concept and relationship between concepts in a text by using diagram. Graphic organizer is also called pictorial organizer, webs, maps, and concept maps. Graphic organizer is visual ways to represent information. The maps can be created to arrange information:

 According to main ideas, subtopics, and details

 In sequence

(45)

 According to the similarities and differences between two or more concepts.

 Along with its components, as in the elements of a story.

Graphic organizer is a communication device that shows the organization or structure of concepts as well as relationship between the concepts. Spatial arrangement

depicting the information structure reduce the cognitive demands on the learner (Ellis, 2004:1)

Based on the explanation above, it can be seen that graphics are visual instructional tools used to illustrate the concepts of a reading text influence by a student or a

class’s prior knowledge about a topic or section of the text, using lines, boxes, etc. that show the connection each others.

Using graphic organizer in teaching reading English comprehension can be very helpful for the teacher to improve students’ performance in teaching reading and also for the students to improve their ability in reading comprehension because they can help students comprehend information through visual representation of concept, ideas, and relationships among the topic, main idea and the details of the text. They provide the structure for short and long-term memory and turn the abstract concepts into concrete visual representations. Teacher can guide the students to create and to manipulate the graphics.

Regardless of the label, graphic organizer can help students focus on concepts and how it is related to other concepts. Graphic organizer help students read and understand textbooks and picture books. In applying graphic

(46)

organizer,comprehension and retention skills play an important role since the students should firstly distinguish between main idea and supporting details. Then they infer the ideas in form of graphic organizer by writing them down in boxes or lines that showing the relation among the ideas. In graphic organizer students uses inferences andconclusion skill in the process of their reading to create the graphic organizer of the text they read. They infer the ideas in the text and draw their own conclusion about the message of the text.

In addition, in creating the graphic organizer of text, the students also use critical thinking and analysis skills. The students should analyze the ideas and think critically to determine which are the main ideas and supporting details of the text.

2.6 The Advantages of Graphic Organizer

According to Ellis (1998), there are advantages of graphic organizer as follows: 1. The content of the text easier to understand and learn.

Students are considerably more likely to understand and remember the content subject you are teaching. Simply put, the information tends to be less “fuzzy” and more precise. Graphics help students separate what is important to know from what might be interesting, but not essential information.

2. Graphic organizer can reduce information processing demands.

Second, because the semantic information processing demands are reduced, the teacher can often address the content at more sophisticated or complex level.

(47)

Showing (as opposed to just telling) how the information is structured can be a powerful way to facilitate understanding.

3. Students become more strategic learners.

Reading and writing skills, communication skills, and analytical, critical, and creative thinking skills are all subject to improve when students learn recognize these patterns of thinking, construct, and use graphic organizers.

2.7 The Disadvantages of Graphic Organizer

Besides graphic organizer has advantages, it is also have disadvantages, they are: 1. Graphic organizer has complex

2. In teaching reading by using graphic organizer, the teacher spends more time and energy to explain and give example how to construct it.

3. Some students have difficulty building concept maps and using these graphic organizer.

2.8 Types of Graphic Organizer

In accordance with Ellis (2004:2), graphic organizer can be divided into two

categories: those that depict the six basic information structures (whole to part, cause and effect, to compare or contrast information, chart the story structure, etc.) and those that serve specialized needs (i.e., a graphic which structures project planning, goal setting, etc.).

(48)

According to Max and Julia Thompson (2004:10), there are five main categories of graphic organizer. The explanation is as the followings:

1) Venn Diagram

The graphic is used to compare or contrast and evaluate information from two sources.

2) Storyboard/Chain of Events

It is used to show process, sequence of events and chronology within a text.

3) Story map

(49)

4) Tree map

This one is used to show classifications, pedigrees, analysis, structures, attributes, examples, and brainstorming.

5) Cause and effect

(50)

Based on the types of graphic organizer aforementioned above, the focused type of graphic organizer researcher used is story map. This type is recommended to help students in comprehension achievement of narrative text by emphasizing text structures.

2.9 Concept of Literal Translation Technique

Literal Translation refers to a translation technique that can be used when the languages involve share parallel structures and concepts; not to a translation made word for word: Literal translation carries the imprint of the original. This technique is used when it is possible to transpose the source language message element by

element into the target language and obtain a text that is idiomatic. Ideational choices are seldom taught from the point of view of function. Generally the focus is on the isolated meaning of each item, e.g. literal translation of these words. The researcher believes that if teachers make students realize the context in which such elements are used and trained them in inferring meaning from context, they wouldfind better results.

