TEACHING READING THROUGH COOPERATIVE INTEGRATED READING AND COMPOSITION (CIRC) AT THE SECOND YEAR STUDENTS OF SMPN 1 KALIREJO CENTRAL LAMPUNG

1. INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents background of the problem, formulation of the problem, objectives of the research, uses of the research, scope of the research, and definition of terms clarified like the following.

1.1 Background of the Problem

In Indonesia, English is one of the subjects learned from elementary school until university level. By learning English, students are expected be able to communicate in English both in written and oral forms and they also hoped to have substantial language skills e.g., listening, speaking, reading and writing.

Reading, as one of language skills, has an important role for those who wants to master English well. Reading is one way for the reader to receive information from the writer in the form of text. Reading can also improve the reader’s vocabulary.

Based on the syllabus of KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan / School Based Curriculum), the standard competence of the reading in Junior High School is understanding the meaning of short simple functional text and essay in form of descriptive and recount texts related to the surrounded environment.Meanwhile, the basic competence in reading at Junior High School is to be able to read the short simple functional text and essay loudly in form of descriptive and recount texts with the sound, stress and intonation related to the surrounded environment (Depdiknas, 2006)

Reading has a purpose. It is something that almost everyone does everyday, it is an integral part of daily lives, taken very much for granted and generally assumed to be something that everyone can do it. The reason for reading depends very much on the purpose for reading. For example, when she/he reads an article about an actress, she/he wants to know and to get the information about the actress. To be able to read effectively and efficiently, readers should have particular purpose in their mind before they interact with the texts. For that reason, they should know what they have to do with the text based on their reading purpose.

Based on the curriculum of KTSP 2006 (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan / School Based Curriculum), the students in junior high school are able to understand monologue and functional texts, especially for second grade students. The second grade students have to interact with types of texts whereas they do not know what they have to do with the texts. The students just read and they do not get anything. It is difficult for them to answer the question from the text. This problem rises because they read alone and do not discuss the text together with their friends. For example, when the students get the texts from the teacher, they directly read the whole of the texts to get the information without discussing with their friends about the content of the texts. Then, they answer the questions based on what they have read before. Finally, they are confused to identify the information in the text.

Recently, teaching reading in Junior High School is commonly done classically. It means that teaching reading is done based on the average speed of students. There are students with high speed and low speed in understanding the content of text. Students who have high speed can understand the meaning of the text and found the information quickly in the text. Meanwhile, the students with low speed will need long time to find the information in the text.

In other words, students with high speed will be bored, and students with low speed will be confused. Low students need help to understand the content of the text together with their

friends. Beside that, students are made to practice thinking critically and creatively to understand the content of the text. It can be seen when the students have difficulties to express their argument and idea in simple English, orally or written form.

Based on that fact, the writer conducted cooperative learning method as one of the alternative technique to handle that problem. Cooperative learning refers to any kinds of teaching in which the students work together in small groups for helping each other in learning a certain lesson material (Slavin, 2008:4). This statement implies that the success of a group’s member succeeds the others and so does the failure. When there is a problem, it should be encountered and solved together. The process of solving problem is assumed to lead different people that subsequently stimulate them to interact to each other.

One types of the cooperative learning is Cooperative Integrated Reading Composition (CIRC). CIRC, one of the learning techniques based on cooperation, is designed to develop reading, writing and other language skills in the upper grades of primary education. CIRC technique presents a structure that increases not only opportunities for direct teaching in reading and writing but also applicability of composition writing techniques (Açıkgoz, 1992; Yaman, 1999).

In line with the implementation of CIRC, Safry (2007) who has applied this technique reports that 85% of the students were interested in participating the lesson conducted through this technique and during the teaching learning process they were very active and it has made fun and active reading class. When he applied this technique, he used narrative text. He saw the students’ interaction in the class. Before applying this technique, the students in the class were not practiced to think critically and active in understanding the content of the texts.

In this case, CIRC is suitable if it is applied for reading class in Junior High School. CIRC treats the students to work in group together and discuss their difficulties in reading together. Therefore, the writer applied this technique in order to increase the students’ comprehension achievement in reading text. The text that was used in this research was descriptive text.

1.2 Formulation of the Problem

According to the background above, the writer formulate a question as the main problem of the research.

Is there any difference of students’ comprehension achievement in reading descriptive text after being taught through CIRC?

1.3 Objective of the Research

In relation to the research problem, the objective of the research is to find out whether there is difference of students’ comprehension achievement in reading descriptive text after being taught through CIRC.

1.4 Uses of the Research

The result of this research may have the following uses: 1. Theoretically:

a. The result of this research is to confirm or disconfirm the theories of teaching reading by cooperative learning method.

b. The result of this research can be used as a reference for those who want to conduct the research in English teaching learning process with the same topic.

2. Practically:

a. For teacher: The result can give information to the English teachers especially in Junior High School, that cooperative learning is an alternative to increase the students’ comprehension achievement in reading.

b. For students: the implementation of CIRC technique in this research can attract the students to read the various texts so that it can increase the students’ comprehension to understand descriptive text in learning activity.

1.5 Scope of the Research

This research was conducted at SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Lampung Tengah. The population of this research was the second year students of SMP N 1 Kalirejo period 2011/2012 and the sample of this research was one class of second year in second semester. Then, the text in this

research was descriptive text because this text is learnt by Junior High School based on syllabus of KTSP. The materials were taken from various types of reading materials and sources, e.g. English magazine, newspaper and students textbooks. In this research, the variable that used was CIRC technique because the writer saw whether CIRC technique could be used to difference students’ reading comprehension achievement in reading descriptive text.

1.6 Definition of Terms

In order to make readers easy in understanding the content of this writing, the writer defines the terms that are used in her writing. Those terms are explained as follows:

Reading is more than knowing what each letter of alphabet standing for; reading involves more than word recognition; that comprehension is an essential of reading that without comprehension no reading (Dallman (1982:23).

Cooperative learning

Cooperative Learning refers to any kinds of teaching methods in which the students work together in small groups for helping each others in learning a certain lesson material (Slavin (2008:4).

Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC)

Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) presents a structure that increases not only opportunities for direct teaching in reading and writing but also applicability of composition writing techniques (Açıkgöz, 1992; Yaman, 1999).

