The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in Improving Students’ Abililty in Reading Descriptive Text (A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta).

(A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade

Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta)

By:

NOVERA HELSANITA

109014000080

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING

SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

JAKARTA

''A Skripsi"

Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Strata

I

(S1).

By:

NOYERA HELSANITA

109014000080

Approved by the Advisor

NIP. 19720501 199903 2 013

Zaharil Anasy. M.Hum. NrP. 19761A07 2007rA 1 002

DEPARTMENT

OF

ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY

OF

TARBTYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING

SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH

STATE

_{ISLAMIC UIIIVERSITY}

JAKARTA

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini,

MENYATAKAN DENGAN SE SUNGGUHNYA

Bahwa skripsi yang berjudul

The

Effectiveness

of

Collaborative Learning in Improving Students' Ability in Reading Descriptive Text (A

Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta) adalah benar hasil karya ilmiah saya sendiri di bawah bimbingan dosen:

Nama

Tempat, Tanggal Lahir NIM

Jurusan Alamat

1. NamaPembimbing I

NIP.

Jurusar/Program Studi

2. Nama Pembimbing II

NIP.

Jurusar/Program Studi

Novera Helsanita

Tangerang, 26 November 1991

109014000080

Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Jl. KH. Hasyim Ashari Gg. Kancil RT 006 RW

05 No. 36, Neroktog-Pinang, Tangerang.

Dr. Ratna Sari Dewi, M.Pd.

t972050t t99903 2 0t3

Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Zahail Anasy, M.Hum. 19761A07 2007t0 1 002 Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Dengan

ini

menyatakan bahwa skripsi yang saya buat benar-benar hasil karya sendiri dan saya bertanggung jawab secara akademis atas apa yang saya tulis. Pemyataan ini dibuat sebagai salah satu syarat Wisuda.

Jakarta, 24 Maret201.4 Mahasiswa _Yb,s.

,l\4.ETERAT

TEl\4.PEL TGL 20

48F15ACF203'

ill

iv

in Improving Students’ Abililty in Reading Descriptive Text (A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta). Skripsi, Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta, 2014.

Advisor: 1. Dr. Ratna Sari Dewi, M.Pd. 2. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum.

Keywords: Collaborative Learning, Students’ Reading Ability, and Descriptive Text.

The objective of this study is to know the effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in improving students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta. The study was quantitative method which used pre-experimental research. The writer only took one class from class 7B as the sample of the research by using purposive sampling. The class 7B consists of 32 students, but only 25 students who followed all stages of research from the beginning until the end. The instruments used in this study were pre-test and post-test.

The result of the study showed that Collaborative Learning is effective in improving students’ reading ability. It can be proven by the t-test result and the

students’ progress scores on pre-test and post-test. The writer obtained that the mean of pre-test was 58.2 and the mean of post-test was 67.4. Then, the t-test result (5.57) is higher than t-table (2.06). It can be concluded that Collaborative Learning is effective towards students’ reading ability.

v

in Improving Students’ Abililty in Reading Descriptive Text (A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta). Skripsi, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2014.

Pembimbing : 1. Dr. Ratna Sari Dewi, M.Pd. 2. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum.

Kata Kunci : Pembelajaran Kolaborasi, Kemampuan Membaca Siswa, dan Teks Deskriptif.

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui keefektifan pembelajaran kolaborasi dalam meningkatkan kemampuan membaca siswa dalam teks deskriptif pada siswa kelas 7 di SMP Pelita Harapan, Jakarta Selatan. Penelitian ini adalah metode kuantitatif yang menggunakan penelitian pre-eksperimen. Penulis hanya mengambil 1 kelas yaitu 7B sebagai sampel penelitian dengan menggunakan purposive sampling. Kelas 7B terdiri dari 32 siswa, tetapi hanya 25 siswa yang mengikuti semua tahap penelitian dari awal sampai akhir. Instrumen penelitian yang digunakan adalah pre-test dan post-test.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pembelajaran kolaborasi efektif dalam meningkatkan kemampuan membaca siswa. Hal ini dibuktikan dari hasil t-test dan peningkatan nilai pre-t-test dan post-t-test siswa. Penulis memperoleh bahwa nilai rata-rata pre-test adalah 58.2 dan post-test adalah 67.4. Kemudian, hasil t-test (5.57) lebih tinggi daripada t-table (2.06). Hal ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa pembelajaran kolaborasi efektif terhadap kemampuan membaca siswa.

vi

All praise be to Allah, the Lord of the World who has given his merciful in

completing this “skripsi”. Peace and blessing be upon our prophet Muhammad

SAW, our beloved Messenger, his families, his companion, and his faithful followers.

This “skripsi” is presented to Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Strata 1 (S1).

In this great occasion, the writer would like to thank to her beloved parents, Suheri Permadi, S.E. and Rahmah, S.Pd. for their love, prayers, encouragement, understanding, and support in material and immaterial things that

helped the writer in finishing this “skripsi”. She also would like to thank to her

brother, Robby Fahada, for his love, support, and jokes in finishing this “skripsi”.

The Writer realizes that she would not finish writing this “skripsi” without

help from some people around her. Therefore, she would like to give her gratitude and appreciation to:

1. Nurlena Rifa’i, M.A., Ph.D. as the Dean of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta. 2. Drs. Syauki, M.Pd. as the Head of Department of English Education. 3. Dra. Farida Hamid, M.Pd. as the academic advisor of class B 2009.

4. Dr. Ratna Sari Dewi, M.Pd. as the first advisor who gives valuable suggestions, corrections, and guidance for the writer in finishing this

“skripsi”.

5. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum. as the secretary of Department of English Education and the second advisor who also gives valuable suggestions, corrections, and guidance for the writer in finishing this “skripsi”.

6. All inspiring lectures who have taught the writer during her study in the Department of English Education, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.

vii

8. Rumbi Maryani, S.Pd. as the English teacher and all staffs of SMP Pelita Harapan, Pondok Pinang, South Jakarta who spend their time and help the writer in collecting data she needs.

9. Her students in the class 7B for academic year 2013/2014 at SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta who give participation, spirit, and support for the writer in finishing this “skripsi”.

10.Her beloved friends, Anisa Faradiba, Ngesthi Pertiwi, Lilis Andriyani, Anisa Ngesti Aprian, Rangga Satria Permana, Endo Yuni Pangestu, kak Ratu Dewi Nurhadi, and class B (Bees United) of English Education Department for academic year 2009 who always give inspirations, ideas, reminders, suggestions, support, and jokes for the writer in finishing this

“skripsi”. We are in a fabulous friendship.

The writer realizes that this “skripsi” cannot be considered perfect without

critiques and suggestions. Therefore, she would like to accept critiques and

suggestions to make this “skripsi” better.