The goal of this technique is to be able to read and translate literary masterpieces and classics. Classes are conducted in the native language. Eventually, entire texts would be translated from the target language into the native language and tests would often ask students to replicate classical texts in the target language. Very little attention is placed on pronunciation or any communicative aspects of the language. The skill exercised is reading and then only in the context of translation.

(51)

2.10 The Advantages of Literal Translation

Translation technique has some advantages, they are:

1. Translation can be done quickly. Therefore, it can help the teacher to keep balance between the time allocation and the number of students in every classroom.

2. Translation is not limited, as it can be used to explain many different types of words.

3. The using of native language will give a set of clear of objective that finally will give the students the security since they can understand most of the instruction.

2.11 Disadvantages of Translation Technique

Besides translation technique has advantages, it is also have disadvantages, they are:

1. Translation is considered too quickly. Therefore, it takes away time that could have been used to exposure the learners to English.

2. Not every English word has exact equivalence in native language.

3. The use of native language will reduce learners’ experience of English in class.

2.12 Concept of Graphic Organizer and Reading Comprehension

Nuttal (1982) states that in reading comprehension, nonverbal material (i.e. Pictures, diagrams, graphs, tables, etc.), and a list of diagrams may give useful illustration or preview of the content of the text/book. Recently people have become conscious that non-verbal information (such as illustration, diagram, graphs, and maps) can be of

(52)

specific help in learning to read effectively. It is also a great assistance for the reader in interpreting the text. In term of teaching and learning English

readingcomprehension in the classroom, teacher and students can create their own non-verbal material in form of graphic organizer. They can build up a list of graphic or diagrams according to the text as visual illustration to show the relationship between the content of the text.

to help focus students’ attention and help them make connections. It can be used, for

example, to organize students’ knowledge about a topic prior to reading, having a

discussion, and so on. Using prior to reading, it can be used as a guide and to build background, especially for difficult or dense text. When used after reading (or whatever classroom activity), it can be used for recording understandings or knowledge gained. Graphic organizer includes story or text structure charts, Venn

(53)

diagrams, story maps, timelines, discussion webs, word webs, clusters, thinking maps and so forth.

By showing, how the information is structured can be a powerful way to facilitate understanding. Moreover, students aremore likely to become strategic learners. Reading and other communication and creative thinking skill are all subjects to improve when students learn recognize these patterns of thinking, construct, and use graphic organizer.

2.13 The Concept of Literal Translation and Reading Comprehension Translation is one of technique that can be used for teaching reading. Richards (1976:1) says that translation is general term referring to the transfer of thought and ideas from one language (source of language) to other language (target language) Whether the language in written or spoken forms. It means that translation is the process of giving the closest meaning or natural equivalent of the words, phases, and sentences of one language into another language whether in written or spoken forms.

Reading comprehension is students’ competence in comprehending the specific

information, words and surface meaning in texts is described by students’ score with

an appropriate technique. Reading includes translating process in order to get the information by relating word to word. The most widely chosen by teacher when the activities designed to evaluate reading comprehension are translation, questions, identification and explanation of new vocabulary, multiple choice, true or false and matching exercises.

(54)

It is known that literal translation technique can be regarded as one of the techniques applied to teach reading comprehension. Literal translation belongs to traditional ways of teaching English which is grammar translation method (GTM) included at Elementary school, Junior High School, and also Senior High School. The reason is

in sense related to the condition of the school, teachers’ ability, time allocation and

number of students in every class.

2.14 The Concept of Narrative Text

According to Potter (2008:13), narrative is the representative of an event or a series of events. In addition, prince stated, “narrative is essentially mode of verbal presentation

and involves the linguistic recounting or telling of events”. The purpose of narrative

stories may have other purposes such as for explaining a phenomenon (myth and legend)

Narratives generally follow a similar structure, but the student should be guided by the purpose for an audience of their text in their use of the following structure: 1. Orientation : an introduction in which the characters, setting, and time of

the story are established, usually answer who, when, and where.

2. Complication : problems in the story, the complication usually involve the main character(s).

(55)

3. Resolution : there needs to be a resolution of the complication.

Complication may be resolved for better or worse, happily or unhappily.

The examples of genres that fit the narrative text structure:

 Folktale : a very told traditional story from a particular place that was originally passed on to people in a spoken form.

