The Research Finding

A. The Research Finding

1. The Research Setting

The research was conducted in SMP Negeri 6 Susua. The school located in Hilidanayao village, South Nias regency. The school was 41 km from Teluk Dalam town. The school has a office and some classes. The school has a composed atmosphere because it was surrounded by many trees and it was far from disturbance of transportation that supports the teaching learning activity.

SMP Negeri 6 Susua consisted of three classes which were divided in three levels, they were: seventh grade; two class eighth grade and the ninth grade. The total numbers of the students were 100 students. In school, there was a headmaster, 10 teachers, and a staff. All the persons who worked in that school were very friendly and cooperate with the researcher.

The subject of the research was the Eighth Grade class B of SMP Negeri 6 Susua. The total numbers of the students were 25 students consisting of 16 boys and 9 girls.

In conducting the research, the researcher started in the beginning of February 2016 by asked permission of headmaster’s agreement first. In conduct the research, the researcher was helped by the English teacher of SMP Negeri

6 Susua 6 Susua

2. The Explanation of the Research Findings for Each Cycle

a) Cycle I

In conducting Cycle I, it was done two meetings. The process of the research in Cycle I as follows.

1) First Meeting

There were some activities that the researcher did in the first meeting of Cycle I, there were.

a) Planning

In doing Cycle I in the first meeting, the researcher prepared a lot of things, such as: lesson plan, reading material about narrative text with title “ Beaty and the Beast,” the observation sheet of the students’ activities, and the observation sheet of the researcher’s activities. The steps of planning were done by the researcher to avoid misconception of the action that would be done in the classroom.

b) Action

After planning, the researcher conducted the action in the classroom. The first meeting of the action was held on February 18 th 2016. The meeting done in 2 x 40 minutes. The teaching-

learning process consisted of pre teaching-learning activities, whilst teaching-learning activities and post teaching-learning activities.

The researcher greeted the students and asked the students’ condition and the students replied the researcher’s greeted and condition, the researcher introduced himself to the students and the students listen the researcher introduced, the researcher checks the student’s attendence list and the students listened to their name.

The researcher continued done the whilst teaching-learning activities. the researcher reminds the students about the last material and the students gave their opinion about the last material they have learnt, the researcher aske the students difficulties in learning English and the students tell their difficulties in learning English, the researcher introduced a new material to the students about narrative text and the students listened to the researcher’s explanation about narrative text, the researcher explained the definition and generic structure of narrative text and the students listened to the researcher’s explanation about the generic structure in narrative text, the researcher gave an example of narrative text and the students connected each other about cause and effect to text and the students listen to the researcher’s explanation about the example of narrative text, the researcher implemented the procedures of Cause and Effect Strategy, the researcher introduced the material and invited to find out the main idea in narrative text and the students found out the main idea in narative text text, the researcher discussed about how events are connected to each other and that the cause was the thing that made something happened, while the effect was the thing that happened (the reaction) and the students connect each other about cause and effect to text, the researcher provided simple examples to the students of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures, the researcher continued discussed to the student’s the generic structures in narrative text and the The researcher continued done the whilst teaching-learning activities. the researcher reminds the students about the last material and the students gave their opinion about the last material they have learnt, the researcher aske the students difficulties in learning English and the students tell their difficulties in learning English, the researcher introduced a new material to the students about narrative text and the students listened to the researcher’s explanation about narrative text, the researcher explained the definition and generic structure of narrative text and the students listened to the researcher’s explanation about the generic structure in narrative text, the researcher gave an example of narrative text and the students connected each other about cause and effect to text and the students listen to the researcher’s explanation about the example of narrative text, the researcher implemented the procedures of Cause and Effect Strategy, the researcher introduced the material and invited to find out the main idea in narrative text and the students found out the main idea in narative text text, the researcher discussed about how events are connected to each other and that the cause was the thing that made something happened, while the effect was the thing that happened (the reaction) and the students connect each other about cause and effect to text, the researcher provided simple examples to the students of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures, the researcher continued discussed to the student’s the generic structures in narrative text and the

Finally, in the post of teaching learning process, the researcher closed the teaching- learning process and greeted the students and the students replied the researcher’s greeted.

c) Observation

The observation was done by the teacher-collaborator during the implemented of the researcher’s action in the classroom. Based on the result of the observation, the researcher obtained the data about the students who had done and had not done the activities during implemented the action in the classroom.