In teaching reading, contemporary reading tasks, unlike the traditional materials, involve three-phase procedures: pre-reading, while-reading, and post-reading stages Alyousef (2005:142).

I. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter contains explanation related to the theories used in this research, i.e., concept of reading comprehension, teaching reading, cooperative learning, models of cooperative learning, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), procedures of teaching reading trough CIRC technique, advantages and disadvantages of CIRC technique, theoretical assumption and the hypothesis.

2.1Concept of Reading Comprehension

Reading is one of language skill that has an important role to get information through texts. The specific information showed by a symbol in the texts or interpretation meaning. Nuttal (1982:42) defines reading as the meaningful interpretation of printed or written verbal

symbols. It means that reading is a result of the interaction between the perception of graphic symbols that represent a language, and the knowledge in the perception of graphic symbols that represent a language, and the knowledge in the world. In this process, the reader tries to recreate the meaning intended by the writer.

Joycey (2006:2) states that reading is an active skill, where the reader interacts with the texts, and to some extent the writer. Smith (1982:5-6) says, “Reading certainly implies

comprehension, and reading is something that makes sense to the reader.” The readers try to understand and get the meaning and information in the written texts in form of symbols, letters, graphs, etc. Thus, they grasp the writers’ message from the text.

According to Mackey (1979:15), “Reading is an active process because it involves an interaction between though and language”. Reading as an active skill, where the reader interacts with the text, and to some extent the writer. It means that if a reader finds a reading passage interesting, his/her mind is fully engaged in trying to understand the text. In addition, Howart (2006: 1) states that reading is, of course, just as communicative as any other form of language. It means that in reading there is an interaction between the writer and the readers through the texts. The writer tries to encode the massage to the readers. Then the readers try to decode the messages that sent by the writer.

Furthermore, Smith (1982: 15) states that comprehension in reading as a matter of “making sense” of text, of relating written language to what we know already and to we want to know. Comprehension can be regarded as a condition where certainly exists. We comprehend when we have no doubt about alternative interpretation or decisions in our mind. In addition, Dallman (1982:23) states that reading is more than knowing what each letter of alphabet standing for; reading involves more than word recognition; that comprehension is an essential of reading that without comprehension no reading.

Concerning comprehension, Simanjutak (1989) states that the first point to be made about reading is comprehension. Comprehension can be regarded as a condition where no

uncertainties exist. One comprehend when he/she has all question answered because he/she has no doubt about all alternative interpretation or decision in his/her mind. As one reader, he/she constantly asking questions, and as long as these question are answered, and his/her uncertainty is reduced, then he/she comprehend.

Referring to the definitions above, it can be said that reading is a way to get information. It means that, through reading we can get the specific information and surface meaning in the

texts. The writer assumes that to make the students are easy to understand the text, so is needed an appropriate technique in teaching reading.

2.2Teaching Reading

Teaching is showing or helping someone learn how to do something providing with

knowledge, causing to know or to understand. It means that when we teach our students, we have to help them to understand the materials being taught or help them to do what they have to do. In relation in teaching reading, Alyousef (2005:142) says that in teaching reading, contemporary reading tasks, unlike the traditional materials, involve three-phase procedures: pre-reading, while-reading, and post-reading stages. The pre-reading stage helps in activating the relevant schema. For example, teacher can asks the students question that interesting things while they read the previewing of the texts. The while-reading stages or the process of the reading has the aim is to develop students ability in tackling texts by developing their linguistic and schematic knowledge. Post-reading includes activities, which enhance learning comprehension using matching exercises, cloze exercises, cut-up sentences, and

comprehension question.

The aim of teaching reading is to develop students’ skills so that the students can read

English texts effectively and efficiently. To be able to do so the reader should have particular purposes in their mind before they interact with the texts. Effective and efficient reading is always purposeful and tends to focus mainly on the purpose of the activity. Then the purpose of reading is implemented into the development of different reading techniques: translation. These can be real when the students read and interact with various types of texts, i.e.

In short, in teaching reading the teacher should provide technique to the students with

purpose for reading to anticipate different type of reading texts. Therefore, reading technique should be matched to reading purpose to read efficiently and effectively. As Suparman (2005: 1) states that there are two major reasons for reading (1) reading for pleasure. The example of reading for pleasure is when we read comic, novel, etc; (2) reading for information (in order to find out something or in order to do something with the information readers get).

The writer assumes that in teaching reading, appropriate and possible technique should be applied based on the purpose of reading in order to get the comprehension. CIRC technique as one of Cooperative Learning technique was possible to be applied by the teacher to the Junior high school students in reading, e.g. students are able to identify and look for the specific information in various types of texts (descriptive texts).

2.3Concept of Descriptive Text

Descriptive text is a text that is used to describe a particular thing, person, or place. It talks about specific thing, person, or place by mentioning its characteristics, parts, quantities, or qualities. Anything being described is explained as clearly as possible to make the readers or listeners able to see or imagine the subject in their minds clearly as the writer sees in his/her. For example, when you have finished to read a descriptive text about a person, you will have imaginations about that person, such as how is her hair, nose, lips, checks, body, etc. her personality, and other descriptions.

Nainggolan (2010:24) defines descriptive text as a text which talks about or describes on a particular person, place, or thing. So that, the function of this text is to give readers

description about a particular person, place, animal, or things. According to Decker (1989:249) in its forms, description is either objective or impressionistic (subjective).

Objective description is purely factual, uncolored by any feelings of the author; it is the type used for scientific papers and most business reports. But impressionistic description, as the

term implies, at least tinges the purely factual with authors’ personal impression; instead of describing how something is, objectively, he describe about how it seems subjectively. In this case, the definition of description can be concluded as description of how something is or how it seems, or how it looks like.