Jakarta, March 24, 2014

viii

ENDORSEMENT SHEET ... ii

SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA SENDIRI ... iii

ABSTRACT ... iv

ABSTRAK ... v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... vi

TABLE OF CONTENT ... viii

LIST OF TABLE ... x

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. The Background of Study ... 1

B. The Identification of Problem ... 4

C. The Limitation of Problem ... 4

D. The Formulation of Problem ... 4

E. The Objective of Study ... 5

F. The Significance of Study ... 5

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. Reading ... 6

1. The Nature of Reading ... 6

2. The Kinds of Reading ... 7

3. The Strategies of Reading ... 8

4. Reading Ability ... 10

5. The Problem in Understanding Texts ... 10

B. Descriptive Text ... 11

1. The Definition of Descriptive Text ... 11

2. The Features of Descriptive Text ... 12

3. The Forms of Descriptive Text ... 14

C. Collaborative Learning ... 15

ix

5. The Disadvantages of Collaborative Learning . 22 D. Teaching Descriptive Text Using Collaborative

Learning ... 23

E. Previous Studies ... 23

F. Conceptual Framework ... 26

G. The Hypothesis of Study ... 27

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. The Place and Time of Research ... 28

B. The Method of Research ... 28

C. The Content of Interference ... 28

D. The Population and Sample ... 30

E. The Technique of Data Collection ... 30

F. The Technique of Data Analysis ... 31

G. The Statistical Hypothesis ... 32

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS A. The Data Description ... 34

B. The Data Analysis ... 37

C. The Data Interpretation ... 40

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ... 42

B. Suggestion ... 42

BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 44

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 The Result of Pre-Test before Implementing Collaborative Learning ………... 34 Table 4.2 The Result of Post-Test after Implementing Collaborative Learning

……… 36

Table 4.3 The Calculation Results of Students’ Pre-Test and Post-Test

xi

Appendix 2 The Blueprint of Post-Test ………... 48

Appendix 3 The Instrument of Pre-Test ………... 49

Appendix 4 The Instrument of Post-Test ………... 53

Appendix 5 The Answer Key of Pre-Test ………... 57

Appendix 6 The Answer Key of Post-Test ………... 58

Appendix 7 The Pre-Test Score ... 59

Appendix 8 The Post-Test Score ... 60

Appendix 9 The Lesson Plan ………... 61

Appendix 10 The Calculation of ANATEST ………... 77

Appendix 11 Surat Bimbingan Skripsi ………... 86

Appendix 12 Surat Permohonan Izin Penelitian ………... 88

Appendix 13 Surat Keterangan Penelitian dari Sekolah ………... 89

1

A.

The Background of Study

In daily life, language has an important role as a medium of communication. It is needed by people because people are social humans. It allows people to talk and to deliver their knowledge, suggestions, opinions, emotions, so on to others. It consists of two forms: spoken and written. People can choose which form they want to use for communication. People have to do communication in order to make interaction with others and understand each other. So far, language has a great value for socialization.

As the writer wrote above, language has two forms. They are spoken and written forms. If someone likes to communicate by using spoken form, another person just listen what the person says. In contrast, if someone likes to communicate by using written form, another person has to read what the person writes. Therefore, people must recognize how those forms of language used.

Having a larger distance of communication in this era, people have to learn an international language. The most famous language which is used in this era is English. In education field, English is involved by people to access many sources of knowledge such as books, articles, English literature, and information from the internet which are written in English. Those sources will be used by students as references for English subject itself and other subjects. On the other hand, in Indonesia, English is one of subjects in the National Examination for Elementary School, Junior High School, and Senior High School. In the National Examination, there are many questions which are related to the texts. Therefore, students must be able to read and understand those texts in order to answer the questions correctly.

Reading is one of aspects in learning English. Reading is needed by people to get more information or knowledge. It is supported by a term

reading as the window of the world. It means that reading is important in many fields. One of them is in education field. Indonesian government has included reading in English syllabus stated in Competence Standard and Basic Competence. Based on Competence Standard and Basic Competence of reading skill in School-Based Curriculum, the seventh grade students of Junior High School are expected to be able to understand the meaning of some short functional texts and simple essays. One of them is descriptive text. Descriptive text is same as factual description which is this term used by Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson. According to them, a factual description describes the parts of a particular person, place, or thing without containing individual view.1

Unfortunately, there are many problems in reading ability. Based on the writer’s experience during “Praktek Profesi Keguruan Terpadu (PPKT)” on February up to June 2013 in SMP Pelita Harapan, Pondok Pinang, South Jakarta, students have to be able to read the English texts which are provided in their exercise sheet (LKS). Unfortunately, most of them have not understood yet about what they have read. It can be the words in the text are unfamiliar for them or they have less vocabulary mastery. Directly, they ask to the writer about the meaning of those unfamiliar words or they search in the dictionary.

Besides, reader’s knowledge and past experience also influence the understanding of the text. It can be said that some students like to watch western movies which are used subtitle in English or students like to sing western songs. For those activities, they have to read the texts of movies and the lyrics of songs in order to understand what the movies and the songs tell about. Moreover, students get new additional knowledge especially in vocabulary. But, none of students has the same knowledge and experience. That is why students still get difficulty to understand the text well.

1

Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson. Text Types in English. (Sydney: Macmillan. 2003). p. 26.

On the other hand, less motivation can be also one of problems towards ability in reading. Most of students feel lazy because they think reading is a boring activity. Sometimes, reading makes them sleepy at the end. The students are encouraged to read the English texts to make progress in reading along their improvement in listening, speaking, and writing. The English teachers need to give more attention and encouragement toward

students’ motivation because every student has the different ability and

motivation in reading.

The last problem is the inappropriate approach or method or technique used in teaching reading. Mostly, the English teachers use reading aloud. It is not effective because it takes long time to ask for each student reads, translates, and finds main idea of the text which is the number of students in one class can reach 30 until 40 students. Another one, it also makes students less interaction with their teacher. They just give full attention to the teacher without ask any questions because feeling shy to ask the teacher about the material in the middle of teaching learning process. In this case, the writer gives Collaborative Learning as a solution in teaching reading. It can help students to work, to share, and to improve together. In addition, students do not have to wait for their turn to read aloud, to translate, and to find main idea of the text individually. They can do it with their member in the group and can make them more focus on it. They will not wait for a turn that makes them bored and less focus. They also do more interaction and ask their friends as the members of group. Within collaborative learning, students can get benefits for themselves because they help each other.

As Lodge and friends states, “With collaboration, learners become effective help-seekers and help-givers. Help-seekers can explain their confusion and ask specific questions for help. Help-givers can check whether their explanations have been understood and whether confusions have been clarified."2

2

Caroline Lodge, Chris Watkins, and Eileen Carnell. Effective Learning in Classrooms. (London: Paul Chapman Publishing. 2007). p. 91-92.

Based on the elaboration above, the writer is interested in doing a research whether Collaborative Learning is effective in improving students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta.

B.

The Identification of Problem

Based on the background of study above, the writer identifies some problems:

1. The students have less vocabulary mastery

2. The students have different knowledge and experience 3. The students have less motivation in reading

4. The inappropriate approach or method or technique used in teaching reading

C.

The Limitation of Problem

In this study, the writer limits the problem on the inappropriate approach or method or technique used in teaching reading. Therefore, the writer gives Collaborative Learning as a solution to make teaching reading is

effective and to improve students’ abililty in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta.

D.

The Formulation of Problem

In this study, the writer formulates the problem formulation on: “Is Collaborative Learning effective in improving students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta?”

E.

The Objective of Study

The objective of this study is to know the effectiveness of collaborative learning in improving students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta.

F.

The Significance of Study

By doing this study, the writer hopes it will be useful for her self in comprehending collaborative learning. For the teachers, they know how to teach reading well. For the students, they know how to work together in understanding the meaning of English texts well. For the next researcher, she or he will get a guidance for her or his research about the effectiveness of using collaborative learning towards students’ ability in reading.

6

A.

Reading

1.

The Nature of Reading

Reading is one of important aspects in learning English. Reading is needed by people to get more information or knowledge. It is supported by a term reading is the window of the world. Furthermore, reading gives something from the written text such as realities, point of views, enjoyment, even feelings of family community (from a letter).1 It means that how important it is, especially in education field. It can be seen that students have to read many kinds of English texts in order to understand what those texts tell about. It means that reading has great effects in learning process.