1) The students who had done activities

: 14 persons (56%) students

2) The students who had not done activities : 11 persons (44%) students

In the first meeting, the researcher found the weaknesses of the students and the researcher done the activities, there were: (1) Some of the students did not find out the main idea in narrative text.

(2) Some of the students did not connect to each other about cause and effect in narrative text. (3) Some of the students were not able to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (4) Some of the students were not able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

Besides that, there were also some strength of the students’ and the researcher’s activities as follows. (1) All the students were present in the class in the first meeting in Cycle I. (2) Most of the students were able to give review the last material to the researcher. (3) Most of the students were able to follow the example of cause and effect in narrative text. (4) Most of the students were able to pose questions to the researcher about narrative text.

Based on the researcher’s activities, the result of the researcher‟s observation sheet in the first meeting in Cycle I as follows.

1) The researcher’s who had done activities : 15 (83.33%) of 18 activities

2) The researcher’s who had undone activities : 3 (16.66%) of 18 activities

d) Reflection

In the first meeting of Cycle I, the researcher did not have enough time to evaluate the students’ ability in reading skill. The researcher would done some improvements in the next meeting, as follows. (1) The researcher asked the students practice to find out the main idea in narrative text at home. (2) The researcher asked the students connected each other about cause and effect in narrative

text.

(3) The researcher asked the students to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (4) The researcher asked the students to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

2) Second Meeting

The researcher did some activities in the second meeting such as, planning, action, observation and reflection. The explanation of the activities as follows.

a) Planning

The researcher made the plan again, in the meeting prepared everything that was needed. The researcher arranged the lesson plan, prepared the material narrative text to the students, the researcher prepared the observation sheet, evaluation sheet to collected the data, prepared the field notes of the researcher and students.

b) Action

In action, the researcher conducted the classroom to continue taught the students. The second meeting was held on February 24 th 2016. The meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes.

The researcher greeted the students and the students responded the researcher greeted, the researcher asked the students’ condition and the students told their condition to the researcher, the researcher checks the students’ attendance list and the students listened their name.

The researcher continued doing the whilst teaching-learning activities. The researcher remind the students about the last material and the students review the last material, the researcher distributed a reading text to the students and the students took the reading text to the researcher, the researcher continued to implement the the procedures of Cause and Effect

Strategy, the researcher asked the students to think of something that might happened and described cause and effect relationships in narrative text and the students described cause and effect relationships in narrative text, the researcher decided the class into groups and found out the specific facts about narrative text and the students made groups and found out the specific facts about narrative, the researcher gave each group of a copy of the cause and effect worksheet and the students took a copy of the cause and effect worksheet, the researcher asked the student discussed then, each group presented their result to read and pointed out in front the class and the students presented their result to read and pointed out in front the class, the researcher distributed the evaluation sheet to the students and the students took the evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher gave instruction how done the test and the students listened the instruction to the researcher, the researcher collected the students’ test and the students submitted their evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher guided the students who still get difficulties in comprehending the text and gave the corrections to the students faults and the students comprehend the correction fault to the researcher, the researcher motivated the students who are less active and can’t afford to follow the taeching-learning process and the students listen the motivation to the researcher, the researcher asked the students’ difficulties about the material that has been learned and the students told their weaknesess about the material in narrative text, the researcher concluded to involve the students and the students listened the conclusion to the researcher.

Finally, in the post teaching-learning process, the researcher closed the teaching-learning process and greeted the students and the students replied the researcher’s greeting.

c) Observation

Based on the result of the students’ observation sheet, the students activities in the second meeting of Cycle I would be described as follow:

1) The students who had done activities

: 18 (72 %) students.

2) The students who had undone activities : 7 (28 %) students.

The researcher found some weaknesses in the second meeting of Cycle I, as follows. (1) Some of the students were not able to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (2) Some of the students were not able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

There were also some advantages in second meeting of Cycle I, as follows. (1) Most of the students were able to find out the main idea in narrative text at home. (2) Most of the students were able to connect each other about cause and effect in narrative text.

Based on the result of the researcher’s observation sheet, the activities had been done by the researcher in the second meeting of Cycle I as follows.

1) The students who had done activities

: 15 (88.23 %) of 17 activities.

2) The students who had not done activities : 2 (11.76 %) of 17 activities

d) Reflection

In the second meeting of Cycle I, the researcher evaluated the students’ ability in reading skill. In the step, the researcher only noted and analyzed the result of the observation. From the In the second meeting of Cycle I, the researcher evaluated the students’ ability in reading skill. In the step, the researcher only noted and analyzed the result of the observation. From the

1) The researcher asked the students to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text.

