Conclusion CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, AND SUGGESTION

familiar with the technique. Once the technique is used in the teaching-learning activity, the students will understand how to make a semantic map in the pre- reading phase. Therefore, with the intention to make the teaching-learning process more student-centered, it is better for the students to make their semantic map in this phase. Third, in the whilst-reading phase, it is suggested to assign the students to make a semantic map in pairs or individually instead of in a group. The students are expected to be independent in comprehending a text. Thus, it is important for them to be able to use this technique when they read any materials by themselves. Finally, in the post-reading phase, it is recommended to displaypublish the students’ best works as the benchmark in order to give reinforcement to the students in doing their works. It can be done by attaching their works on the classroom wall. In general, due to the fact that using the semantic mapping technique can improve the students’ reading comprehension; it is suggested to the English teachers especially whose students have the same characteristics and in the similar situation to apply this technique as one of the alternatives that can be used in the teaching of reading comprehension. For future researchers, it is hoped that they will conduct a similar study on the other skills like listening, speaking, and writing and at other levels of students for the improvement of the teaching of English or carry out an experimental study on the same skill in order to verify the present result. REFERENCES Ajideh, P. 2006. Schema-theory Based Considerations on Pre-reading Activities in ESP Books . The Asian EFL Journal, 16, pp. 1-19. Alyousef, H. S. 2005. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESLEFL Learners . The Reading Matrix. 5 2, 143-153. Anderson, N. J. 1999. Exploring Second Language Reading: Issues and strategies . Boston, MA: Heinle Heinle. Antonacci, P. A. 1991. Students Search for Meaning in the Text through Semantic Mapping . Social Education, 55, 174-175. Baker, L. Brown, A. L. 1984. Metacognitive Skills and Reading . In P.D. Pearson, ed., Handbook of Reading Research , Vol.1 pp. 353-394. New York: Longman. Barr, R., Blachowicz, C. L. Z., Wogman-Sadow, M. 1995. Reading diagnosis for teachers: An instructional approach . White Plains, NY: Longman. Cramer, R. Bassey, M. 1998. Action Research for Improving Practice , in Halsall, R. ed., Teacher Research and School Improvement: Opening Doors from the Inside. Buckingham: Open University Press. Blachowicz, C., Fisher, P. 1996. Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms . Columbus, OH: MerrillPrentice Hall. Blachowicz, C.L.Z., Fisher, P. 2000. Vocabulary Instruction . In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, R. Barr Eds., Handbook of reading research Vol. 3, pp. 503 –523. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Blachowicz, C., Ogle, D. 2001. Reading Comprehension: Strategies for independent learners. New York: Guilford. Brown, H. D. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Addison Wesley Longman. Burns, A. 2010. Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A guide for practitioners . New York: Routledge. Burns, A. 1999. Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burns, C.P, Roe. D.P and Ross, B.E. 2010. Teaching Reading in today’s Elementary Schools. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Cushenberry, D.C. 1985. Improving Reading Skills in the Content Area . Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.