Generally, reading is a way to get an information from a text, to make an explanation, and to make a conclusion of that information. As Nuttall writes that the writers have to create what they express by information in order to be understood by the reader.2 On the other hand, Daniels and Bizar state that reading is like indistinct process by which a reader receives the information on a passage.3 From these views, reading is a process which is a reader has to receives what a writer writes in the text.

Moreover, reading is not a simple activity. It involves some efforts to understand what a text tells about. It is like the communication between a reader and a text and the transfer of meaning from mind to mind. Readers have to make sense of the text to make their understanding to rebuild the

writer’s meaning. It is supported by Daniels and Bizar’s statement that

readers are co-creators of meaning which means readers continually construct

1

Christine Nuttall, Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language, (Oxford: Heinemann, 1989), p. 3.

2

Ibid., p. 4.

3

Harvey Daniels and Marilyn Bizar, Teaching the Best Practice Way: Methods that Matter, K-12, (New York: Stenhouse Publishers, 2005), p. 37.

meaning for themselves as they think of the writer’s text.4

In addition, Alderson emphasizes that knowing the process of reading means knowing the main characteristic of reading.5 Thus, reading is a bit complex process than people had thought previously.

Based on the point of views above, reading is a process to get an information from a text, to make an explanation, and to make a conclusion of that information which it needs understanding to rebuild the meaning of the text continually as the reader read the text.

2.

The Kinds of Reading

Students will need to experience variety of reading tasks to the kinds of reading they plan in the target language in order to be independent language users. Mostly, teachers want their students to develop reading ability by reading short texts. Besides, students also need to develop their reading abilty by reading longer texts. Nuttal describes this case as intensive reading and extensive reading.

Intensive reading includes the text used under the close advice of the teacher or under the advice of a duty which power students to pay huge attention to the text. The goal of intensive reading is to reach detailed understandng of the text, not only what it means, but also how the meaning is produced. Meanwhile, extensive reading is in order to understand the whole book, students must be able to understand the components of text such as the sentences, paragraphs, and chapters. Teachers do not have to pay little attention for longer texts which are used in the classroom. Skimming and scanning can train the practice on reading longer texts.6

Besides intensive reading and extensive reading, there are also skimming and scanning. Skimming is the ability to find main idea from a

4

Ibid., p. 38.

5

J. Charles Alderson, Assessing Reading, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 3.

6

passage, meanwhile, scanning is the ability to search particular information.7 When skimming, readers read the passage quickly to get something important

of it or to get the writer’s notion of it. As Mather and McCarthy state that

readers will jump some sentences or paragraphs because the goal of skimming is to get a short description quickly in order to recognize the main ideas.8 It means that skimming is to underline the important points from a passage. When scanning, readers only search particular information of the passage as quickly as possible until they get what they are looking for.

According to Pavlik, “Scanning is a technique for finding facts. It finds

simple answers to questions such as: Which? What kind? How many?

Where?”9

It means that scanning is to mark what readers need in the passage. The writer concludes that intensive reading and extensive reading are compliment each other. Teachers have to pay much attention to extensive reading as well as intensive reading. Teachers can not ignore the extensive reading if they want their students be skilled readers.

3.

The Strategies of Reading

Before reading a text, students need to take some strategies to be a smart reader in order to understand it easily. Sometimes, students have lack of preparation to read a text and it makes them get confused. Lewin has proposed some strategies to make reading easier to be both understood and comprehended. Those strategies are:

a. Focus strategies: selectively attend to significant information. b. Information-gathering strategies: acquire needed new information. c. Self-regulating strategies: monitor one’s own construction of

meaning (metacognition).

d. Generating strategies: produce new information, meanings, ideas, and summaries.

7

Team of Five, Improving Reading Skill in English for University Students, (Jakarta: Kencana, 2006), p. 40.

8

Peter Mather and Rita McCarthy, Reading and All That Jazz, Tuning Up Your Reading, Thinking, and Study Skills, (New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2007), p. 531.

9

e. Organizing strategies: track new information, construct and sort meaning, and enhance retention.10

Those reading strategies can help students achieve one thing, that is understanding the text as easy as possible. On the other side, not all students can construct perfect understanding and comprehending of a text with just the first reading. For those students who experience it, they will reread the text. In addition, Lewin also proposes some reading repair strategies to get better understanding of a text. Those strategies as below:11

a. Reread an important part slowly to really get it. b. Read a passage aloud softly to hear the words spoken.

c. Find out for sure which event happened before (or after) another event.

d. Reread a key passage to see if you agree or disagree with it.

e. What do you think of the author’s decision to fill in something

specific to the text in question?

f. Hunt for a key vocabulary word in its context to determine its meaning.

g. Skim for evidence to prove or disprove that fill in something specific to the text in question.

h. Reread the title and change it to something better.

i. Return to the part where fill in something specific to the text in question and look for some important insight.

Those reading repair strategies can help students to recall information from the first reading previously. They are great help to build better understanding of text. Good readers realize that go back to the text to read again can increase understanding.

10

Larry Lewin, Paving the Way Reading and Writing: Strategies and Activities to Support Struggling Students in Grades 6-12, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003), p. 21.

11

4.

Reading Ability

So far, readers only point out about information they have. Actually, readers not only have information, but also readers have abilities. Abilities are not only to learn new information, but also abilities to deal with information.

It is able to notice the difference between good readers and poor readers, or good understanding and poor understanding. It is not only the ability to start the suitable drawing of the text, but also the cognitive ability to understand the text and especially the description arrangement of the texts.

As mentioned above, some reading researchers have attempted to discover what verbal skills are needed to text comprehension and to recognize reading skills or abilities by giving a variety of passages and asking them questions in order to test different levels of understanding those passages. One of reading researchers defines eight skills such as recalling word meanings, drawing inferences about the meaning of a word in context, finding answers to questions answered explicitly or in paraphrase, weaving together ideas in the content, drawing inferences from the content, recognizing a

writer’s purpose, attitude, tone, and mood, identifying a writer’s technique,

and following the structure of a passage.12

5.

The Problems in Understanding Texts

Many factors of text may tend to be difficult for students in reading

process. Those factors can influence the students’ understanding becomes not

good enough. Nuttal points out that the factors include concepts, vocabulary and sentence structure, cohesive device, discourse markers, and problems beyond the plain sense.13 Meanwhile, Alderson adds that the factors are text topic and content, text types and genres, literary and non-literary texts, text organization, traditional linguistic variables, and text readability14 In addition, Lems and friends explain about the text structure specifically:

“Text structure affects the length of a text and the section in it, how it is subdivided headings, how material is summarized through indexes,

12

Alderson, op. cit., p. 9-10.

13

Nuttall, op. cit., p. 83.

14

glossaries, or subheadings, and even what a paragraph looks like. Each text structure has its own conventions, and they are culturally specific. For example, the text structure of an informal letter is different from a letter of recommendation, a science article in a journal, or an editorial in the newspaper.”15

From some experts’ ideas above, they have the same factors of

problems in understanding texts. It can be said that those factors complement each other. Recognizing those factors may help students to be aware and to minimize the problems in understanding texts.

B.

Descriptive Text

1.

The Definition of Descriptive Text

As general, people always describe everything in their life. It can be what they see, hear, touch, smell, and taste. Describing is not only delivered by spoken form, but also it is delivered by written form. The form of writing developed by details is a descriptive writing. Descriptive writing is same as factual description which is this term used by Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson. According to them, a factual description describes the parts of a particular person, place, or thing without containing individual view.16 In additional, it gives a picture in words that appeal directly to the senses. It is emphasized by Pharr and Buscemi’s statement that good descriptive writing will develop reader’s interest to form sensory acts from all five senses.17

In additional, Pharr and Buscemi propose some ways to evoke the senses. They are:

a. Sight: “The mountain rose, green, and verdant, above the white,

sandy beach below.”

b. Hearing: “The quail burst out of the thicket with an explosion of

pounding wings.”