2) The researcher asked the students to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text. The result of the students’ evaluation sheet as follows.

Table 1 THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY in READING COMPREHENSION by USING CAUSE AND

EFFECT STRATEGY in CYCLE I

MCC The students’

Level

Frequency Percentage

Very Good

Total

The data from the pevious page explain that the students’ ability in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy in cycle I was failed. Some of the students did not pass the MCC which stated at school was 65. None of the students can be classified in very good level. There were three students (12 %) classified in “good” level. There are seven students (28%) in “enough” level. There were nine students (36%) in “less” level and there are six students (24 %) in “fail” level. The average of the students’ mark was 50.8. The result shows that some of the students ability were unable in reading comprehension.

The students’ mark as follows. THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY in READING COMPREHENSION

BY USING CAUSE and EFFECT STRATEGY at the EIGHT GRADE of SMP

NEGERI 6 SUSUA in CYCLE I

No The Name of the Students

1 Agusman Laia 14 70 Enough 2 Amira Bu’ulolo

12 60 Enough 3 Apiairman Laia

10 50 Less 4 Aprianus Bu’ulolo

12 60 Enough 5 Apusna Laia

8 40 Less 6 Artikan Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 7 Arlinus Bu’ulolo

6 30 Fail 8 Bahasa Bu’ulolo

9 50 Less 9 Dewi Manwas Laia

8 40 Less 10 Faatulo Laia

6 30 Fail 11 Faoli Bu’ulolo

8 40 Less 12 Meiman Takdir Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 13 Mariana Bu’ulolo

14 70 Enough 14 Mastina Bu’ulolo

9 50 Less 15 Novimani Laia

6 30 Fail 16 Nitaho Bu’ulolo

6 30 Fail 17 Opiria Laia

12 60 Enough 18 Perama Bu’ulolo

9 50 Less 19 Rikas Darni Bu’ulolo

6 30 Fail 20 Sudiman Halawa

14 70 Enough 21 Suka Hati Bu’ulolo

9 50 Less 22 Tanda Nasokhi Bu’ulolo

12 60 Enough 23 Tanda Ziduhu Bu’ulolo

14 70 Enough 24 Yofilia Laia

6 30 Fail 25 Zonos Bu’ulolo

8 40 Less

The Students Total Value

Less Avarage

The result of the students‟ ability in Cycle I can be viewed in ‟ ability in Cycle I can be viewed in ‟ ability in Cycle I can be viewed in the graphic below. .

Enough Enough

rc 15 12%

Good

10 Very Good Very Good 5

Fail

Less Less

Enough

Good

Very Good

Graphic 1: The Students‟ Ability in ‟ Ability in Reading Comprehension by Using Cause and E ‟ Ability in and Effect Strategy in Cycle I.

Based on the explanati nation of the data above, it shows that the student udents’ ability Reading Comprehension by Using Caus ause and Effect Strategy was less. Most of the stude tudents could not pass the Minimum Competence Cr Criterion (MCC), it was 65. That’s why the res researcher decided to continue the research to Cycle le II.

b) Cycle II

In conducting Cycle II, the researcher was done in two meetings by following the procedures.

1) First Meeting

The activities that the researcher did in Cycle II as follows.

a) Re-planning

Based on the result of reflection in Cycle I, the researcher improved the weaknesses by doing good preparation before conducted the action. The researcher prepared many things, such as: lesson plan, material, observation sheet, field notes for the researcher and students and evaluation sheet.

b) Action

The first meeting of Cycle II was held on March 10 th 2016. The researcher greeted the students and asked the students’ condition and the students responded the researcher greeted and

told their condition, the researcher checked the student’s attendence list and the students listened their name.

