Research Procedure Research Participants

gain books supporting the research. Second, the researcher browsed the Internet to gain newest and related information supporting the research. Third, the researcher selected the instruments used in the research. There were two instruments of the research those were tests and interviews. The researcher once composed a test specification for producing the test. Finishing the test specification, the researcher then presented the draft of the test to be corrected by the thesis sponsor. After receiving the feedback of the draft of the test, the researcher then revised the test and did so until the thesis sponsor stated that the test had been appropriate to collect the data of the research. The first one tested the microteaching students’ mastery for the first six text types. Those were recount, narrative, procedure, descriptive, news item, and analytical exposition. The first test was conducted on February 5 th 2010 at Microteaching Laboratory A. The second one tested the microteaching students’ mastery for the rest six of the text types. Those were report, hortatory exposition, spoof, explanation, discussion, and review. The second test was conducted on March 1 st 2010 at Microteaching Laboratory A. The participants were to determine what kind of texts those were in the consideration of the social purpose, generic structure, and lexicogrammatical features for each text. Figure 3.1. An Overview of the Research Procedure Background Identification Searching for Information Library The Internet Instruments Selection Test Test Specification Draft Feedback Final Interview Interview Guidelines Draft Feedback Final Participants Selection Data Collection Test I Test II Interview Data Analysis Mapping the Test Mapping the Interview Report Preparation The second instrument of the research was interview guidelines. The researcher firstly drafted the interview guidelines to be corrected by the thesis sponsor. After the interview guidelines had been appropriate to gain the second data of the research, the researcher then conducted the interviews. The interview was conducted on April 30 th , 2010 at Microteaching Laboratory A. The researcher asked the participants’ difficulties on comprehending text types which was reflected on the result of the test that most of them had the level of Low L and only one participant gained the level of Medium M. A general overview of the research procedure could be observed on the Figure 3.1 . 39

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presented the result of the research and the answers of the questions stated in the problem formulation see p.5. Answering the problem formulation, the researcher then elaborated two major parts in this chapter namely microteaching students level of comprehension of text types and microteaching students’ difficulties on comprehending text types.

A. Microteaching Students’ Comprehension of Text Types

In gathering the data of the microteaching students’ level of comprehension of text types, the researcher conducted tests. There were two tests conducted as follows.

1. Test I

The test was testing microteaching students’ level of comprehension of the first six text types those were recount, narrative, procedure, descriptive, news item, and analytical exposition. The test is attached in the appendices. The details of the findings and discussion for each text types were discussed as follows.

a. Recount

There were six texts in the test I. The recount text was the text titled A Visit to Sheep Property which was on the fourth number of the test I. Table 4.1. Recount No. Partici pants Identification and purpose Generic structure Features Total name purpose orientati on events Reorie ntation subject tense 1. A √ √ √ - - √ √ . 2. B √ - √ - - √ √ . 3. C √ - √ √ √ √ √ . 4. D √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 5. E √ - √ - - √ √ . 6. F √ √ - - - √ √ . 7. G √ √ √ - - √ √ . 8. H √ - √ - √ √ √ . 9. I √ - √ √ √ √ √ . 10. J √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 11. K √ √ - - - √ √ . 12. L √ √ √ √ - √ √ . 13. M √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 14. N √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 15. O √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 16. P √ √ √ √ - √ √ . 17. Q √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Total . . Average 81.51 81.51 81.51 81.51 Table 4.1. showed the result of microteaching students’ level of comprehension of recounts. The highest score was obtained by participant D, J, M, N, O, and Q who scored 100. The lowest score was obtained by participant B, E, F, and K who scored 57.14. The average score was 81.51 or in other words, there were 81.51 of all 17 participants, for about 14 participants, comprehend recount texts. For further details, there were 85.29 of all 17 participants, for about 15 participants, comprehend the social function of recounts which was to retell events for the purpose of informing or entertaining. There were 66.67 of all 17 participants, for about 11 participants, comprehend the generic structure of