15

Kristin Lems, Leah D. Miller, and Tenena M. Soro, Teaching Reading to English Language Learners, (New York: The Guilford Press, 2010), p. 179-180.

16

Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types in English 3, (Sydney: Macmillan, 2003), p. 26.

17

Donald Pharr and Santi V. Buscemi, Writing Today, Contexts and Options for the Real World, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005), p. 136.

c. Touch: “Weathered by almost a century, the old man’s arm felt as if

it were covered with elephant skin.”

d. Taste: “My slice of apple pie tasted the way I expected it to until I

noticed a hint of raspberries.”

e. Smell: “The part of the cave where the bear had nested had a sharp,

earthy, almost rank scent.”18

In descriptive writing, the writer has to writes the description of something or someone or a place which contains clear information as real as possible. It makes the readers easy to conceive what the text tells about. It means that as the readers are reading, they are forming the descriptive details of subject matter become real to them.

Based on the explanation above, descriptive text is description of someone or something or a place that described into words. It includes details as real as possible which make the reader easy to imagine what the text is being described.

2.

The Features of Descriptive Text

a. Purpose

Generally, the purpose of descriptive text is to present the description of a person, a place, or an object for the readers. It is also supported by Anderson that its goal is to say something about the subject by describing its details without containing individual view.19 On the other hand, Dietsch divides three general purposes of descriptive text. They are:

1. To create imagery, a mood, or an aura of a place. 2. To stimulate understanding and convince.

3. To urge the listener to action20

From those purposes, they can guide the emotional expressions of readers by describing details that create a dominant impression of readers’ main idea.

18

Ibid., p. 137.

19

Anderson, op. cit., p. 26.

20

Betty Mattix Dietsch, Reasoning and Writing Well: A Rhetoric, Research Guide,

b. Linguistic Features

Descriptive texts usually include the linguistic features. According to Anderson, the linguistic features as below:21

1. Verbs in the present tense

2. Adjectives to describe the features of the subject

3. Topic sentence to begin paragraphs and organize the various aspects of the description

On the other hand, there are some additional linguistic features belong to Busecemi. They are:

1. Using concrete and proper nouns 2. Using effective verbs

3. Including specific details22 c. Schematic Structures

Generally, description text has an opening paragraph introducing the subject of the description. Then, it is followed by a series of paragraphs each describing one feature of the subject. The last is a final concluding section that signals the end of the description. The following is the more explanation

about the constructions that the writer takes from Anderson’s book:23

1. A general opening statement in the first paragraph

 This statement introduces the subject of the description to the audience.

 It can give the audience brief details about the when, where, who or what of the subject.

2. A series of paragraphs about the subject

 Each paragraph usually begins with a topic sentence.

 The topic sentence previews the details that will be contained in the remainder of the paragraph.

 Each paragraph should describe one feature of the subject.

21

Anderson, loc. cit.

22

Santi V. Buscemi, A Reader for Developing Writers, Fifth Edition, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002), p. 263-264, 267.

23

 These paragraphs build the description of the subject. 3. A concluding paragraph

 The concluding paragraph signals the end of the text.

For the sample of description text including the schematic structures, it can be seen in appendix 14.

3.

The Forms of Descriptive Text

Generally, people thought that the form of descriptive text is like they find and read as usual. In fact, the descriptive text has its own forms. When reading a descriptive text, people must realize what form of the descriptive text is being read. Fortunately, Pharr and Buscemi divide the descriptive

text’s forms into two forms. The forms are objective description and

subjective description.24

Objective description is used in the sciences, in business, and in technology. Writers using this approach attempt to describe their subject

without including their personal responses. A medical examiner’s report on

what caused the death of a person found in an alley is an example of objective description. So is the report of a business planner who has been sent to look at a tract of land and determine its suitability for development as a shopping center. When a certain type of machinery is needed for production, a

company’s engineers will describe the machine before it is built, lying out the

required physical and dynamic specifications. Note that personal bias is out of place in this context. Instead, the emphasis is on impartially, on providing a disinterested description.

On the other side, subjective description is used by writers to show a personal connection to their subject. For example, if the writers wrote an

essay describing their aunt’s dog, Rusty, a lovable rogue with a talent for

madcap adventures and digging up disgusting objects, they would be writing from their limited experience of this dog. If their aunt had taken on this

assignment, however, her response would probably be much different. She’s

24

the one who has to deal with this creature day in and day out, and what seem

“lovable” to an occasional visitor may well require teeth-gritting forbearance

from the caretaker.

From the elaboration above, the difference between objective description and subjective description is clear enough. The objective description only uses the details as real as the described subject, without including personal opinion. Meanwhile, the subjective description includes the

writer’s feelings toward the described subject. Therefore, people can realize

and determine easily which one descriptive text used objective description and subjective description.

C.

Collaborative Learning

1.

The Definition of Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning is not like an unusual term anymore in kinds of fields, especially in education field. It has been discussed by the experts and educators in the education field. Collaborative learning gives ways to arrange group work to improve learning process and to increase students’ academic achievement. It is related to Simplicio’s statement in the Orlich and friends’ book that doing in collaborative teams is able to help the pupils reach academic goal.25

Collaborative learning is an approach that used by teachers in teaching

and learning processes. It is quoted from Slavin’s statement in the Dornyei’s

book, “Educational theory has even proposed a teaching approach, called

cooperative learning, which is entirely built on the concept of peer

collaboration.”26

It can be said that collaborative learning is same as cooperative learning which is collaborative learning is more general approach than cooperative learning approach. This approach has been accepted in popularity in recent years.

25

Donald C. Orlich, et. al., Teaching Strategies: A Guide to Effective Instruction, Ninth Edition, (Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010), p. 270.

26

Zoltan Dornyei, Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), p. 100.

Collaborative learning is group learning refers to school tasks and activities done by a group of students which includes some thoughts and discussion. It is actively organized which is students can work, share, and improve together. It is working together to accomplish goals. It consists of two or more students in a small group teach each other to reach the same goal. Within collaborative learning, students can get benefits for themselves because they help each other. Holub and Harrington say that collaborative learning includes the share constructing of taking part of two students in which results for each person are documented.27

In additional, Lodge and friends point out that working together will make something bigger than working individually.28 Muijs and Reynolds also state that collaborative work provides strength problem-solving because the whole information available in a group is probably to be greater than available to personal students.29 It means that collaborative learning gives positive effect in learning process in which students can get excellent information and solve the problem based on the subject they discuss together. On the other hand, Kyriacou says that team work is as a part of gradual learning and to the point which makes students participate in many works.30 From these explanations, both of experts have the same statements toward what students get by using collaborative learning. A greater knowledge will be available among the students in the group.

Based on the explanations above, collaborative learning is an approach that used by teachers in teaching and learning processes in which two or more students learn something together, increase the academic achievement, and improve the learning process. Students can work and share each other to get greater knowledge towards a subject in order to reach the same goal. Those

27

Tish Holub and Robert G. Harrington (eds.), Taking Sides, Clashing Views on

Controversial, Issues in Classroom Management, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006), p. 48.

28

Caroline Lodge, Chris Watkins, and Eileen Carnell, Effective Learning in Classrooms, (London: Paul Chapman Publishing, 2007), p. 88.