Sudarwati, and Grace (2007:135) confirms that the social function or the purpose of descriptive text is to describe a particular person/thing. The text organization or generic structure of descriptive text is:

1. Identification : identify phenomenon to be described

2. Description : provide details of the topic such as parts, qualities, characteristics, etc.

Besides generic structure, descriptive text also has language features:

1. The use of adjectives and compound adjectives (brown-skinned, attractive, beautiful, etc.)

2. The use of linking verbs (appears, is, was, etc.) 3. The use of attributive has and have

In relation in language features in descriptive text, Nainggolan (2010:24) states several language features used in descriptive text are:

1. Linking verbs (is, are, was, were)

2. Some action verbs (climb, sing, kick, etc.) 3. Non-action verbs (have, has, consist of, etc.) 4. Simple present tense (timeless)

Descriptive language (what they look like, what they have, what they do)

2.4Cooperative Learning Method

In cooperative learning, the students work together in a team or a group to do such kind of task given by their teacher. In these groups, all member of the group can share their ideas in order to finish their tasks. Cooperative learning has been defined as “small groups of learners working together as a team to solve a problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common goal” (Artz and Newman,1990,p.448) in Peterson and Miller.

While Slavin (2008:4) said that cooperative learning refers to any kinds of teaching methods in which the students work together in small groups for helping each others in learning a certain lesson material. In cooperative learning class, the students are hoped to discuss and argue in order to sharpen knowledge they have achieved at that time and close discrepancy in understanding in their own. This kind of learning is very important because others will help one who is categorized to a low student. So that, they will get more knowledge through this learning.

While, Kagan (1994) said that Cooperative Learning is a teaching arrangement that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working together to achieve a common goal. This statement implies that the success of a group’s member succeeds the others and so does the failure. It means, when there is a problem, it should be encountered, and solve together. The process of solving problem is assumed leading to different people that subsequently stimulate them to interact to each other.

Cooperative learning is carefully structured-organized so that each learner interacts with others and all learners are motivated to increase each other’s learning (Kagan and Oslen in Kesler, 1992:1) not all types of group work are cooperative because cooperative learning is

structured or organized well. Through this structure and organization, each student can interact with other students. By having interactions with others, each student will have motivation to increase their knowledge about what they learn. In addition, Lie (2004:28) states that underlies cooperative learning model in education world is homo homini socious philosophy. It means that human being is social creature who can not live alone, he needs to work together with others.

In accordance with the explanation, students must be accustomed to solving problem, finding something worth for themselves and dealing with various different ideas (Depdiknas,

2006:11). In the discussion process, it is important to realize that different ideas are actually supporting one another in finding the best solution. Therefore, a member has to see the others’ ideas are worthy and so do the others.

The overall above discussions of cooperative learning imply the message for students, “care about your own achievement, and care about others’. This value seems demand a greater emphasize on group work and students’ interaction in the classroom.

2.5Models of Cooperative Learning

According to Slavin (2008), there are several variations of cooperative learning model, those are:

2.5.1 Students Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD)

In STAD, students are divided into four or five member learning teams. Each student has representatives of both sexes, various racial or ethnics groups, and high, average, and low achiever. Team members use work sheets or other study devices to master the academic materials and then help each other learn the materials through tutoring, quizzing one another, and/or carrying on team discussion. Individually, students take

weekly or biweekly quizzes on the academic materials. These quizzes are scored, and each individual is given an improvement score.

2.5.2 Team-Game-Tournament (TGT)

Generally, TGT is same with STAD but except one thing: TGT uses academic tournament, and quizzes and score system of individual progress, where the students race as their team proxy with the participant from the other team who has academic ability before is equal like them. TGT is often combined with STAD, through add a certain tournament in STAD structure.

2.5.3 Team-Assisted Individualization (TAI)

Team Assisted Individualization (TAI) shares with STAD and TGT the use of four-member mixed ability learning teams and certificates for high-performing teams. But, where STAD and TGT use a single pace of instruction for the class, TAI combines cooperative learning with individualized instruction.

2.5.4 CIRC (Cooperative Integrated Reading And Composition)

CIRC type is one of cooperative learning type which comprehension in learning reading and writing at Junior and Senior High School. Students work in cooperative groups which consist of 4 students. They do in a arrangement activity together,

included reading together, make prediction about the text, make summary with others, write the arguments about a story, and spelling practice and vocabulary. And also, students work together to understand the main idea.

Relating to the technique that would be applied in this research, the writer applied

Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) that is more suitable since it has some techniques involving a series of step that can be practically implemented in the classroom. And, regarding to the background of this research, the researcher will make

interactions happen among students, supposed to be the means of help each other in

understanding the content of the texts. Thus, the researcher will use CIRC that the researcher thinks it will have equal change for achievement, group support for achievement, and the performance, all basic components of cooperative learning ensure realization of personal responsibility (Slavin, 1980).

2.6 Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC)

Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) technique, one of the learning techniques based on cooperation, is designed to develop reading, writing

and other language skills in the upper grades of primary education. CIRC technique presents a structure that increases not only opportunities for direct teaching in reading and writing but also applicability of composition writing techniques (Açıkgoz, 1992; Yaman, 1999). CIRC technique is developed to support traditionally used “skill-based reading groups” approach.

Firstly, reading groups are established in the classroom. Next, students are paired off within the groups. When the teacher works with a reading group, couples try to teach each other meaningful reading and writing skills by using reciprocal learning technique. They help each other in performing basic skill-building activities (such as oral reading, contextual guessing, asking questions, summarizing, writing a composition based on the story, revising-correcting composition).

In general, team books are published at the end of this process. Teams are rewarded for all reading and writing assignments on the basis of the average performance of group members. Thus, equal change for achievement, group support for achievement, and the performance, all basic components of cooperative learning ensure realization of personal responsibility

Furthermore, the steps of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) are described as follow:

1. Introduction by teacher: Firstly, of all, teacher shares basic information with classroom.

2. Group work: 4 or 5 student groups were established. Worksheets and other materials prepared by teacher were handed out to group members. Depending on the content of the work, students can collectively answer the questions and answers can be checked by each member and conveyed to other groups. Other members also control the answers and the process continues this way.

3. Assessment: Depending on the features of the selected technique, skills or information learnt by students in relation to course content are assessed by students individually or cooperatively.

4. Detection of successful groups: Individual and group assessment of the student scores are entered on a group scoreboard and the resulting scores are summed. The group with the highest final score is rewarded (Yaman, 1999).

2.7 Procedures of Teaching Reading through CIRC Technique The steps of teaching reading through CIRC technique are:

1. Pre-reading Activity

The pre reading activity is presented as follows:

 The procedure begins by showing an example of the text to the students. Then, read the text together.

 Teacher asks students about questions related to the text then gives explanation about the text and new words.

