L L Test II
Table 4.20.
Summary of the Result of the Test for Each Text Types
No. Text types
Identification and purpose
Generic structure Features
Total
1. news item
54.76 71.43
42.06 2.
descriptive 85.71
33.33 95.24
71.43 3.
narrative 83.33
33.33 95.24
70.63 4.
recount 85.71
69.84 97.62
84.39 5.
analytical exposition 14.29
7.94 78.57
33.60 6.
procedure 73.81
23.81 83.33
60.32 7.
report 8.33
19.44 77.78
35.18 8.
hortatory exposition 16.67
25.93 66.67
36.42 9.
Spoof 52.78
35.19 61.11
49.69 10.
explanation 36.11
16.67 61.11
37.96 11.
discussion 47.22
51.85 88.89
62.65 12.
review 11.11
13.89 88.89
37.96 Total
42.65 29.41
80.15
Table 4.20 showed the summary of the result of the test for each text
types. It presented the primary result of the research those were what type of text with the lowest level of comprehension and in what part of text the participants
had the lowest level of comprehension. The highest score was gained on recount with 84.39. The lowest score was gained on analytical exposition with 33.60. The
highest part of text types was gained on the lexicogrammatical features of the text types with 80.15 and the lowest part of the text types was gained on the generic
structure of the text types. For further discussion, there were only four text types which gained more
than 60 points comprehended for their identification and purpose; those were descriptive, narrative, recount, and procedure. There was only recount which its
generic structure was comprehended 60. All of the text types were comprehended for their features.
B. Microteaching Students’ Difficulties on Comprehending Text Types
For providing the data of this part of findings and discussion, the researcher had interviewed three respondents from the formers 17 participants.
The respondents taken were one with the highest score of the test, one with the median score of the test, and one with the lowest score of the test. The first
respondent was respondent M with the highest score of the test. The respondent stated that her difficulties of comprehending text types were at least about three
reasons. The first one was that she rarely read the text. “…yang membuat sulit adalah bahwa sebagian text itu saya jarang
membaca jarang membaca terus lupa generic structurenya dan sebagainya...”
[“...the thing that makes it difficult is that I rarely read some of the texts so that I forget the generic structure and so on...”] Respondent M, Interview
1. The second difficulty is that the respondent’s lack of interaction with text
types. “…jadinya yang bikin sulit karena kurang apa ya berinteraksi maksudnya
kurang apa ya in touch sama teks2 nya itu...” [“...so the thing that makes it difficult is that my lack of interaction with
the text, I mean, it because I am not quiet in touch with those text...”] Respondent M, Interview 1.
The last difficulty of comprehending text types for respondent M was her
laziness. “...yang bikin sulit itu ya kadang-kadang kendalanya males itu yang
paling besar.” [“...the thing that makes it difficult is that sometimes I am lazy and this is
the biggest difficulty.”] Respondent M, Interview 1. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
The second respondent was respondent C with the median score of the test. She stated that at least there were two reasons of the difficulties of
comprehending text types. The first one was related to her own characteristic. “...berhubungan dengan apa ya kayak ee karakteristik saya juga sih
sebenarnya...” [“...in fact, it relates to my own characteristic...”] Respondent C,
Interview 2. The second difficulty was lacking of involvement with the text.
“...kalo misalkan diberi kesempatan untuk misalkan ee diberi handout atau diberi apa itu mungkin bisa lebih baik gitu ya.”
[“...if I am given more opportunities to, for example, provided by handouts or something like that, may be the result will be better.”] Respondent C,
Interview 2. The last respondent who gained the lowest score of the test was respondent
E. There were two major difficulties for her. The first one was that she was not taught those text types during her study.
“...lha trus kan kalo selama saya kuliah di sini mempelajari kayak generic structure tipe-tipe teks seperti itu tu... kayaknya gak ada...”
[“...so as long as I have studied here, there is no subject in which I can learn the generic structure and types of texts...”] Respondent E, Interview
3. The second difficulty was her lacking of information related to text types.
“...kurang informasi aja informasi kalo misalnya ada informasi yang cukup pasti kan muridnya juga tahu...”
[“...it’s only a matter of lacking of information; if there is enough information of course the students will comprehend it...”] Respondent E,
Interview 3.
Summarizing the respondents’ difficulties in comprehending text types, the researcher divided the difficulties into two main factors those were internal
factors and external factors. The internal factors included the microteaching students’ laziness on learning the text types and their own characteristics. In other
words, it related to their motivation in learning the text types. The external factors included reading the text rarely, lacking of interaction with text types, lacking of
involvement with the text, and those text types were not taught during her study. Difficulties in text comprehension might occur at mainly three different levels of
processing: at the level of the word, at the level of the sentence, and at the level of the text Yuill Oakhill, 1991.
66