 Fairy tale : an old story about magic things happened intended for amusing and giving lessons, meaning, and moral values.

 Fable : a traditional short story that teach moral lesson, especially one with the animals as characters; this story is considered as one group of animal stories.

 Myth : a story from ancient times, especially one that was told to explain about natural events or to describe the early history of place or people.

Language features that are used in narrative text are: 1. Simple past tense is used in most narratives.

2. In chronological order, using connectives that signal time, e.g., once upon a time, one day, then, next, after, meanwhile.

3. Focused on individual or group participants, for example, in third person: he, she, and they, or second person: the young man.

According Duke et al (2010) reading narrative is making students to share and make meaning of experience, as with fairy tales, realistic fiction, and many true stories.

(56)

From the explanation above, the researcher assumes that narrative text is a kind of text, which tells about series of events and also provides the resolution for the problem that happen in the past. In this research, the researcher would focus on

narrative text because the students’ comprehension in reading narrative is still low.

Even though narrative text is one of reading text that is mostly used in the reading test but many students in the first year of Senior High School do not really comprehend this sort of text. They still have difficulty in finding the main idea and specific information of narrative text.

2.15Teaching Reading of Narrative Text using Graphic Organizer

In developing students’ reading comprehension of narrative text, the researcherwould like to present the application of graphic organizer technique. The researcher

elaborates and constructs the following procedures of teaching reading

comprehension of English narrative text. The researcher takes some steps in the presentation of graphic organizer as follows:

Pre-reading Activity

Before giving the reading material, the students to firstly doing some steps as follows: 1. The students greets the teacher.

2. The students discuss about the goals of the lesson and the roles of teacher and students in the lesson.

3. The students are asked leading question related to the topic of text. 4. The students are introduced the lesson procedures.

(57)

While reading activity

1. The students reviewabout narrative text 2. The students are given the text

3. The studentsdiscuss the text together based on their schemata by asking some question related to the topic.

4. The students are introduced the graphic organizer technique and explained its function as visual illustration that can help them to comprehend the text easier. 5. The students are explained about story map and show how to construct story map. 6. The students show and explain to the relation between the lines in the story map or

storyboard (main idea and its detail information), reference of the pronoun, and difficult vocabulary in constructing the graphic organizer.

7. The students are given discussion ofgraphic organizerin the class

8. The students are explained the generic structure of the narrative text based on the story map.

9. The groups of students are asked to discuss story map according to the text. 10. The students are asked to practice applying graphic organizer in reading

comprehension of the given text individually

11. The student are evaluated their reading comprehension through reading test.

Post Reading activity

After the students read the text then they would do the following activities: 1. The students discuss their difficulties in the teaching learning process. 2. The students make conclusion of the lesson.

(58)

3. Teacher closes the meeting.

2.16 Teaching Reading of Narrative Text using Literal Translation Technique The application teaching reading through Literal Translation Technique in the school is by translating the text to comprehend it. The students are given the text and then read it aloud together. Then, they discuss it together while translating it, and when they find difficult vocabulary, they would look for it in the dictionary. The researcher take some steps of teaching reading through Literal Translation technique would be used in the school is as follows:

Pre-reading activity

Before giving the reading material, the students are firstly doing some steps as follows:

1. The student open the class.

2. The student are brainstormed the reading material together with the class While reading activity

While reading activity, the students then do the following steps: 1. The students get the reading text from the teacher. 2. The students read the text aloud together.

3. The students discuss the text based on their schemata

4. The students discussthe text together with their peers by translating it. 5. The studentsevaluate their reading comprehension through reading test.

(59)

Post reading activity

After the students read the text then they would do the following activities: 1. The students discuss their difficulty in the teaching learning process. 2. The studentsmake conclusion of the lesson.

3. Teacher closes the meeting.

2.17 Theoretical Assumption

Based on the previous explanation, the researcher assumed that using graphic organizer as technique of teaching reading might give positive effect in improving students reading comprehension achievement. Graphic organizer could give the visual representation of the text or topic and its relationship among the ideas. By utilizing graphic organizer in reading, it was assumed that students would get used to analyze the whole structure of the text. In graphic organizer, the students would be able to find out the ideas of the text a draw relationship among the ideas visually. Thus, the students would be able to comprehend the text well. As the result, students’ reading comprehension achievement could be improved.

2.18 Hypothesis

Therefore, the researcher came to the hypothesis that there was a significant

difference of students’ reading comprehension achievement between students who are

taught through Graphic Organizer Technique and those who are taught through Literal Translation Technique.

