class in reading test gained 73.04 in which there were 37 students who passed the Minimum Mastery Criterion
– Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal KKM 65 sixty five.
d. Reflecting
The reflection of Classroom Action Research CAR was carried out after getting the score result of reading test. The writer and the teacher
felt satisfied because they could improve students’ reading comprehension of descriptive text. The students could understand the passage easily. It
could be seen that the result of students’ score improved from the pretest 1. Furthermore, they could analyze the schematic structures easily
concerning identification and description of the descriptive text. Then, they seemed more enthusiastic during the teaching learning process.
After achieving the target research minimally 75 students who passed the KKM, therefore the writer and the teacher decided to stop the
Classroom Action Research CAR because it had already succeeded. Hence, the writer and the teacher did not continue to the next cycle.
The teacher and the writer got the result of research and it could be assumed that the implementing of Classroom Action Research in
developing students’ reading comprehension of descriptive text by using group work technique
was appropriate with the teacher’s and the writer planning that had been discussed previously. In this case, the action of
reading activities could be conducted well.
C. Discussion of the Data after Classroom Action Research CAR
The discussion of the data after implementing the action consisted of two parts. Those were the result of post interview and the result of posttest. For further
descriptions as following:
1. Result of Post Interview
After implementing group work technique, the writer carried out the unstructured interview with the teacher. It was conducted on Thursday,
November 25
th
2010 after finishing cycle 2. It started at 01.30 A.M and finished at 02.00 A.M. It was done to know the te
acher’s response as the observer about group work technique through Classroom Action Research
CAR that had been done. In this case, the writer divided into three categories of questions. Those were the general condition in English class
during Classroom Action Research, the difficulties in implementing group work technique during Classroom Action Research CAR, and the
strategy that had been used to solve the difficulties. The first category was the general condition in English class during
teaching reading descriptive text through group work. The teacher said students’ condition was good enough. In this sense, students could do the
exercise well in line with the teacher’s instruction. They could pay
attention and focus on the teacher’s explanation. They also more
comprehended the schematic structures of descriptive text. They could not only improve their reading comprehension, but also could develop their
social interaction and could share the ideas one another. Then, they could enrich their critical thinking ability, could more responsibly for their own
learning and learning of others, and could enjoy in learning activities. Moreover, they could easily to determine which including into main idea,
supporting details, and purpose of the text. Then, the teacher assumed that group work technique was a good idea to teach descriptive text because
students could enjoy in learning descriptive text, could analyze the schematic structure of the text and could comprehend the descriptive text
together. The second category was the difficulty of the teacher in
implementing group work technique during Classroom Action Research CAR. As the observer, the teacher thought that students could not work
together well because some of them did not know the advantages of group
work technique in learning descriptive text, they only knew that group work was enjoyable, therefore they did not work together optimally.
Moreover, students still needed to know some unfamiliar vocabulary, because they gave up when they found it. Another difficulty, the classroom
was so crowded that made students hardly to focus. The third category was how the teacher solved the problems and
difficulties using group work during Classroom Action Research CAR. In this sense, the teacher and the writer still collaborated to discuss and to
solve the problems such as getting students to bring dictionary in order the students did not give up when found unfamiliar words. Next, the teacher
gave them warning if they were noisy and had to control students by walking around the class.
2. Result of Post Test
Before the students carried out the test, the writer had done the trustworthiness of the test using discriminating power and difficulty item
among pretest, posttest 1, and posttest 2. It was found that there consisted of six items should be revised either the stem or the distracters of the item.
It could be seen in the appendix. Furthermore, the writer gave the result of data including the
pretest, posttest 1, and posttest 2 into a table as following:
Table 4.1 The Students’ Reading Score of Pretest, Posttest 1, and Posttest 2
STUDENTS’ NUMBER
PRETEST CYCLE 1
POSTTEST CYCLE 2
POSTTEST
1 55
65 70
2 40
65 65
3 55
65 80
4 40
55 80
5 40
60 65
6 55
75 80
7 45
55 55
8 50
75 95
Continue to the next page
