unfamiliar words of the text by using their dictionary. And then, the students determined the schematic structures of the text by themselves.
Afterwards, the teacher asked students some questions related to the text. Then, the students were divided into five groups and asked to arrange
jumble paragraph into a good passage. And then, students are asked to find the schematic and linguistic features of descriptive text. After that, the
teacher asked to the leader of each group to present their answer. Then, discuss it together in the class. Next the teacher concludes about the
material and activity in this meeting.
c. Observing
In this phase, the observer makes notice about the situation in the classroom, she was found more increase situation than cycle before. The
students more active, they usual to ask the material which they think its unclear explanation, they like to do exercise cooperatively, and they have
more attention to the teacher’s explanation. In the second action of cycle two, the teacher was held on posttest 2 regarding students’ reading
comprehension of descriptive text. Based on the result of the posttest 2, the mean score of the class in reading test gained 71.95 in which there were 17
students who passed the Minimum Mastery Criterion – Kriteria
Ketuntasan Minimal KKM is 70.
d. Reflecting
In this phase, the teacher and the writer have evaluation of acting or action in cycle two. They have conclusion that the students more
understand about the materials; especially in schematic structure and linguistic feature of descriptive text than the acting in cycle one. Then, the
students have more understood to answer the question about those materials. Besides, the writer and teacher have satisfied of students’
reading comprehension of descriptive text by using Contextual Teaching
and Learning improvement. It indicated that the mean score in posttest 2 was better than posttest 1.
The teacher and the writer got the result of research and it could be assumed that the implementing of Classroom Action Research in
improving ing students’ reading comprehension of descriptive text through
Contextual Teaching and Learning method was appropriate with the teacher’s and the writer planning that had been discussed previously. In
this case, the action of reading activities could be conducted well.
4. Discussion of the Data after Classroom Action Research CAR
After implementation the action research, the writer gained four data; those were the result of and post interview, post observation, post
questionnaire and posttest, In this case, the writer gave the report concerning the data analyzing according to post interview, observation,
questionnaire and the result of post-test. For further descriptions as
following: a.
The Result of Post Interview
After implementing the Contextual Teaching and Learning method in reading descriptive text, the writer held the post interview
with an English teacher in second year of SMP Bakti Mulya 400. This interview held on Thursday, 23
rd
September 2010. It started at 09.30 A.M. and finished at 10.00 A.M. It was to know the teacher’s
response concerning Contextual Teaching and Learning method in reading descriptive text through CAR that had done. After that, the
observer asked some questions related to the imp rovement students’
reading comprehension to teacher. The interview was unstructured interview.
In this interview, the English teacher concludes that Contextual Teaching and Learning method is one of good methods to
use in this era. Many teachers in Indonesia try to implement this