29

Daniel Muijs and David Reynolds, Effective Teaching, Evidence and Practice, Second Edition, (London: Sage Publications, 2005), p. 59.

30

Chris Kyriacou, Effective Teaching in Schools, Theory and Practice, Third Edition,

results will not be gained by students if they work individually. As Lodge proves that people get knowledge more because they tell it to other people that they do not tell to themselves. So, they also learn something that they will not get if they are just doing by themselves.31

2.

The Teachers

’

Roles in Collaborative Learning

The teachers’ roles in collaborative learning classroom are different from the teachers’ roles in traditional classroom. Here, teachers speak less than students because collaborative learning emphasize on students center. Johnson et. al. stated in the Richards’ book that the teacher has to make well-structured learning condition in the classroom, creating aims, decisions, and structured assignments, dividing students into teams and roles, and choosing materials and time.32 In additional, Harel also stated in Richards’ book:

“An important role for the teacher is that of facilitator of learning. Teacher interacts, teaches, refocuses, questions, clarifies, supports, expands, celebrates, emphasizes. Facilitators are giving feedback, redirecting the group with questions, encouraging the group to solve its own problems, extending activity, encouraging thinking, managing conflict, observing students, and supplying resources.”33

Furthermore, Orlich and friends add the teacher’s roles are teacher need to actively teach social skills, monitor the use of social skills, ask students to practice those skills within their groups, have students provide feedback on group interactions and social processes, and develop plans for engaging students in problem solving and conflict resolution.34 On the other

hand, Kessler has divided the teacher’s roles into five roles as stated below:

a. Inquirer: teachers are continually examining and questioning their beliefs, values, and assumptions, knowing the learner, acknowledging learner potential, expecting learners to be successful.

b. Creator: teacher creates the social climate in the classroom which is active, interactive, positive, caring, supportive, secure, tolerant of

31

Lodge, Watkins, and Carnell, op. cit., p. 89.

32

Jack C. Richards and Theodore S. Rodgers, Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Second Edition, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), p. 199.

33

Ibid.

34

errors, and trusting; teacher creates learning experiences structured for positive interdependence, individual accountability, intergroup cooperation, and opportunities for the second language learner to use language purposefully and meningfully in the context of experiencing specific cooperative skills.

c. Observer: teacher stands back, listens to the groups, then records observations, e.g. body language, degree of involvement, gestures, or tone of the talk; teacher may reflect on them in an attempt to interpret the observations in a nonjudgmental way; teacher prepares a checklist in order to identify essential skills for cooperative interaction.

d. Facilitator: teacher is prepared to step aside to give the learner a more meaningful role, to intervene and to assist in the problem-solving

process, to support and encourage the learners’ desire to learn;

teacher interacts, teaches, refocuses, questions, clarifies, supports, expands, celebrates, and empathizes.

e. Change agent: teacher to be a communicator who can articulate reasons for teaching a certain way and explain why cooperative learning for the second language learners works; teacher can become an advocate for the second language learner, communicate initiatives and programs to students, staff, parents, and the community at large.35

Although collaborative learning is student center, it does not mean teachers do not have any roles. Teachers keep having some roles but they do not tend to handle over all the learning process. The important thing is teachers still have opportunities to handle the learning process in order to students are not out of focus.

3.

The Students’ Roles in Collaborative Learning

Many experts have stated what the students’ roles in collaborative

learning. They elaborate the roles with their own words but the main point is

35

Carolyn Kessler (ed.), Cooperative Language Learning (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1992), p. 164-171.

same so far. According to Richards and Rodgers, “The primary role of the learner is as a member of a group who must work collaboratively on tasks with other group members. Learners are also directors of their own learning. They are taught to plan, monitor, and evaluate their own learning. Learners alternate roles involve partners in the role of tutors, checkers, recorders, and information sharers.”36

In additional, Orlich and friends state the students’ roles are:37

a. Group leader (facilitates group discussion and makes group sets goals and works to meet them).

b. Monitor (monitors time on task and ensures that everyone gets an equal opportunity to participate).

c. Resource manager (gathers and organizes materials).

d. Recorder (keeps a written or taped record of group activities).

e. Reporter (shares group findings and plans in whole-class discussions).

Meanwhile, Kessler also state the students’ roles as below:38

a. Gatekeeper (makes sure each person participates and that no one individual dominates the group process).

b. Cheerleader (makes sure that the contribution of each member and the team as a whole are appreciated).

c. Taskmaster (keeps the group on task and attempts to make sure each member contributes and guides discussion/work).

d. Secretary (records team answers and supporting material; can also be the team spokesperson in reporting to the whole class).

e. Checker (checks that everyone agrees before a group decision is made; checks that everyone understands the assignment and what is needed to finish).

f. Quiet captain (makes sure the group does not disturb other groups).

36

Richards and Rodgers, loc. cit.

37

Orlich, et. al., op. cit., p. 273.

38

From both of experts’ explanations above, especially Orlich and Kessler, they have same ideas in dividing the students’ roles. They only use different terms to elaborate it.

On the other side, Johnson and Johnson have divided the students’

roles into six roles as stated in Muijs and Reynolds’s book. Those roles are:39

a. The summarizer, who will prepare the group’s presentation to the

class and summarize conclusions reached to see if the rest of the group agrees.

b. The researcher, who collects background information and looks up any additional information that is needed to complete the task.

c. The checker, who checks that the facts that the group will use are indeed correct and will stand up to scrutiny from the teacher or other groups.

d. The runner, who tries to find the resources needed to complete the task, such as equipment and dictionaries.

e. The observer/troubleshooter, who takes notes and records group processes. These may be used during the debriefing following the group work.

f. The recorder, who writes down the major output of the group, and synthesizes the work of the other group members.

Based on those roles belong to Johnson and Johnson above, the writer thinks that those roles are recommended for higher grade such as students of Senior High School and college. It is because the elaboration from each role has reached higher level of thinking like doing presentation, taking notes, and synthesizing. Those activities are not appropriate for students of Junior High School because their level of thinking has not reached it.

4.

The Advantages of Collaborative Learning

There are many advantages of collaborative learning which has taken place in the education field. Many experts have stated those advantages based

39

on their experiences and researches in the past or in recent years. Lodge and friends summarize the advantages of collaborative learning, the list covers:40

a. Improved learning and achievement: higher level thinking skills, student satisfaction with the learning experience, positive attitude

towards the subject, less divergence between learners’ achievement,

learning orientation rather than a performance orientation, critical thinking and dialogue.

b. Improved skills: oral communication skills, empathy skills, social interaction skills, self-management skills, leadership skills of female students.

c. Improved engagement and responsibility: active involved exploratory learning, student responsibility for learning, student retention.

d. Improved relationships: responsibility for each other, the classroom as a community, positive race relations, diversity understanding, student-staff interaction and familiarity.

In addition, Muijs and Reynolds state that collaborative learning can

develop students’ social skills, which means students can have more emphatic abilities; collaborative leaning can allow students to understand others’ ideas,

which means students can be aware that each student has strengths and weaknesses; and collaborative learning can find an answer to a case in a group, which means students can gather all their knowledge to solve the case.41

Furthermore, Orlich and friends summarize some of the important points about small groups, the list covers:42

a. Increased depth of understanding and grasp of course content. b. Enhanced motivation and greater involvement with the course. c. Positive attitudes toward later use of material presented in the course. d. Problem-solving skills specific to content of the course.

40

Lodge, Watkins, and Carnell, op. cit., p. 100.

41

Muijs and Reynolds, op. cit., p. 52-53.

42

e. Practice in the application of concepts and information to practical problems.

