Discussion FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

75

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusion

Based on the result of hypothesis testing and data analysis in chapter four, it can be summed up as follows: The first, there was no significant difference of reading comprehension between students who were taught by DRTA and those who were taught by Conventional method. In other words, the students‟ reading comprehension was not influenced by the use of teaching method. The second , there were interactional effects of teaching method DRTA and Conventio nal and reading interest toward students‟ reading comprehension. In other words, the students‟ reading comprehension was influenced by the use of teaching method depend on the level of students‟ interest. In fact, students with high reading interest is more effective to use DRTA method while students with low reading interest is better to use Conventional method. The third , there was significant effect of s tudents‟ reading comprehension who were taught by DRTA was higher than those who were taught by Conventional method for students who had high reading interest. It can be concluded that DRTA method was more effective than Conventional method primarily for students with high reading interest. The last , t here was no significant difference of students‟ reading comprehension who were taught by DRTA method and those who were taught by Conventional method for students who had low reading interest. It can be said that for students with low reading interest, there was no influence of teaching method both students who were taught by DRTA and those who were taught by conventional method toward students‟ reading comprehension. B. Suggestion Based on the conclusion of the study, some suggestions related to the researcher to convey in this study are: Firstly, for the teachers, based on the data obtained, the result of students‟ reading comprehension that are taught by using DRTA method is higher than those who are taught by using conventional teaching method. Thus Directed Reading Thinking Activity DRTA method can be applied in the eighth grade students of junior high school. Therefore, English teachers should multiply the theoretical knowledge of Directed Reading Thinking Activity and practice in teaching learning activity so that the students will be easy to comprehend the text. 76 Secondly, t he result of students‟ reading comprehension taught by Directed Reading Thinking Activity is better than those who are taught by Conventional one. Therefore, it is required English teachers‟ training or workshop in order to optimize the capability of providing appropriate material lesson by using this kind of method. Thirdly, for institution, debriefing the theories, concepts and aspects that an educator should posses which associated to English learning, the facilities should be developed and improved to support students‟ creativity for instance add English books collection in the library. Lastly, t eachers should determine students‟ reading interest, besides motivating them to be able to please the subject taught, so th at the students‟ skill of reading interest in learning process could be improved. One of the ways is by practicing reading more often in which the students are trained to read for pleasure. They can read what they want, so that they would have an interest in reading. REFERENCES AbiSamara, N. 2006. Teaching second language reading from an interactive perspective . Available at http:nadabs.tripod.com Retrieved on February 3, 2006. Adams, Nick. 1994. Narrative Analysis , Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres. Aebersold, Jo Ann and Mary Lee Field. 1997. From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms , New York: Cambridge University Press. Albin, M. L., Benton, S. L. and Khramtsova, I. 1996. Individual Differences in Interest and Narrative Writing , New York: Academic Press, 1996. Alderson J. Charles. 2000. Assessing Reading, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Alexander, P. A. 1997. Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. In Maehr, M. L., and Pintrich, P. R. eds., Advances in Motivation and Achievement , Vol. 10, Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, pp. 213 –250. Allen, Jerry. 1988. Aspect in Narrative , Virginia: Kogen Press. Allington, Richard and Michael Strange. 1980. Learning through Reading in the Content Areas , Massachusetts: D.C. Heath. Al Odwan, Talal Abd Al- Hameed. 2012. The Effect of the Directed Reading Thinking Activity through Cooperative Learning on Secondary Stage Students‟ Reading Comprehension in Jordan. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol 216, 138-151. Anderson, Mark. 2003. Text Types in English 2 , South Yarra: Macmillan. Bailey, Kathleen M. 1998. Learning about Language Assessment: Dillemas, Decisions, and Direction, London: Heinle Heinle Publisher. Bainbridge, Joyce and Sylvia Pantaleo. 