Hypothesis Testing RESEARCH METHODS

REFERENCES Anne. D. 2003. Teaching by principles an interactive approach. San Fransisco State University. Longman. Beers, S. Howell, L. 2003. Reading strategies for the content areas. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Beverly, C. 2006. Comprehensive high school reading methods. New York: Bell and Howel Company. Calvo, M.G. 2004. Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading, Learning and Individual Differences. From: http:www.criticalreading.com inference_reading.htm, retrieved on March 20 th , 2012. Carver. P. 1990. Communicative through reading. Kansas: University of Kansas Applied English Center. Cowan, S. 2010. Teaching of reading: Techniques for instruction and assessment. From: http:csuchicodspace.calstate. eduHtm, retrieved on April 24 nd , 2012. Depdiknas. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Doyle. 2004. Teaching of reading. New York: CBS College Publishing. Evinda, Z. 2009. A comparative study of students’ reading achievement between students who are taught through predictive reading technique and those through conventional technique at the first year of SMA Al Huda Jatimulyo Lampung Selatan. Unpublished Script. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University. Forsten, Char, Grant, Jim, Hollas, Betty. 2003. Differentiating textbooks. Peterborough, NH: Crystal Strings Books. Hancocok. J. 1987. How to teach English. London: Longman. Handayani, E. 2011. A comparative study of students’ reading achievement between students who are taught through contextual teaching and learning and those through jigsaw learning at the first year of SMA N 1 Bandar Lampung. Unpublished Script. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University. Hatch, E. and Farhady, H. 1982. Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. London: Newbury House, Inc. Heaton, J.B. 1975. English language test. New York: Longman Inc. Heaton, J.B. 1991. Writing English language test. New York: Longman Inc. Hughes, Arthur. 1991. Testing For Language Teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Howart, P. 2006. Making reading communicative. From: http:academic.cuesta. edu.Htm. retrieved on April 19 th , 2012. Krashen. S. D. and Tracy T. 1988. The natural approach. London: Prentice- Hall, Inc. From: http:academic .cuesta.eduacasuppas302.HTM. retrieved on March 21 st , 2012. Kathleen. 1986. Reading skills for college students. Engelwood Clipps, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Latulippe, D. 1986. Comprehensive reading methods. New York: Bell and Howel Company. Lyman, A. 1971. Testing English as a second language. New York: McGraw- Hill. Markstein, L.Hirasawa, L. 1982. Expanding reading skills. Massachusetts: Newburry House Publisher. Rushel, M. 2004. How to be a more successful reading. Boston: Boston Heinle Publisher Smith, B. 1999. Breaking through to College Reading. From: http:academic .cuesta.eduacasuppas302.HTM. retrieved on March 23 rd , 2012. Suparman, U. 2005. Understanding and developing reading comprehension. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University. 112 pages. Suparman, U. 2012. Developing reading comprehension skills and strategies. Bandung: Arfino Raya Publisher. 113 pages. Universitas Lampung. 2008. Pedoman penulisan karya ilmiah. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University. Walker, B. J. 2004. Diagnostic teaching of reading: Techniques for instruction and assessment. From: http:csuchico-dspace.calstate.eduHtm, retrieved on April 22 nd , 2012. Wallace, J. Michael. 1987. Teaching vocabulary. London: Briddles Ltd. Zwiers, J. 2005. Building reading comprehension habits in grades. From: http:web001.greece.k12.ny.usacademics.Htm, retrieved on April 22 nd , 2012.

Dokumen yang terkait

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

0 4 9

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS TECHNIQUE AND TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

0 3 9

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH LOGICO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CROSSWORD PUZZLE AT THE SEVENTH GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 21 BANDAR LAMPUNG

5 48 74

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH RECIPROCAL TEACHING TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 5 METRO

1 7 62

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH RECIPROCAL TEACHING TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP NEGERI 5 METRO

0 3 50

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH SQ3R AND TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND YEAR OF SMP NEGERI 8 BANDAR LAMPUNG

3 69 60

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT THROUGH RETELLING STORY AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH TRANSLATING A FAIRY TALE AT THE FIRST GRADE OF MA MA’ARIF 4 KALIREJO LAMPUNG TENGAH

0 12 46

A Comparative Study of Students’ Speaking Achievement between Those Taught through Silent Viewing and Sound Only Technique at The First Grade of SMA N I Natar

0 11 67

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH

2 14 60

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS’ LISTENING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT THROUGH VIDEO AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH AUDIO IN SMPN 26 BANDAR LAMPUNG

1 26 59