The researcher continued done the whilst teaching-learning activities.The researcher told the result of students’ work in Cycle I by showed their value and the students listened their value in Cycle I, the researcher told the students weaknesses in Cycle I and the students listened their weaknesess in Cycle I, the researcher asked the students difficulties in Cycle I and the students tell their weakness in Cycle I namely; had limitated in comprehending the generic structures in narrative text, could not see the key words and phrases in text, and difficult for the students to find the specific facts in narrative text, the researcher reminded the students about the last

material and the students reminded the last material they have learnt, the researcher introduced a new material to the students about narrative text and the students listened the new material to the researcher, the researcher explained the definition and generic structure of narrative text and the students listened the researcher explanation, the researcher gave an example of narrative text and the students comprehend the example in narrative text, the researcher implemented the procedures of Cause and Effect Strategy, the researcher introduced the material and invited to find out the main idea in narrative text and the students found out the main idea in narative text text, the researcher discussed about how events are connected to each other and that the cause was the thing that made something happened, while the effect was the thing that happened (the reaction) and the students connected each other about cause and effect to text, the researcher provided simple example to the students of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures and the students practiced the example of cause and effect by writing on the board, verbally and in pictures, the researcher continued discussion to the students the generic structures in narrative text and the students found out the generic structures in narrative text, the researcher more explained to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text and the students identified the key words and phrases in narrative text. the researcher gave worksheet and presented their result in front class for each groups and the students presented their result by reading in front class for each group, the researcher asked the students to give some questions about the material and the students answered the researcher’s question, the researcher drawed conclusion to the students and the students listened the concluded material to the researcher. The researcher gave assignment to the students and the students listened the assignment to the researcher.

Finally, in the post of teaching learning process, the researcher closed the teaching- learning process and greeted the students and the students replied the researcher’s greeting.

c) Observation

The observation was done by the teacher-collaborator during the researcher was implemented the action in the classroom. The teacher-collaborator observed all of the activities happened in the teaching-learning process; included the researcher‟s and students‟ activities. Based on the result of the observation, the researcher obtained the data about the students who had done and had not done the activities during implementing the action in the classroom. (1) The students who had done activities

: 21 (84 %) students

(2) The students who had not done activities : 4 (16 %) students

Some weaknesses of the students only were found during the teaching-learning process, as follows.

1) There were 21 students able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

2) There were 21 students got difficulties to find the specific facts in narrative text. However, the researcher also found some advantages in the first meeting during teaching- learning, as follows.

1) All students were present in the class.

2) Most of the students were able to connect to each other and that the cause was the thing that makes something happens, while the effect was the thing that happened (the reaction).

3) Most of the students were able to discuss the generic structures in narrative text.

4) The students followed the procedure of the teaching instructed by the researcher seriously.

Based on the researcher’s activities, the result of the researcher’s observation sheet in the first meeting in Cycle II was as follows. (1) The researcher who had done activies : 17 (89.47) of 19 activities (2) The researcher who had undone activies : 2 (10.52%) of 19 activities

d) Reflection

In the first meeting of Cycle II, the researcher did not gave evaluation sheet to the students. The researcher focused on teaching material by using cause and effect strategy to the students. However, there were some improvements to be done by the researcher in the next meeting, such as:

1) The researcher asked the the students to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

2) The researcher asked the the students to find the specific facts in narrative text.

2) Second Meeting

In the second meeting of Cycle II, the researcher did some activities as follows.

a) Re-planning

There were some preparation that the researcher prepared before done the action in the second meeting of Cycle II. The researcher prepared a lesson plan, a copy of sheet word, reading text, observation sheet, field notes for the researcher and students and evaluation sheet.

b) Action

The first meeting of Cycle II was held on March 17th 2016. The researcher followed the activities which had been arranged in lesson plan. The researcher greeted the students and the students responded the researcher greeted, the researcher asked the students’ condition and the The first meeting of Cycle II was held on March 17th 2016. The researcher followed the activities which had been arranged in lesson plan. The researcher greeted the students and the students responded the researcher greeted, the researcher asked the students’ condition and the