Meanwhile, Brown mentions the advantages of collaborative learning (group work) which are a bit different from other experts mostly. The advantages are generates interactive language, offers an embracing affective climate, promotes learner responsibility and autonomy, and a step toward individualizing instruction.43

From psychology view, collaborative learning (group work) has two main benefits of a motivational kind which have stated by Fox. It gets closely

into students’ desire to communicate each other and students talk and work

together can make them interest more actively with the ideas and realities of

the subject than they listen to the teacher’s instruction.44

In additional, Kyriacou stressed that social and communication skills are grown deal with participation in small team work as important as the intelligent standard of the activity created.45

From experts’ statements, it can be concluded that collaborative

learning has great value in learning process. It influences students with many good effects toward their learning process, achievement, skills, even social life.

5.

The Disadvantages of Collaborative Learning

Besides the advantages, there are also many disadvantages of collaborative learning which has taken place in the education field. Many experts have stated those disadvantages based on their experiences and researches in the past or in recent years. Muijs and Reynolds summarize the disadvantages of collaborative learning, the list covers:46

a. It does not naturally promote independent learning and can foster dependency on certain dominant members of the group.

43

H. Douglas Brown, Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language

Pedagogy, (New York: Longman, 2001), p. 178-179.

44

Richard Fox, Teaching and Learning, Lessons from Psychology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005), p. 161.

45

Kyriacou, loc. cit.

46

b. It can easily lead to free-rider effects whereby certain members of the group do not effectively contribute and rely on the work of others. c. It can also make it harder to manage for the teacher.

d. It can take a lot longer to cover a particular topic.

e. Shyer pupils may feel that they are not benefiting as much.

f. Pupils can strengthen each other’s misconception.

g. There is a risk of classroom getting out of hand with pupils shouting out answers.

D.

Teaching Descriptive Text Using Collaborative Learning

The following is the procedures in teaching descriptive text using Collaborative Learning:

1. Teacher introduces a brief explanation of Collaborative Learning that it is useful for them to develop their ability in reading descriptive text.

2. Teacher divides students into groups. There are 32 students in the class 7B. Each group consists of 4 students. So, there are 8 groups in the class. 3. Teacher gives a descriptive text for each group.

4. Teacher gives instructions for all groups to read and to understand the descriptive text.

5. Teacher handles all groups when they are doing the task and helps them when they are getting difficulty.

6. Teacher allows students to look for the meaning of difficult words in the dictionary if they find those words in the text.

7. Teacher asks students to answer the questions related to the text.

8. Teacher and students check the answers which have been answered by students.

9. Teacher gives score based on the students’ works have been checked.

E.

Previous Studies

Related to this study, there are some previous studies which have sameness in each variable and method of research. The previous studies as below:

1. The Effectiveness of Learning Reading through Collaborative Learning at the Second Grade Students of SMAN 8 South Tangerang. Proposed by Iffah Salimah, 2010.

The aim of this study is to see the effectiveness of learning reading through collaborative learning. The writer used quantitative method and pre-experimental design. The writer did this study at the second grade students of SMAN 8 South Tangerang that involved 40 students from one class, science class, and the population of science students are 181 students. The writer used pre-test and post-test as the instruments of research. The writer got the result that t0 was

28,2. The writer used the degree of significance of 5% = 2,02 and 1% = 2,71. Comparing t0 and tt, the result was 2,02 < 28,2 > 2,71. It meant that Ha was

accepted and Ho was rejected because t0 was higher than tt. It concluded that

collaborative learning is effective in learning reading and students’ achievement in SMAN 8 South Tangerang.

2. The Effectiveness of Teaching Reading through Collaborative Learning Activities at the Second Grade Students of MTs Hidayatul Islamiyah Jatibaru Karawang. Proposed by Eka Nurazizah, 2012.

The aim of this study is to propose an alternative way in teaching reading using collaborative learning to be more conducive and interesting in order to enable the students learn in a positive environment and make the English teaching and learning flow smoothly and effective. The writer used quantitative method and experimental design. The writer did this study at the second grade students of MTs Hidayatul Islamiyah Jatibaru Karawang that involved 80 students from two classes, 8B and 8C, and the population of second grade students are distributed into four classes. The writer used pre-test and post-test as the instruments of research. The writer got the result that t0 was 18,65. The writer used the degree of

significance of 5% = 1,99. Comparing t0 and tt, the result was 18,65 > 1,99. It

meant that Ha was accepted and Ho was rejected because t0 was higher than tt. It

concluded that collaborative learning is effective in teaching reading and students’ achievement in MTs Hidayatul Islamiyah Jatibaru Karawang.

3. Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension of Descriptive Text through Group Work Technique at the First Year of VII-I Class of SMPN 10 Tangerang Selatan. Proposed by Rizki Amelia, 2013.

The aim of this study is to know whether group work can develop

students’ reading comprehension of descriptive text through group technique in

the first year of VII-I class of SMPN 10 Tangerang Selatan. The writer used classroom action research method. The writer did this study at the first year of VII-I class of SMPN 10 Tangerang Selatan that involved 46 students. The writer used observational sheet, interview guideline, and test (pre-test and post-test) as the instruments of research. The writer got the result that 80,43% of students can reach values > 65 and have achieved the minimum passing criteria (KKM). It concluded that the students’ reading comprehension of descriptive text through group work technique had improved.

Those three studies have the differences with this study. The first study has the differences with this study in the dependent variable. It has more general dependent variable which is the writer does not mention what kind of text she chooses and the sample of study is the second grade students of Senior High School. Meanwhile, this study mentions what kind of text (descriptive text) and the sample of study is the seventh grade students of Junior High School. The similarities are both of these studies use pre-experimental design as the quantitative method, test as the instrument of study, and see the effectiveness of collaborative learning in learning reading.

Another study has the difference with this study in the research design. It uses experimental design which takes two classes as the experiment class and the control class. Meanwhile, this study uses pre-experimental design which takes only one class. The similarities are both of these studies use test as the instrument of study and see the effectiveness of collaborative learning in learning reading.

The last study has the differences with this study in the method and the

aim. It uses classroom action research method and its aim is to improve students’

reading comprehension through group work technique. In contrast, this study uses pre-experimental design and its aim is to see the effectiveness of collaborative

learning in learning reading. The similarities are both of these studies choose descriptive text as the dependent variable and the sample of study is the first grade students of Junior High School.

F.

Conceptual Framework

Reading is one of skills in learning language which has an important role. Reading is a way to get an information from a text. It must be learned and developed because it will be needed by people to add and to broad their knowledge about everything. It also helps people to update the most recent information. Therefore, reading is the window of the world.

In contrast, most of students feel reading is a boring activity, moreover reading an English text. They think that reading an English text is difficult because they have lack of vocabulary, so they get problem to understand the text. Besides, they do not know exactly how to pronoun words by words well. They have to open dictionary for many times until they feel tired to do it. Finally, they feel better to ask spontaneously to the teacher rather than to open dictionary for many times.

When the teacher has to answer the students’ question one by one, it will

waste time because there are a lot of students in the one class. To avoid the wasting time, group work can help this situation. Thus, the writer proposes Collaborative Learning as an approach to learn reading well.

Collaborative Learning can be an alternative approach in teaching reading which is students can work, share, and improve together. It is a process that two or more students in a small group teach each other to reach the same goal. It also encourages students to be active. Within collaborative learning, students can get benefits for themselves because they help each other.

Based on the elaborations above, the writer assumes that Collaborative Learning can be effective in improving students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta.

G.

Hypothesis of the Study

The writer proposes alternative hypothesis (Ha) and null hypothesis (H0) as

below:

Ha : There is an effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in improving

students’ reading ability between pre-test and post-test scores.