2. Reading Activity

The reading activity is presented as follows:

 The teacher divides the students into groups consist of 4-5 students. Then, teacher asks students to read the text in their mind, and then, they read louder.

 Teacher gives the students some questions that related to the grammar of the story.  Teacher gives new words list that consist in the text to the students. Then, students

practice in their group about these new words.

 Teacher asks students to search the new words meaning that consist of the text in dictionary.

 Teacher asks the students to discuss the story with their group and make summary of the story.

3. Post-Reading

The post reading activity is presented as follows:

 At the end of the story, teacher does an understanding test for the students about the story. Students are instructed to write sentences by using their own hand about the story.

2.8Advantages and Disadvantages of CIRC Technique

Teaching reading through cooperative integrated reading composition has some advantages and disadvantages. It can be explained as follows:

a. The students are able to express their idea.

b. The students practiced to work in-group and discus their work together.

c. The students are stimulated to be creative and active in both asking and answering the questions about the specific information and clues related to the text.

d. The students are motivated to look for the meaning of the difficult words in dictionary.

Disadvantage:

a. The students that have low speed ability in reading are difficult to work together with the students that have high speed ability in reading, because the students with low ability have to think fast to follow their mind.

From the explanation above, it can be assumed that cooperative integrated reading

composition is a possible technique in teaching reading. The students are trained to work in-group and express their idea clearly. Needless to say, cooperative integrated reading

composition can motivates the students to be active and creative in understanding text.

2.9Theoretical Assumption

Based on the literature review the writer assumes that by the differences human being has, everyone has tendency to educate each other. Teaching learning process adapts it by presenting a certain interaction in which every people interacts each other and builds understanding and knowledge together through cooperative learning.

Meanwhile, cooperative learning (CL) is kind of teaching method in which the students work together in small groups for helping each others in learning a lesson material. Moreover, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) as one of its methods can be used

to increase students’ reading achievement in identifying the specific information in

descriptive text for junior high school students. It is because the students are made aware of their purpose in reading and can motivate them to identify the specific information in the texts.

2.10 Hypothesis

Referring to the theoretical views presented earlier, the researcher states her hypothesis as follows:

There is difference of students’ comprehension achievement in reading descriptive text after being taught through CIRC.

I. RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter discusses about research design, population and sample, data collecting technique, validity and reliability of the test, procedures of collecting data and hypothesis testing.

3.1 Research Design

This research was quantitative research and the writer used one-group pretest-posttest design. In this research, before the first teaching, pretest was carried out and after three times

teachings using the treatment (CIRC technique), a posttest was conducted. This was done to see whether there is a different of students achievement in reading descriptive text. This research design can be presented as follows:

T1 X T2 Where:

T1 : The Pretest X : Treatment T2 : The Post Test

(Hatch and Farhadi in Setiady, 2006:131)

This study is to investigate whether Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) technique can be used to increase students’ reading comprehension achievement in

understanding the text by comparing the average score (mean) of the pretest with the average score (mean) of the posttest. Firstly, the researcher administered a pretest to the students to identify their achievement of reading comprehension in identifying the specific information,

main idea, reference, inference and vocabulary in descriptive text before applied the technique. Then, the students were given three treatments by using CIRC technique. Eventually, a posttest was administered to identify students’ reading comprehension in identifying the specific information in descriptive text after being taught by using Cooperative Integrated Reading Composition (CIRC) technique.

3.2 Population and Sample

The population of this research was the second grade students of SMPN 1 Kalirejo Lampung Tengah in even semester period 2011/2012. There were seven classes of the second grade of SMPN 1 Kalirejo, from class VIII A to VIII G. Each class consisted of 34 students; the total population was 328 students. The sample was one class as experimental class (VIII A) and therefore VIII B became the try out class, which was selected by using Simple Random Sampling. The class was selected randomly by using lottery, since the 2nd _{grade in SMPN 1} Kalirejo was not stratified class. There was no priority class. It is applied based on the

consideration that every class in the population has the same chance to be chosen and in order to avoid the subjectivity in the research (Setiyadi, 2006:39).

3.3 Data Collecting Technique

To collect the data the writer used the following techniques: 1. Pretest

The writer administrated this test in 60 minutes. The purpose of this test was to know how far the students’ ability in mastering descriptive text before the treatment, the test was multiple choices that consist of 25 items. The materials tested were related to the curriculum used in the school and suitable with their level. It was also needed to know their reading

2. Posttest

Post-test was given after the treatment in order to find out whether there was any increase of students’ reading comprehension achievement. The test was multiple choices consisted of 25 items. The materials tested, were related to the curriculum used in the school and suitable with their level. The post-test was done after three meetings of the treatments. The result of the post-test of the participant class was analyzed.

3.4 Try Out

The tests are said to have good quality if it has a good validity, reliability, and level of difficulty and discrimination power.

3.4.1 Validity of Test

To measure whether the test has a good validity, in this research, the tests are based on the construct validity and content validity.

The validity of the instrument is presented as follows:

a. Content validity

Content validity refers to the extent to which a test measures a representative sample the subject matter contents, the focus of the contents validity was adequacy of the sample and simply on the appearance of the test (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:251). To know whether the test is good reflection of what will be taught and of the knowledge, which the teacher wants the students to know, the researcher compares this test with table of specification. If the table represents the material that the researcher wants to test, then it is valid from that point of view. A table of specification is an instrument that helps the test constructor plans the test.

Table 1: Table specification of try out

NO Objective Number of items Presentage

1 Identifying main idea 2., 6., 13., 18., 22., 28., 31., 36. 20% 2 Inference 5., 9., 15., 20., 24., 30., 35., 38. 20% 3 Reference 3., 12., 19., 29., 33., 39. 15% 4 Specific Information 1., 7., 8., 11., 16., 17., 21., 25., 26.,

27., 32., 37.

30% 5 Vocabulary 4., 10., 14., 23., 34., 40. 15%

Total 40 100%

From table specification of try out above there were 40 items that divided into 5 objectives, they were identifying main idea 8 items, inference 8 items, reference 6 items, specific information 12 items and vocabulary 6 items.