(60)

III. RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter discusses about the methods of research used in this study, such as research design, population and sample, data collecting technique, research procedures, and criteria of good test, data analysis, data treatment, and hypothesis testing.

3.1 Research Design

In this research, the researcher intends to find out the significant increase of

students’ reading comprehension achievement by comparing graphic organizer and literal translation in reading. To gain the objectives of the research, the researcher conducted quantitative design with pretest posttest experimental group design. The researcher selected two classes, one as the experimental group

oneand another as the experimental group two. According to Hatch and Farhady (1982:22) the design of the research is described as follows:

G1 : T1 X1 T2

G2 : T1 X2 T2

Notes:

G1 : experimental group one G2 : experimental group two T1 : pre-test

(61)

X1 : treatment for Experimental Group one (Graphic Organizer Technique)

X2 : treatment for Experimental Group Two (Literal Translation Technique)

In this research the pretest was conducted by implementing a reading narrative test provided by the researcher. The posttest was given by the end of the

treatment. The treatment (X) was conducted three times. Before the test used to collect the data, the researcher firstly tried it out to the students. The try-outtest was held before all the tests and treatments would be given to the students. The aim of this try out test was to find out the quality of the items of tests which were used in this research.

3.2 Population and Sample 3.2.1 Population

The population of the research was the first year students of SMAN 1 Natar. The researcher chose the first year students in the second semester of academic year 2012/2013. There werenine classes of the first year students and each class

consisted of 30 to 34 students. Their ages range from 15-16 years old. From those nine classes, there were around 288 students as the population of the research

3.2.2 Sample

Based on the population above, three classesweretaken as the sample of this research, the first class as try out class, the second class as the experimental group one, and the last class as the experimental group two. The two sample classes of this research were selected using simple random sampling. Those classes

(1)

DP: 0.20-0.39 = Satisfactory DP: 0.40-0.69 = Good DP: 0.70-1.00 = Excellent

DP: - (negative)= Bad items, should be omitted

(Heaton, 1975: 182)

3.6 Data Analysis

The researcher computed the students’ score in order to find out the students’ achievement in reading narrative text through graphic organizer using the following steps:

- Scoring the pre-test and post-test.

- Tabulating the results of the test and calculating the score of the pre-test and post-test.

- Drawing conclusion from the tabulated results of the pre-test and post-test administered, that is by statistically analyzing the data using statistical computerization i.e. Independent Groups T-Test of Statistical Package for

Social Science (SPSS) version 15.0 for windows to test whether the

increase of students’ gain is significant or not, in which the significance is determined by p < 0.05. It is used as the data come from the two samples (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:111).

3.7 Treatment of the Data

In order to determine whether the data are good or not, the researcher would analyze the data by:

(2)

2. Tabulating the result of the thesis and calculating the mean of the pretest and posttest. To compute the average score or mean of the pretest and posttest, the researcher would use a very simple statistic formula as follows:

�

=

Σ

�

Notes:

� : mean (average score)

∑x: total number of the student’s score N : total number of the students (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:5)

3. Calculating from the tabulated results of the pretest and posttest administeres thatis by statistically analyzing the data using t-test_{to test whether or not the}

difference between pretest and posttest is significant. It is used as the data comes from the same sample or known as paired data (Hatch and Farhady, 1982).

4. Administering Random Test

This test is used to make sure whether the data is random or not (Hatch and Farhady is quoted by Setiyadi, 2006: 168-169). The researcher uses SPSS version 15.0 to analyze the data. The hypotheses for the random test are as follow:

H0 : the data is not random

(3)

In this research, the criteria for the hypotheses are H1 is accepted if p > α, and

the researcher uses level of significance 0.05.

5. Administering the Normality Test

This test is used to measure whether the data in two classes are normally distributed or not. The data are tested by One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Formula (SPSS 15). The hypothesis is accepted if the result of the normality test is higher than 0.05 (sign > α). In this case, the researcher uses level of significance of 0.05

6. Administering the Homogeneity Test

This test is used to know whether the data of the posttest from the

experimental class 1 and from the experimental class 2 are homogeneous or not. The data is tested by Independent Sample Test (SPSS 15). The criteria for the homogeneity of pre test are:

H0: There is no significant difference in the level of ability (equal)

H1: There is a significant difference in the level of ability (not equal)

The criteria for the hypothesis isH1 is accepted if the result of Homogeneity

test of pretest is higher than 0.05 (Sign > α).