1999. Learning with Literature in the Canadian Elementary Classroom . Edmonton Alberta: The University of Alberta Press. Bernhardt, Elizabeth B. 1991. Reading Development in a Second Language: Theoretical, Empirical, and Classroom Perspective , New Jersey: Ablex Publishing. Block, Catty Collins and Sheri R. Parris. 2008. Comprehension Instruction: Research-Based Best Practices. New York: The Guilford Press. Brown H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles on Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, second edition, San Francisco: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Brunner, Judy Tilton. 2011. I Don’t Get It . Playmouth: Rowman Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Carol, R. 2000. Mindful Reading: strategy training that facilitates transfer, journal of Adolescent adult literacy, vol.45 6, 498 —513 Chatman, S., and B. Attebery. 1993. Reading Narrative Fiction. New York: McMillan. Cortina, Joe and Janet Elder. 2005. Opening Doors: Understanding College Reading , New York: McGraw-Hill. Daniel Zemelman and Hyde Samuels. 1998. Reading Comprehension , New York: Oxford University Press. Diyata, Firmansyah. 2005. Stepping More for Junior High School Grade VIII , Bandung: Regina. Educational Research Service. 2000. Supporting Good Teaching Series. Helping struggling middle school and high school readers. Farris, Pamela J. and Carol J. Fuhler. 2004. Teaching Reading: A Balanced Approach for Today’s Classroom, New York: McGraw-Hill. Grellet, Francoise. 1986. Developing Reading Skill: A Practical Guide to Reading Comprehension Exercise , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Harmer, Jeremy. 1983. The Practice of English language Teaching , New York: Longman. Harris Larry A. 1980. Reading Instruction; Diagnostic Teaching in the Classroom, New York: Richard C. Owen Publishers. Hartono, Rudi. 2005. Genres of Texts , Semarang: English Department Faculty of Language and Art. Hidi, S. 2000. An interest researcher‟s perspective on the effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation. In Sansone, C., and Harackiewicz, J. M. eds., Intrinsic Motivation:Controversies and New Directions , Academic Press, New York, pp. 309 –339. Hidi, S. 2001. Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review , v. 13, pp. 103, 191 – 209. Hidi, S., Baird, W. 1988. Strategies for increasing text-based interest and students‟ recall of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly , v. 23, pp. 465 –483. Hornby A. S. 2003. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English , New York: Oxford University Press. Hudson, Thom. 2007. Teaching Second Language Reading , New York: Oxford University Press. Josephine S.M. 2007. English on Sky SMP Book VIII , Jakarta: Erlangga. Krapp, A., Hidi, S., Renninger, A. 1992. Interest, learning, and development. In Renninger, R.A., Hidi, S., and Krapp, A. eds., The Role of Interest in Learning and Development , Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 3 –25. Lewin, Larry. 2003. Paving the Way in Reading and Writing: Strategies and Activities to Support Struggling Students in Grades 6-12 , San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Linse, Caroline T. 2005. Practical English language Teaching For Young Learners . New York: Mc Graw-Hill Companies, Inc. Maxwell Martha J. 2000. Skimming and Scanning Improvement : Section 2 Exercises, Berkeley: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Mikulecky, Beatrice S., Linda Jeffries. 1998. More Reading Power: Reading for Pleasure, Comprehension Skills, Thinking Skills, Reading Faster , New York: Longman. Morris, N. 1998. The wonders of our world: hurricanes tornadoes. pp. 16-25. NY: Crabtree Publishing Company. Murcia, Marianne Celce. 1991. Teaching Reading as a Second of Foreign Language , Bosron: Heinle Heinle. Nuttall, Christine. 2005. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language , London: Macmillan. Opitz, Michael F and Lindsey M Guccione. 2009. Comprehension and English Language learners. Portsmouth: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Pakenham, Kenneth J. 1994. Making Connections: An Interactive Approach to Academic Reading , Ne w York: St. Martin‟s press. Patel, M.F., Jain, Praveen. 2008 English Language Teaching Methods, Tools Techniques, Jaipur: Sunrise Publishers. Pollard, Andrew. 2002. Reading for Reflective Teaching , New York: Continuum. Pusat Kurikulum, Balitbang Depdiknas. 2003. Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris SMP dan MTs, Jakarta. Richards, Jack. C and Willy A. Renandya. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching . Cambrige: Cambrige University Press. Richards, J.C. 1999. The Language Teaching Matrix , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richek, M. A. 1987. DRTA: 5 variations that facilitate independence in reading narratives. Journal of Reading, 3, 632-642.