Table 2: Table Specification for Pre-Test

NO Objective Number of items Presentage

1 Identifying main idea 1., 4., 9., 13., 21., 24. 24% 2 Inference 11., 14., 16., 20., 23. 20%

3 Reference 1., 8., 19., 25. 16%

4 Specific Information 5., 6., 12., 17., 18., 22. 24%

5 Vocabulary 2., 7., 10., 15. 16%

Total 25 100%

While, in pre-test the total items were 25 items. From table specification of the pre-test above, there were 6 items in identifying main idea because there were two items dropped, 5 items in inference 8 items in try out test and 2 items was dropped, 4 items in reference from 6 items in try out test and 2 items dropped , 6 items in specific information from 12 items in try

out test and 6 items dropped and the last were 4 items in vocabulary from 6 items in try out test and 2 items were dropped

Based on the explanation above in identifying specific information, the students were still confuse and difficult in answering the question. It proved from the total items in pretest. The total items in pretest were half items in try out test.

Table 3: Table Specification for Post-Test

Then, in table specifica tion of post-test the total number of items of post-test were 25 items. Where in identifying main idea were 6 items, inference were 5 items, reference were 4 items, specific information were 6 items and vocabulary were 4 items.

b. Construct Validity

NO Objective Number of items Presentage

1 Identifying main idea 1., 9., 11., 14., 21., 23. 24% 2 Inference 2., 6., 10., 18., 24. 20%

3 Reference 7., 12., 19., 20. 16%

4 Specific Information 3., 4., 13., 16., 17., 25. 24%

5 Vocabulary 5., 8., 15., 22. 16%

Construct validity measures whether the construction had already referred to the theory, meaning that the test construction had already in line with the objective of the learning (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:251). To know the test was true reflection of the theory in reading comprehension, the researcher examined whether the test questions actually reflected the means of reading comprehension or not.

3.4.2 Reliability of Test

Reliability refers to the extent to which the test is consistent in its score, and gives us an indication of how accurate the test score are (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:244). To test the instruments, the researcher used split-half method in which the reading tests were divided into halves Hatch and Farhady, 1982:246). By splitting the test into two equal parts (first half and second half); it was made as if the whole tests had been taken in twice. The first half

contained passage 1, 2, 3 and 4 the items were number 1 until 20. The second half contained passage 5, 6, 7 and 8 involving question number 21 until 40. Moreover, by arranging the tests into first half and second half allowed the researcher to measure the test reliability by having split half method.

To measure the coefficient of the reliability between the first and second half, Pearson Product Moment was used, with the formula:

 



   2 2 1 xy r Where: 1

r = The coefficient reliability between first and second half group

X = The total numbers of first half group Y = The total numbers of second half group

2

 _{= The Square of X} 2

 _{= The square of Y} (Lado in Hughes, 1991:3)

Then to know the coefficient correlation of the whole items, Spearman Brown formula is used: rl rl rk   1 2 Where:

rk : The reliability of the test rl : The reliability of the half test The criteria of reliability were: 0.90-1.00 = high

0.50-0.89 = moderate 0.0-0.49 = low

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:268)

If the reliability the test reaches 0.50 the researcher will consider that it has been reliable. Hatch and Farhady (1982:223) stated that level of reliability about 0.90-1.00 indicates that this instrument would produce consistent result when administered under similar condition to the same participant and in different time.

3.4.3 Level of Difficulty

Level difficulty of the reading test is used to classify the test items into difficult items and easy ones. The items should not be too difficult or too easy for the students. In this research, reading tests consisted of two kinds: one for pretest and the other for posttest. Before being used, both kinds of the tests are tried out, the results of which are explained in this season.

In calculating the Level of Difficulty for each item, the following formula was used:

N

R

LD



LD = Level of Difficulty

R = Number of the students who answer correctly N = Total number of the students

<0.30 = Difficult 0.30-0.70 = Average >0.70 = Easy (Shohamy, 1985:79)

3.4.4 Discrimination Power

The discrimination power (DP) is the proportion of the high group students getting the items correct minus the proportion of the low-level students who get the items correct. In

calculating the discrimination power of each item the following formula was used:

   2 1 er correctLow er correctUpp DP

DP = Discrimination Power

U = Number of upper group who answer correctly L = Number of lower group who answer correctly N = Total number of the students

The criteria are:

DP : 0.00 – 0.19 =Poor

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

DP : - (Negative) = Bad items, should be omitted (Heaton, 1975:182)

3.4.5 Scoring System

In scoring the result of the test, the researcher used Arikunto’s formula. This ideal highest score is 100. The score of pretest and posttest was calculated using formula as follows:

100   N R S Where:

S : The score of the test

R : The total of highest answers N : The total items

3.5 Procedures of Collecting Data

In collecting the data, the researcher used the following steps:

1. Determining the Problem

The first step of this research was determining the problem. The writer determined what kind of problems appear in the class.

2. Determining the population and sample of the research: The population of this research was the second grade students of SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Lampung Tengah. The sample of this research was one class which is chosen randomly.

3. Conducting try out

There are 40 items. The try out test was administered in 60 minutes. The aim of this try out was to know the quality of test, which would be used as instrument of the research. 4. Administering the pre-test: pre-test was conducted before the treatments. It was done to

check students reading comprehension to identify the specific information in various types of texts. Pre-test was administered for about 60 minutes on 1st

week.

5. Giving treatment: three treatments by using CIRC technique were given in two weeks. The treatments was conducted in three meeting and 80 minutes for each. The treatments were classroom activity, which used and applied CIRC technique in teaching reading. 6. Conducting posttest: Posttest was conducted after the treatment. Post test was conducted

to find out whether there is a significant increase in students reading achievement in identifying the specific information after the treatments. It was administered for 60 minutes in experimental group.

7. Analyzing the data. The data of pre-test and post-test are put into a score table and it is used to see the significant increase of students’ score in reading comprehension.

3.6 Hypothesis Testing

The hypothesis is stated as follows: There is difference of students’ comprehension achievement in reading descriptive text after being taught through CIRC (Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition).

The researcher compared the pre-test and post-test score by using Repeated Measure t-test through computing with Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 15.0 for window. The researcher used the level of the significance 0.05 in which the hypothesis is approved if Sign <



. It means that the probability of error in the hypothesis is only 5%.

CURRICULUM VITAE

The researcher, Fevi Meila Suwarni, was born in Sridadi, Kalirejo, Lampung Tengah on May 27th _{1989. She is the fifth child of the six children of a couple Supardi and Ruswati.}

She began to study at SD N 1 Sridadi in 1995 and graduated in 2001. In the same year, she continued her study at junior high school of SLTP N 1 Kalirejo and graduated in 2004. She then decided to continue her study at SMA N 1 Kalirejo and finished in 2007.

In the same year, she was registered as the student of English Education Study Program at the Teacher Training and Education Faculty, Lampung University through SPMB. In 25th July – 30 September 2011, she carried out Program Pengalaman Lapangan (PPL) in SMP N 3 Bandar Lampung and did her research in SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Lampung Tengah on March 6th– April 3th 2012.

MOTTO

“Your imagination is your preview of life’s coming attractions.” (Albert Einstein)

“Change your thoughts and you change your world”

DEDICATION

This script is proudly dedicated to:

My beloved parents, Supardi and Ruswati.

My beloved brothers and sister, Andi Priyanto, Ria Prasmawati, Yudi Wartono, Gigih Uswanto and Irfan Hidayat.

My beloved “Mamas” Maseri, S.Pd.

My beloved comrades NERD ’07 of Lampung University. My almamater, Unila

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Praise to Allah SWT for blessing the researcher with health and determination to finish this script. This script, entitled “Teaching Reading through Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) at the Second Year of SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Central Lampung” is presented to the Language and Arts of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Lampung University as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for S-1 degree, English Education.

The researcher would like to express her gratitude to many people who have suggested, and helped in finishing this script. First, she delivers her gratitude and respect to her first advisor, Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. and Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd. her second advisor, who have given their best suggestions, advices, and evaluations during the accomplishment of this script. Then, she would like to delivers her gratitude to her examiner, Dr. Muhammad Sukirlan, M.A. for his contribution and encouragement.

Besides, she wants to extend her deep appreciation to Drs. Elang Muryanto as the headmaster of SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Central Lampung, Siwi S.Pd. as the English teacher of SMP N 1 Kalirejo, and the students of SMP N 1 Kalirejo, Central Lampung, especially class VII A for their nice cooperation during the research. Most importantly her special gratitude go to her beloved mother and father, Ruswati and Supardi, who always give theirpray, patience, motivation, love, supports and willingness to wait for the writer’s graduation. Her thankfulness is also addressed to her brothers and sisters; Andi Priyanto, Ria Prasmawati, Yudi Wartono, Gigih Uswanto and Irfan Hidayat for your love, helps, and supports. Her thankfulness is due to her cousins, Aninda Fidza, Adinda Marshalina, Azzam Alif and Adhar Perdana, thank for their laughs and cheerfulness.

The writer also would like to extend her appreciations to her beloved comrades of NERD ’07 Delia A, Delia B, Lala, Ratih, Zie, Dini, Ervina, Cia, Nyimas, Silka, Aprita, Ayu, Endah, Hadhy, Rahmat, Sih, Silvia, Egra, Siti, Esy, Umi, Nurul Puspita, Aparel Sheka, Ganis Suhesti,Tiwi Chan, Liliz Fauziah, Ike Epridiana, Veronica Niki, Diah Riparatiwi, Dion Wildan, Deri Herdawan, Joko Setyo, Dwi Astiti, Asti Setyowati, Fery Yun, Dian Irawan, Muhammad Rudy, Rahmat Nurudin, Rio Allen Wicaksi, Romandani Adyan, Septariani, Desti Mulyasari,

iii

Yulia Helwana especially for Diah Arini Kusumastuti, Fetrisia and Meila Sari. Thanks for all support and everything since her very first year in this department. Besides, she must extend her gratitude for love and supports to her beloved boarding house friends, Sarinah, Desni Yuliana, Rian Marlina, Wina Riyana, Yessi Maulita and especially for her roommate Lilis Suryaningsih ; thank to your support and may our friendship last forever.

Hopefully, this script would give a positive contribution to the educational development or to those who want to carry out further research.

Bandar Lampung, 2012

ABSTRACT

TEACHING READING THROUGH COOPERATIVE INTEGRATED READING AND COMPOSITION (CIRC) AT THE SECOND YEAR

STUDENTS OF SMPN 1 KALIREJO CENTRAL LAMPUNG

By

Fevi Meila Suwarni

In English Language Teaching, one of the important skills in English is reading, but most of the students still got difficulty to comprehend the text. As a matter of fact, the students’ reading ability in reading comprehension is still need to be improved to achieve the goal in the curriculum. Therefore, the objective of this research was to find out whether there was difference of students’ comprehension achievement in reading descriptive texts after being taught through CIRC.

The population of the research was the students of the second year of SMP N 1 Kalirejo Lampung Tengah in 2011/2012 academic year and the sample was VIII A class. The class consisted of thirty four students. The research design was one group pretest and posttest design and the data were taken by means of the test and then they were analyzed by using Repeated Measure t-test.

The result of the data shows that the students’ achievement in reading comprehension of descriptive text increased after they were taught using CIRC technique. Based on the analysis, it can be found that the students’ average score in the pretest was 60.5 and the posttest was 73. It has been proven by the gain (12.5) of the students’ mean score in posttest that is higher than that of in pretest. By using Repeated Measure t-test, it was found that t-ratio is -17.099 and t-table is 2.042. Since t-ratio is higher than t-table, it proved that the difference is increase between pretest and posttest.

Based on the result, it can be concluded that the students’ achievement in reading comprehension conveyed in descriptive text increase by teaching uses CIRC technique. In other words, the hypothesis of the research is accepted.

ADMITTED BY

1. Examination Committee

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

Examiner : Dr. Muhammad Sukirlan, M. A. ………

Secretary : Drs. Sudirman, M. Pd. ………

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. Hi. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. NIP. 19600315 198503 1 003

TEACHING READING THROUGH COOPERATIVE INTEGRATED READING AND COMPOSITION (CIRC) AT THE SECOND YEAR

STUDENTS OF SMPN 1 KALIREJO CENTRAL LAMPUNG (A Script)

By

FEVI MEILA SUWARNI

LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY BANDAR LAMPUNG

xi

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDICE Page

1. Research Schedule ... 49

2. Try Out Test ... 50

3. Lesson Plan ... 60

4. Pre Test ... 74

5. Post Test ... 83

6. Upper-Lower Group Try Out Test ... 92

7. Difficulty Level and Discrimination Power of the Try Out Test ... 94

8. Reliability Analysis of Try Out Test ... 95

9. Students’ Pre-test and Post-Test Score ... 97

10. Table Distribution of Pre Test Score ... 98

x s

LIST OF GRAPH

Graph Page

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Table Specification of Try Out ... 26

2. Table Specification of Pre test ... 27

3. Table Specification of Post test ... 28

4. Increase from the Pre-test to Post-test ... 37

5. Result of the Students Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 38

46

REFERENCES

Acikgoz KU. 1992. Cooperative Learning, Theory, Research, Practice. Malatya: Ugurel Publications.

Alyousef, H. S. 2005. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners. The Reading Matrix Vol. 5, No. 2, September 2005. Retrieved on November 2011./rider.co.id.

Arikunto, S. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian;Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Casey, K. 2003. The Do’s and Don’t ‘s for Improving Reading Comprehension. Retieved on November 2011. http://iteslj.org/technique.html.

Dallman, R. I. 1982. Teaching of Reading. New York: CBS college Publishing. Depdiknas, 2006. Silabus Kurikulum Satuan Pendidikan.Jakarta: Depdiknas. Durukan, E. 2010. Effects Of Cooperative Integrated Reading And Composition

(CIRC) Technique On Reading-Writing Skills. Educational Research and Reviews Vol. 6(1), pp. 102-109, January 2011.Retrieved,November 2011. http://www.academicjournals.org/err/PDF/Pdf%202011/Jan/Durukan.pdf Goodman, K. 1976. The Reading Process: a Psycholinguistic View. In E. B.

Smith at al. Language and Thinking in School, 2nd Ed. New York: Holt Rineheart and Winston.

Grellet, F.1981. Developing Reading Skills, a Practical Guide to Reading Comprehension Exercises. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hatch, E and FArhady, H. 1982. Research Design and Statistic for Applied

Linguistic. Boston: Heinle Publisher, 290pp.

Heaton, J. B. 1975. Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman. Hedge, T, 2003. Teaching&Learning in the Language Classroom. London:

Oxford. University Press.

Howard, P. 2005. Making Reading Communicative. . Retrieved on Oktober 2011./rider.co.id.

Joycey, Ed. 2006. Reading Comprehension: an Interactive Process. Updated December 2011. http//ilc-iral.com/737/1017/-21k

47

Kessler, Carolyn. 1992.Cooperative Language Learning. United States : Prentice-Hall.

Lie, A. 2004. Cooperative Learning: Mempraktikkan Cooperative Learning di Ruang-Ruang Kelas. Jakarta: Grasindo.

Mackay, R. 1979. Teaching the Information-Gathering Skills in Reading a Second Language.Rowley,mass: Newburry House Publisher.

Nuttal, C. 1996. Teaching Reading Skill in a Foreign Language (New Edition). Heineman Educational Book:Oxford University Press.

Priyana, J. 2008. Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students Grade VIII. Pusat Perbukuan,Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2008. Jakarta.

Safry, F. 2007. Metode Cooperative Learning Sebagai Salah Satu Alternatif Metode Pembelajaran Membaca Dalam Bahasa Inggris. Retrieved October 2011.

http://www.journal.unnes.ac.id/index.php/LIK/article/download/535/492 Setyadi, B.2006. Metode Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing. Yogyakarta:

Graha Ilmu.

Simanjuntak, E. G. 1988. Developing Reading Skill for EFL Students. Jakarta: P2LPTK.

Slavin, R. E.2008. Cooperative Learning; Teori,Riset dan Praktik. Bandung: Nusa Media.

Smith, F. 1978. Understanding Reading. 2nd ed. New York: Holt Rineheart and Winston.

Suparman, U. 2005. Understanding and Developing Reading Comprehension. Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung.

Syafri, F. 2007. Metode Cooperative Learning Sebagai Salah Satu Alternatif Metode Pembelajaran Membaca Dalam Bahasa Inggris. Retrieved October 2011.

Vaezi, S. 2006. Theories of Reading. 23rd March. 2006. Language Institute Language Teaching Journal Vol.1 No 1 Spring 2005. Iran.

Wardiman, A. 2008. English in Focus 2 : for Grade VIII Junior High School (SMP/MTs).Pusat Perbukuan,Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2008. Jakarta.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ... i

CURICULUM VITAE ... ii

DEDICATION ... iii

MOTTO ... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... v

CONTENTS ... vii

LIST OF TABLES ... ix

LIST OF GRAPH ... x

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xi

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Problems ... 1

1.2 Formulation of the Problem ... 4

1.3 Objective of the Research ... 5

1.4 Uses of the research ... 5

1.5 Scope of the Research ... 6

1.6 Definition of the Term ... 6

II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Concept of Reading Comprehension ... 8

2.2 Teaching Reading ... 10

2.3 Concept of Descriptive Text ... 12

2.4 Cooperative Learning Method ... 13

2.5 Models of Cooperative Learning... 15

2.5.1 Student’s Team Achievement Division (STAD) ... 15

2.5.2 Team Game Tournament (TGT) ... 16

2.5.3 Team Assisted Individualization (TAI) ... 16

2.5.4 Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) ... 16

2.6 Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition CIRC) ... 17

2.7 Procedures of Teaching Reading through CIRC ... 19

2.8 Advantages and Disadvantages of CIRC Technique ... 20

2.9 Theoretical Assumption ... 21

viii III. RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Research Design ... 23

3.2 Population and Sample ... 24

3.3 Data Collecting Technique ... 25

3.4 Try Out ... 25

3.4.1 Validity of Test ... 25

3.4.2 Reliability of Test ... 28

3.4.3 Level of Difficulty ... 30

3.4.4 Discrimination Power ... 30

3.4.5 Scoring System ... 31

3.5 Procedures of Collecting data ... 32

3.6 Hypothesis Testing ... 33

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Result of the Research ... 34

4.1.1. Result of Tryout Test ... 34

4.1.2. Result of Pre Test ... 35

4.1.3. Result of Post Test ... 36

4.1.4. Increase of the Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension . 37 4.1.5. Hypothesis Test... 38

4.2. Discussion ... 39

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1. Conclusions ... 44

5.2. Suggestions... 44

REFERENCES ... 46

x s

LIST OF GRAPH

Graph Page

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Table Specification of Try Out ... 26

2. Table Specification of Pre test ... 27

3. Table Specification of Post test ... 28

4. Increase from the Pre-test to Post-test ... 37

5. Result of the Students Achievement in Reading Comprehension ... 38

46

REFERENCES

Acikgoz KU. 1992. Cooperative Learning, Theory, Research, Practice.