H0 : There is no effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in improving

28

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A.

The Place and Time of Research

The implementation of this research held on February up to March 2014. This research took place at SMP Pelita Harapan, at Pupan street number 29 Pondok Pinang-Kebayoran Lama, Jakarta Selatan.

B.

The Method of Research

The method of this study was quantitative method which used pre-experimental research as the design about the effectiveness of using collaborative

learning towards students’ ability in reading descriptive text at the seventh grade

students of SMP Pelita Harapan. According to Verma and Mallick, this research usually involves three stages. The first stage is the administration of the pre-test, measuring the dependent variable; the next stage is the experimental treatment or the independent variable is applied; the final stage is the administration a post-test, measuring the dependent variable again.1 The changing of pre-test to post-test scores means that the treatment is significant.

C.

The Content of Interference

The writer did the implementation of treatment 4 meetings. All meetings had almost same procedures in teaching descriptive text using Collaborative Learning. Each meeting had a different theme of descriptive text: Daily Activities, Idol, Tourism Object, and Health.

The first meeting’s theme was Daily Activities. In the beginning step, the writer did ask and question session about students’ daily activities. Then, the

writer explained about telling the time. It was required in making a descriptive text about daily activities. It meant that students did everything, they needed to

1

Gajendra K. Verma and Kanka Mallick, Researching Educational: Perspective and Techniques, (London: Falmer Press, 1999), p. 103.

write the time. In the middle step, the writer divided the students into some groups. She gave a text based on the theme for each group. After giving the text, the writer asked for students to understand and to answer the questions related to the text. In the ending step, the writer and the students checked the answers. After

checking the answers, the writer gave confirmation based on students’ work

results.

The next meeting’s theme was Idol. In the beginning step, the writer did

ask and question session about famous people. Then, the writer asked students’

favorite idol. Next, the writer did ask and question session about adjectives. It was required in making a descriptive text about idol. It meant that students described everyone, they needed to write how people looked like by using adjectives. In the middle step, it was same as the first meeting: dividing the students into some groups, giving a text about famous people for each group, and asking for them to understand and to answer the questions related to the text. In the ending step, the writer and the students did the same thing as in the first meeting.

The third meeting’s theme was Tourism Object. In the beginning step, the

writer did ask and question session about famous tourism objects. Then, the writer

asked students’ favorite tourism object. Next, the writer did ask and question

session about adjectives. It was required in making a descriptive text about idol. It meant that students described a place, they also needed to write how it looked like by using adjectives. In the middle step, it was same as in the first and in the second meetings: dividing the students into some groups, giving a text about famous tourism object for each group, and asking for them to understand and to answer the questions related to the text. In the ending step, the writer and the students did the same thing as in the first and in the second meetings.

The last meeting’s theme was Health. In the beginning step, the writer did

ask and question session about kinds of sports. Then, the writer asked students’

favorite sports and famous athletes. In the middle step, it was same as the first three meetings: dividing the students into some groups, giving a text about health for each group, and asking for them to understand and to answer the questions

related to the text. In the ending step, the writer and the students did the same thing as the first three meetings.

That was what the writer had done during the implementation of treatment. It had 4 meetings which was each meeting had a different theme. The main point was the procedures done were similar.

D.

The Population and Sample

The writer did the research at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan. The population of the seventh grade is 62 students which are divided into 2 classes, 7A and 7B. Each class consists of 30 and 32 students. The writer took one class from class 7B as the sample of the research. The writer only took 25 students from class 7B because those students followed all stages of research from the beginning until the end. In this research, the sample was chosen by using the purposive sample technique because it was the English teacher’s recommendation. The English teacher said that class 7B’s students were passive mostly. In addition, their family background does not support them to learn English at home or any courses. Therefore, she wanted to know whether the students can be active after the treatment had been given by the writer. This technique is done because of some considerations such as limited time, energy, and cost.2 It can also be selected because of the researcher’s experience and knowledge of the group to be sampled.3

E.

Instrument and The Technique of Data Collection

To get the data in this research, the writer used tests as the research instrument of the pre-experimental research. The tests were:

2

Suharsimi Arikunto, Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik, Cet. 14, (Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 2010), p. 183.

3

L. R. Gay, Geoffrey E. Mills, and Peter Airasian, Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications, Ninth Edition, (New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc., 2009), p. 134.

1. Pre-test

The writer held the pre-test at the first meeting. Before the students learnt reading descriptive text through collaborative learning, she gave them a pre-test measuring the dependent variable.

2. Post-test

The writer gave the post-test after the treatment had been given by

collaborative learning towards students’ ability in reading descriptive

text. This test for measuring the dependent variable again.

Before administering the test, the writer tried the pre-test instrument to another class. She wanted to analyze the validity and the reliability of pre-test instrument in order to check whether it had been good or not to be used. She used software ANATEST to calculate both validity and reliability of the pre-test instrument. The pre-test instrument consisted of 30 questions of multiple choices. The writer just took 20 questions were valid and reliable.

Based on the results of validity and reliability at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan which used software ANATEST, there were 26 questions were valid and reliable from 30 questions. The questions were valid and reliable: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, and 30. Meanwhile, the questions were not valid and reliable: 3, 13, 23, and

27. For the details of ANATEST’s calculation, it can be seen in appendix 10.

F.

The Technique of Data Analysis

The data was obtained from the tests used to know how effective

collaborative learning towards students’ ability in reading descriptive text. It was

gained from the students’ pre-test and post-test scores.

To find out the effectiveness of using collaborative learning towards

students’ ability in reading descriptive text, the writer used t-test formula which

was adapted from Anas Sudijono. Before using t-test formula, the writer had to seek some formulas below.4

4

Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, (Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2008), p. 305-307.

a. Determining mean of variables MD = Ʃ

MD = the average of gained score (mean of difference)

ƩD = sum of gained score N = number of students

b. Determining of standard deviation score of variables SDD = √ 2

SDD = standard deviation of gained score

D2 = sum of squared gained score ƩD = sum of gained score

N = number of students

c. Determining of standard error mean of variables SEMD = _√

SEMD = standard error mean of gained score

SDD = standard deviation of gained score

N = number of students d. Determining t0

t0 =

t0 = t observation

MD = the average of gained score (mean of differences)

SEMD = standard error mean of gained score

e. Determining degrees of freedom df = N-1

df = degree of freedom N = number of students

G.

The Statistical Hypothesis

The statistical hypothesis is to probability in term of sampling and measurement error. It is stated in either the null or alternative hypotheses. Null

hypothesis states that there is no difference between the population means of the two groups. It is indicated by the symbol H0. Meanwhile, alternative hypothesis

which is designed as Ha is the opposite of null hypothesis.

The writer proposes alternative hypothesis and null hypothesis as below: 1. If tobserve > ttable, the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and the null

hypothesis (H0) is rejected. It means that there is an effectiveness of

Collaborative Learning in improving students’ reading ability between pre-test and post-test scores.

2. If tobserve < ttable, the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected and the null

hypothesis (H0) is accepted. It means that there is no effectiveness of

Collaborative Learning in improving students’ reading ability between pre-test and post-test scores.

34

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS

A.

The Data Description

As the writer mentioned before, this study discussed about the

effectiveness of using collaborative learning towards students’ ability in reading

descriptive text which has been done at the seventh grade students of SMP Pelita Harapan Jakarta. She held the teaching and applied the collaborative learning approach in reading. She also gave pre-test and post-test to the students.

After conducting the research, the writer obtained two kinds of data, the scores of pre-test and post-test, as shown in the tables below.