The researcher continued doing the whilst teaching-learning activities. The researcher reminds the students about the last material and the students review the last material, the researcher distributed a reading text to the students and the students took the reading text to the researcher, the researcher continued to implement the the procedures of Cause and Effect Strategy, the researcher asked the students to think of something that might happened and described cause and effect relationships in narrative text and the students described cause and effect relationships in narrative text, the researcher decided the class into groups and found out the specific facts about narrative text and the students made a groups and found out the specific facts about narrative, the researcher gave each group of a copy of the cause and effect worksheet and the students took a copy of the cause and effect worksheet, the researcher asked the student discussion then, each group presented their result by reading and pointed in front the class and the students presented their result by reading and pointed in front the class, the researcher distributed the evaluation sheet to the students and the students took the evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher gave instruction how to do the test and the students listened the instruction to the researcher, the researcher collected the students’ test and the students submitted their evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher guided the students who still got difficulties in comprehending the text and gave the corrections to the students faults and the students comprehended the correction fault to the researcher, the researcher motivated the students who were less active and could afford to follow the learning process and the students listened the motivated to the researcher, the researcher asked the students’ difficulties about the material that has been learned and the students told their weaknesess about the material in narrative text, the The researcher continued doing the whilst teaching-learning activities. The researcher reminds the students about the last material and the students review the last material, the researcher distributed a reading text to the students and the students took the reading text to the researcher, the researcher continued to implement the the procedures of Cause and Effect Strategy, the researcher asked the students to think of something that might happened and described cause and effect relationships in narrative text and the students described cause and effect relationships in narrative text, the researcher decided the class into groups and found out the specific facts about narrative text and the students made a groups and found out the specific facts about narrative, the researcher gave each group of a copy of the cause and effect worksheet and the students took a copy of the cause and effect worksheet, the researcher asked the student discussion then, each group presented their result by reading and pointed in front the class and the students presented their result by reading and pointed in front the class, the researcher distributed the evaluation sheet to the students and the students took the evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher gave instruction how to do the test and the students listened the instruction to the researcher, the researcher collected the students’ test and the students submitted their evaluation sheet to the researcher, the researcher guided the students who still got difficulties in comprehending the text and gave the corrections to the students faults and the students comprehended the correction fault to the researcher, the researcher motivated the students who were less active and could afford to follow the learning process and the students listened the motivated to the researcher, the researcher asked the students’ difficulties about the material that has been learned and the students told their weaknesess about the material in narrative text, the

Finally, in the post teaching-learning process, the researcher closed the teaching-learning process and greeted the students and the students replied the researcher’s greeting.

c) Observation

The researcher got the data about the students who had done and not done activities:

1) The students who had done activities

: 25 (100%) students

2) The students who had not done activities : 0 (0%) student

The result of observation sheet both of the reseacher and students during the teaching- learning process, as follows. The weaknesses were not found in the second meeting of Cycle II was the students were able found out the main idea and the students were able identified cuase and effect what happend and why it happened in narrative text, the students were more active to study about narrative text because able to follow the procedure of Cause and Effect Strategy. Thus, the students ability in reading comprehension increased.

Based on the researcher‟s activities, the result of the researcher’s observation sheet in the first meeting in Cycle II was as follows. (1) The researcher’s activies which had been done

: 16 (100%) of 16 activities (2) The researcher’s activies which had not been done : 0 (0%) of 16 activities

In the second meeting of Cycle II, nearly all of the students had done the activities during the teaching-learning process and based on the result of the researcher’s activities showed that all the activities had been applied well by the researcher.

d) Reflection

The researcher evaluated the result of the students’evaluation sheet in reading comprehension through Cause and Effect Strategy. The researcher examined the students’ ability in reading comprehension by giving some questions in multiple- choose test, the result of their test was explained as follows.

Table 3 THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY in READING COMPREHENSION by USING CAUSE AND

EFFECT STRATEGY in CYCLE II

MCC The students’

Level

Frequency Percentage

Very Good

The data from the table above explained that the students were able in reading comprehension well, especially in narrative text through Cause and Effect Strategy. The students would be pass the MCC, as stated at the school was 65. There were fourteen students (56%) in “very good” level.

There were tenth students (40%) in “good” level. There was one student (4%) in “enough” level. The average of the students mark was 86. The result shows that the students were successful in reading comprehension by Cause and Effect Strategy.

The the result students’ mark as follows.

THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY in READING COMPREHENSION BY USING CAUSE and EFFECT STRATEGY at the EIGHT GRADE of SMP

NEGERI 6 SUSUA in CYCLE II

No The Name of the Students

Score

Mark Level

1 Agusman Laia

19 95 Very Good 2 Amira Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 3 Apiairman Laia

17 85 Very Good 4 Aprianus Bu’ulolo

19 95 Very Good 5 Apusna Laia

16 80 Good 6 Artikan Bu’ulolo

18 90 Very Good 7 Arlinus Bu’ulolo

14 70 Enough 8 Bahasa Bu’ulolo

19 95 Very Good 9 Dewi Manwas Laia

16 80 Good 10 Faatulo Laia

16 80 Good 11 Faoli Bu’ulolo

19 95 Very Good 12 Meiman Takdir Bu’ulolo

18 90 Very Good 13 Mariana Bu’ulolo

19 95 Very Good 14 Mastina Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 15 Novimani Laia

18 90 Very Good 16 Nitaho Bu’ulolo

15 75 Good 17 Opiria Laia

18 90 Very Good 18 Perama Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 19 Rikas Darni Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good 20 Sudiman Halawa

19 95 Very Good 21 Suka Hati Bu’ulolo

18 90 Very Good 22 Tanda Nasokhi Bu’ulolo

15 75 Good 23 Tanda Ziduhu Bu’ulolo

18 90 Very Good 24 Yofilia Laia

19 95 Very Good 25 Zonos Bu’ulolo

16 80 Good

The Students Total Value

Very Good

Avarage

The result of the students’ability lity in Cycle II can be viewed in the graphic below: :

Enough Enough

P e rc 20 Very Good Very Good

Less Less

Enough

Good

Very Good

Graphic 2: The Students’ Abi Ability in Reading Comprehension by Using Cause se and Effect Strategy in C in Cycle II.

Based on the data above bove, the researcher concludes that students were were able to understand what cause and effect situations tions are and than, students were able to identify ntify an event that was responsible for the cause that r hat resulted in an effect through Cause and Effect S t Strategy In Cycle II, the students were able to find find the main ideas in the text the students were were able to know the generic structure in narrative ive text, the students able to know the key wor words and phrases in narrative, the students able to to find the specific facts in narrative. Moreover, r, the average of their mark was 86%. It shows that t t the students were successful because their avera rage mark was higher than the KKM (Kriteria Ketunt untasan Minimal) that was 65 point .

3. The Students’ Activities in All Cycles

The entire students’ activities in all cycles can be viewed in Table 4 below.

Table 4 THE STUDENTS’ ACTVITIES in All CYCLES

No Cycle Meeting

Criterion

Frequency of Activities (%)

1 st I 1 Done

2 nd Done

2 st II 1 Done

2 nd Done

25 students

- Based on the data above, the researcher concludes that the students‟ activities had

Undone

0 students

increased from the first meeting of Cycle I until in the meeting of Cycle II. In the first meeting of Cycle I, there were 14 students (56%) who did the activities and 11 students (44 %) who did not do the activities. While in the second meeting, there were 18 students (72%) who did the activities and 7 students (28%) who did not do the activities.

In Cycle II, in the first meeting, there were 21 students (84%) who did the activities and 4 students (16%) who did not do the activities. While in the second meeting of Cycle II, there were

25 students (100%) who did the activities and nothing the students who did not do the activities.

4. The Researcher’ Activities in All Cycles

The entire researcher’s activities in all cycles results in Tables 5 as follows.

Table 5 THE RESEARCHER’S ACTVITIES in ALL CYCLES

No Cycle Meeting Criterion

Frequency of

Activities

1 st I 1 Done

2 nd Done

2 st II 1 Done

2 nd Done

Undone

From the table above, the researcher concluded that was activities in each meeting increased. The weakness from the previous meeting has improved in the next meeting. In the first meeting of Cycle I, there were 15 activities (83.33%) which had been done by the researcher, and

3 activities (16.66%) which had been undone by the researcher. While in the second meeting, there were 17 activities (100%) which had been done by the researcher and 2 activities (10.52%) which had been undone by the researcher.

Furthermore, in the first meeting of Cycle II, there were 16 activities (84.21%) which had been done by the researcher, and 3 activities (15.78%) which had been undone by the researcher. While in the second meeting of Cycle II, all activities had been done by the researcher.

5. The Students’ Ability in Reading Comprehension by Using Cause and Effect Strategy of All Cycles

The result can be viewed in table 6 as follows.

Table 6 THE STUDENTS’ ACTVITIES in ALL CYCLES

No Cycle

1 nd I 2 Enough

Very Good

2 nd II 2 Enough

Very Good

Based on the evaluation sheet, the researcher explained the students’ ability in reading comprehension. In Cycle I, it showed that there were three students (12%) can be classified in “good” level. There were seven students (28%) the “enough” level. There were nine students (36%) in “less” level and there were six students (24%) in “fail” level. the average of the students‟ mark was 50.8.

While the students’ ability in reading comprehension in Cycle II was category “Good” level. It showed that there were fourteen students (56%) in “very good” level. There were tenth students (40%) in “good” level. There was one students (4 %) in “enough” level. The students of SMP Negeri 6 Susua at the eight grade were able in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy. The result of the students’ average mark was 86.