Malatya: Ugurel Publications.

Alyousef, H. S. 2005. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners.

The Reading Matrix Vol. 5, No. 2, September 2005. Retrieved on

November 2011./rider.co.id.

Arikunto, S. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian;Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta:

Rineka Cipta.

Casey, K. 2003.

The Do’s and Don’t ‘s for Improving Reading Comprehension

.

Retieved on November 2011. http://iteslj.org/technique.html.

Dallman, R. I. 1982. Teaching of Reading. New York: CBS college Publishing.

Depdiknas, 2006. Silabus Kurikulum Satuan Pendidikan.Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Durukan, E. 2010.

Effects Of Cooperative Integrated Reading And Composition

(CIRC) Technique On Reading-Writing Skills. Educational Research and

Reviews Vol. 6(1), pp. 102-109, January 2011.Retrieved,November 2011.

http://www.academicjournals.org/err/PDF/Pdf%202011/Jan/Durukan.pdf

Goodman, K. 1976. The Reading Process: a Psycholinguistic View. In E. B.

Smith at al. Language and Thinking in School, 2

nd

Ed. New York: Holt

Rineheart and Winston.

Grellet, F.1981. Developing Reading Skills, a Practical Guide to Reading

Comprehension Exercises. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hatch, E and FArhady, H. 1982. Research Design and Statistic for Applied

Linguistic. Boston: Heinle Publisher, 290pp.

Heaton, J. B. 1975. Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman.

Hedge, T, 2003. Teaching&Learning in the Language Classroom. London:

Oxford. University Press.

Howard, P. 2005. Making Reading Communicative. . Retrieved on Oktober

2011./rider.co.id.

Joycey, Ed. 2006. Reading Comprehension: an Interactive Process. Updated

December 2011. http//ilc-iral.com/737/1017/-21k

47

Kessler, Carolyn. 1992.Cooperative Language Learning. United States :

Prentice-Hall.

Lie, A. 2004. Cooperative Learning: Mempraktikkan Cooperative Learning di

Ruang-Ruang Kelas. Jakarta: Grasindo.

Mackay, R. 1979. Teaching the Information-Gathering Skills in Reading a Second

Language.Rowley,mass: Newburry House Publisher.

Nuttal, C. 1996. Teaching Reading Skill in a Foreign Language (New Edition).

Heineman Educational Book:Oxford University Press.

Priyana, J. 2008. Scaffolding English for Junior High School Students Grade VIII.

Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2008. Jakarta.

Safry, F. 2007. Metode Cooperative Learning Sebagai Salah Satu Alternatif

Metode Pembelajaran Membaca Dalam Bahasa Inggris. Retrieved October

2011.

http://www.journal.unnes.ac.id/index.php/LIK/article/download/535/492

Setyadi, B.2006. Metode Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing. Yogyakarta:

Graha Ilmu.

Simanjuntak, E. G. 1988.

Developing Reading Skill for EFL Students. Jakarta:

P2LPTK.

Slavin, R. E.2008. Cooperative Learning; Teori,Riset dan Praktik. Bandung:

Nusa Media.

Smith, F. 1978. Understanding Reading. 2

nd

ed. New York: Holt Rineheart and

Winston.

Suparman, U. 2005. Understanding and Developing Reading Comprehension.

Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung.

Syafri, F. 2007.

Metode Cooperative Learning Sebagai Salah Satu Alternatif

Metode Pembelajaran Membaca Dalam Bahasa Inggris. Retrieved

October 2011.

Vaezi, S. 2006. Theories of Reading. 23

rd

March. 2006. Language Institute

Language Teaching Journal Vol.1 No 1 Spring 2005. Iran.

Wardiman, A. 2008. English in Focus 2 : for Grade VIII Junior High School

(SMP/MTs).Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2008.

Jakarta.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ... i

CURICULUM VITAE ... ii

DEDICATION ... iii

MOTTO ... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... v

CONTENTS ... vii

LIST OF TABLES ... ix

LIST OF GRAPH ... x

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xi

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Problems ... 1

1.2 Formulation of the Problem ... 4

1.3 Objective of the Research ... 5

1.4 Uses of the research ... 5

1.5 Scope of the Research ... 6

1.6 Definition of the Term ... 6

II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Concept of Reading Comprehension ... 8

2.2 Teaching Reading ... 10

2.3 Concept of Descriptive Text ... 12

2.4 Cooperative Learning Method ... 13

2.5Models of Cooperative Learning... 15

2.5.1 Student’s Team Achievement Division (STAD) ... 15

2.5.2 Team Game Tournament (TGT) ... 16

2.5.3 Team Assisted Individualization (TAI) ... 16

2.5.4 Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) ... 16

2.6 Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition CIRC) ... 17

2.7 Procedures of Teaching Reading through CIRC ... 19

2.8 Advantages and Disadvantages of CIRC Technique ... 20

2.9 Theoretical Assumption ... 21

viii

III. RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Research Design ... 23

3.2 Population and Sample ... 24

3.3 Data Collecting Technique ... 25

3.4 Try Out ... 25

3.4.1 Validity of Test ... 25

3.4.2 Reliability of Test ... 28

3.4.3 Level of Difficulty ... 30

3.4.4 Discrimination Power ... 30

3.4.5 Scoring System ... 31

3.5 Procedures of Collecting data ... 32

3.6 Hypothesis Testing ... 33

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Result of the Research ... 34

4.1.1. Result of Tryout Test ... 34

4.1.2. Result of Pre Test ... 35

4.1.3. Result of Post Test ... 36

4.1.4. Increase of the Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension . 37 4.1.5. Hypothesis Test... 38

4.2. Discussion ... 39

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1. Conclusions ... 44

5.2. Suggestions... 44

REFERENCES ... 46