Table 4.1

The result of pre-test before implementing Collaborative Learning Students Pre-test

1 65

2 60

3 55

4 35

5 70

6 75

7 50

8 65

9 65

10 65

11 60

12 35

13 70

14 50

Students Pre-test

16 45

17 65

18 45

19 70

20 55

21 45

22 55

23 65

24 75

25 40

N = 25 Ʃ = 1455

Based on the table above, the writer obtained that there were 12 students who reached and passed the Minimum Mastery Criteria (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal). Meanwhile, 13 students did not reach it. The Minimum Mastery Criteria itself was 65. For those who reached the Minimum Mastery Criteria meant that the students got score as same as the Minimum Mastery Criteria. For example, the students were on number 1, 8, 9, 10, 17, and 23. On the other side, for those who passed the Minimum Mastery Criteria meant that the students got score higher than the Minimum Mastery Criteria. For example, the students were on number 5, 6, 13, 15, 19, and 24. It can be seen that the highest score was 75. Meanwhile, for those who did not reach the Minimum Mastery Criteria meant that the students got score lower than the Minimum Mastery Criteria. For example, the students were on number 2, 3, 4, 7, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, and 25. It can be seen that the lowest score was 35.

Table 4.2

The result of post-test after implementing Collaborative Learning Students Post-test

1 75

2 70

3 65

4 40

5 75

6 80

7 60

8 65

9 65

10 70

11 60

12 40

13 75

14 55

15 85

16 45

17 85

18 75

19 80

20 75

21 60

22 55

23 85

24 80

25 65

Based on the table above, the writer obtained that there were 17 students who reached and passed the Minimum Mastery Criteria. Meanwhile, 8 students did not reach it. For those who reached the Minimum Mastery Criteria were on number 3, 8, 9, and 25. On the other side, for those who passed the Minimum Mastery Criteria were on number 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, and 24. It can be seen that the highest score was 85. Meanwhile, for those who did not reach the Minimum Mastery Criteria were on number 4, 7, 11, 12, 14, 16, 21, and 22. It can be seen that the lowest score was 40.

B.

The Data Analysis

Data of students’ achievement in reading divided into two kinds, they are

the data before they learn reading through collaborative learning which is gained from pre-test and the data after they learn reading through collaborative learning which is gained from post-test. The writer presented the data about the students’ achievement in reading both before and after using collaborative learning. The first, the writer presented the result of pre-test, post-test, and its differences. Then, the writer used the formula statistic calculation of t-test with significance 5% to decide significance of different results in reading before using collaborative learning and after using collaborative learning.

In the following table, the writer presented the calculation results of tests and its differneces to know the effectiveness of collaborative learning towards

students’ ability in reading.

Table 4.3

The calculation results of students’ pre-test and post-test Students Pre-test Post-test Gained Score (D) D2

1 65 75 10 100

2 60 70 10 100

3 55 65 10 100

4 35 40 5 25

Students Pre-test Post-test Gained Score (D) D2

6 75 80 5 25

7 50 60 10 100

8 65 65 0 0

9 65 65 0 0

10 65 70 5 25

11 60 60 0 0

12 35 40 5 25

13 70 75 5 25

14 50 55 5 25

15 75 85 10 100

16 45 45 0 0

17 65 85 20 400

18 45 75 30 900

19 70 80 10 100

20 55 75 20 400

21 45 60 15 225

22 55 55 0 0

23 65 85 20 400

24 75 80 5 25

25 40 65 25 625

N = 25 Ʃ = 1455 Ʃ = 1685 Ʃ = 230 Ʃ = 3750

Average 58.2 67.4 9.2 150

Based on the data presented in the table above, it can be discussed that the lowest gained score is 0 and the highest gained score is 30. Meanwhile, the sum of gained score is 230 and the sum of squared of gained score is 3750.

After finishing the calculation of pre-test and postest, the writer used t-test formula to find out the effectiveness of using collaborative learning towards

differences of mean variables, the standard deviation scores of variables, and the standard error mean of variables. The formula as follow:

a. Determining mean of variables MD = Ʃ

MD = = 9.2

b. Determining of standard deviation score of variables SDD = √ 2

SDD = √ 2

SDD = √ = √ = √ = 8.08

c. Determining of standard error mean of variables SEMD = _√

SEMD = _√ = _√ = = 1.65

d. Determining t0

t0 =

t0 = = 5.57

e. Determining degrees of freedom df = N-1

df = 25-1 = 24 t table  5% = 2.06

90 APPENDIX 14

THE SAMPLE OF DESCRIPTIVE TEXT

Deinonychus Schematic Structures Opening statement introducing the subject

The model of Deinonychus, a dinosaur from the Cretaceous period, can be found in the museum of Natural Science.

Series of paragraphs

describing the subject

Deinonychus is small by dinosaur standards. It is about 2.5 metres in length and stands about one metre high at the shoulder.

This reptile has a long tail, spindly legs and slender neck. The head is large and the jaws are lined with sharp teeth.

The tail, approximately 3 metres in length, has vertebrae surrounded by bundles of bony rods so the whole tail can be held stiff.

The toes of Deinonychus are unusual. The first toe is small and points backwards. The second toe has a huge sickle-shaped claw and is raised. The third and fourth toes are in the normal position.

A conclusion

90 Summer Sanctuary Schematic Structures Opening statement introducing the subject

My family used to spend two months every summer at a log cabin in the mountains of Colorado. To me, the most pleasant spot at the cabin was the porch in the front.

Series of paragraphs

describing the subject

The porch, which was made of plain grey cement, was small, about 9 x 12 feet, but I liked to sit there in a worm wooden lawn chair and enjoy the view of the mountains. Both to the left and right, there were huge red rock cliffs that rose for hundreds of feet, almost straight up. There was also a steep spruce-covered mountain to our rear, so that the cabin was enclosed on three sides by mountains. With mountains almost all around, I felt protected and comfortable. To the front, as I sat on the porch, I could for miles down the lovely green valley between the two side mountains. In the valley were a series of ponds that shimmered and sparkled in the sunlight. In the distance was a mountain that looked like it was covered with green velvet. On the left side of the porch was a birdfeeder that attracted tiny shimmering green hummingbirds, and to the right was my mother’s vegetable garden. It was filled with delicious tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers, and peas. It attracted a lot of rabbits. She would chase them away but I liked to watch them.

A conclusion

I spent hours and hours on that porch every summer. As a city-dweller, I always appreciated the mountain breezes, the scent of the spruce trees, and the wildlife.

90 Old Classroom Schematic Structures Opening statement introducing the subject

My old classroom was interesting because three sides of classroom were made of glass.

Series of paragraphs

describing the subject

I enjoyed sitting close to the windows and looking at the view. On the left-hand side of class, I could easily see the football field. In the mornings, it was full of students exercising. There was an army camp in front of the athletic field not far away from the school. It was fabulous to see the soldiers marching up and down the field. Farther in the distance, I had the advantage of seeing the city of Nicosia. It was enjoyable to see the houses, the buildings, the hospital, and the river close to it. The view from the back of the classroom was also panoramic. Close to the school, there was a beautiful park with many trees around it. Not far from the park was a hippodrome for horse racing. Since I like horses, I was interested to see the horses running in the hippodrome. Farther in the distance, I could enjoy the view of the snowy mountains. On the right side of the class was the road. I was always interested to see the drivers in a hurry in the morning. Behind the road was a thick forest, which was appealing during the winter.

A conclusion

The position of the classroom with its panoramic view made me feel like I was dreaming. Although I was only a child when I studied in that classroom, I will never forget it.