3.8 Hypothesis Testing

After collecting the data, the researcherrecorded and analyzed them in order to find out whether there is an increasing in students’ ability in reading

(4)

comprehension of narrative text or not after the treatment. The researcher used Independent Group T-test to know the level of significance of the treatment effect.

The formulation is:

Xe Xc

c e obs S X X t   

With: _ _

2 2 2 1                    n S n S

S e c

Xe c

X : Mean from the difference pre-test and post-test of experimental class oneand experimental class two

X : Mean from the difference pre-test and post-test of experimental class One and experimental class two

S XeXc : Standard error of differences between means

n : Subjects on sample

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:111) The criteria are:

If the t-ratio is higher than t-table : H1 is accepted

(5)

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

In line with the results of the data analysis and discussion, the following conclusions are drawn:

a. There was a significant difference of students’ reading comprehension achievement between those who were taught through graphic organizer and those who were taught through literal translation at the first grade of SMAN 1Natar. The mean or average score of posttest in experimental class one is higher than experimental class two (79.87> 72).The mean difference is 7.87, meaning that the experimental class one gained 7.87 score, higher than experimental class two in posttest. Besides that, the significant value of the posttest in both classes was 0,000 that was lower than 0.05 (0,000<0.05). T-value is higher than T-table (4.190>2.000).

b. Graphic organizer is more effective technique than literal translation. The mean difference after implementing graphic organizeris higher than the one after implementing literal translation(16.5 >8.12). It indicated that the increase in experimental class one washigher than in experimental class two. The significance value (2-tailed) in experimental class was p = 0.00<0.05 that meant there was a significant difference. It was also found that the students followed the reading class enthusiastically in experimental class. They enjoyed working in group and the media attracted and helped them much. Discussion happened during the class since the teacher monitored them.

(6)

5.1 Suggestions

According to the conclusion above, the researcher suggests that the teacher should apply graphic organizer in teaching because the technique has advantages:

1. The teacher can use graphic organizer as an alternative way in teaching reading since it can be used to improve the students’ reading

comprehension achievement.

students to get used to determining main ideas and supporting details. The teacher also should give more examples in doing this correctly.

3. The further researchers should apply graphic organizer to improve the students’ reading comprehension achievement. they should apply other kinds of texts, i.e., descriptive, exposition, spoof, report text, etc.

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

ADMITTED BY

Ayu Pratami Putri

1.3

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

�

=

Σ

�

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION AT THE THIRD YEAR OF SDN 6 METRO PUSAT KOTA METRO

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH INFORMATION TRANSFER TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT FIRST YEAR STUDENTS OF SMAN 2 PRINGSEWU

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION AT THE THIRD YEAR OF SD N 6 METRO PUSAT

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS’ WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH DIRECT METHOD AND THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH SILENT WAY AT THE FOURTH YEAR OF SDN 1 PISANG PENENGAHAN LAMPUNG SELATAN

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH RETELLING STORY AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATING A FAIRY TALE AT THE FIRST GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH COLLABORATIVE STRATEGIC READING AND TAUGHT THROUGH SELF-QUESTIONING STRATEGY AT THE FIRST YEAR STUDENTS OF SMAN 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

Dukungan

Links

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT OF NARRATIVE TEXT BETWEEN STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZER AND THROUGH LITERAL TRANSLATION AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 NATAR

ADMITTED BY

Ayu Pratami Putri

1.3

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING ACHIEVEMENT OF

NARRATIVE BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC

ORGANIZER AND TRANSLATION

�

=

Σ

�

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION AT THE THIRD YEAR OF SDN 6 METRO PUSAT KOTA METRO

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH INFORMATION TRANSFER TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT FIRST YEAR STUDENTS OF SMAN 2 PRINGSEWU

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION AT THE THIRD YEAR OF SD N 6 METRO PUSAT

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THE STUDENTS’ WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH DIRECT METHOD AND THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH SILENT WAY AT THE FOURTH YEAR OF SDN 1 PISANG PENENGAHAN LAMPUNG SELATAN

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH RETELLING STORY AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATING A FAIRY TALE AT THE FIRST GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH COLLABORATIVE STRATEGIC READING AND TAUGHT THROUGH SELF-QUESTIONING STRATEGY AT THE FIRST YEAR STUDENTS OF SMAN 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan