Normality test Inferential statistics
variable. As a result, the increase of metacognitive learning strategy as the first independent variable is followed by the increase of reading comprehension as the
dependent variable. This also works for vocabulary mastery as the second variable to reading comprehension. The increase of the two independent variables is
followed by the increase of the dependent variable. To seek of how reading comprehensionis predictable from metacognitive
learning strategy and vocabulary mastery, the multiple regression analysis is conducted. The analysis results on a statistical equation of Y= 54.084 + 0.094X
1
+ 0.253X
2.
The above equation shows that every increase of one score on the variable of metacognitive learning strategy and vocabulary mastery, collectively,
is to be followed by the increase of reading comprehension as much as 0.094 and 0.253 at constant 54.084.
In order to compare the contribution of each independent variable, Beta is used. According to Beta column, metacognitive learning startegy is 0.07 meaning
it makes less of a unique contribution while vocabulary mastery is 0.74 meaning it makes the strongest unique contribution. It can be concluded that vocabulary
mastery gives bigger contribution than metacogitive learning strategy. For testing the correlation and coefficient of the variables, the correlation
is seen from the R value which must be greater than the value of α 0.00
while the coefficient can be seen from the significant value that must be less than the value of α 0.05. The correlation between metacognitive learning
strategy and reading comprehension is 0.26 which is greater than 0.00 r = 0.26 0.00. It means that there is a positive correlation between metacognitive learning
strategy and reading comprehension. This correlation is considered small. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
Meanwhile, the significant coefficient is 0.07 which is greater than 0.05 sig = 0.07 0.05. It is concluded that the correlation coefficient between
metacognitive learning strategy and reading comprehension is not significant. In addition, the correlation between metacognitive learning strategy and vocabulary
mastery is 0.44 which is bigger than 0.00 and the coefficient is 0.00 r = 0.44 0.00 and sig = 0.00 0.05. It is found that there is a positive and significant
correlation between students’ metacognitive learning strategy and vocabulary mastery and this correlation is considered medium. It means that if their
metacognitive learning strategy is high, their vocabulary mastery will also be high.
On the contrary, if their metacognitive learning strategy is low, their vocabulary mastery would also be low. The other result shows that the correlation
between vocabulary mastery and reading comprehension is 0.70 which is bigger than 0.00 and the coefficient is 0.00 r = 0.70 0.00 and sig = 0.00 0.05. It is
concluded that there is a positive and significant correlation between students’
vocabulary mastery and reading comprehension and this correlation is considered large. It means that if their vocabulary mastery is high, their reading
comprehension would also be high. On the contrary, if their vocabulary mastery is low, their reading comprehension will also be low. According to the significant
coefficient, the most predictable is vocabulary mastery. It means that vocabulary mastery is the best predictor of reading comprehension.