Homogeneity Test The Assumption Test

H ˳ : There is no significant difference of students’ reading comprehension based on their learning styles; visual, auditory and kinesthetic. The criteria of ANOVA test: H ₁ is accepted if F-value F˳ F-table F t and probability significant sig. value 0.05 H ˳ is accepted if F-value F˳ F-table F t and probability significant sig. value 0.05 The result showed that F-value F ˳ 0.030 is lower than F-table F t 3.159, 0.030 3.159. Then the p value is 0.970 greater than 0.05 0.970 0.05. Hence, it can be concluded that H ˳ is accepted and H₁ is rejected. Clearly, from the result, it can be said that there is no significant difference of students’ reading comprehension based on their learning styles; visual, auditory and kinesthetic. Moreover, Post-Hoc test is conducted to show the specific data of none significant difference among students’ reading comprehension based on their visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning styles. Post-Hoc procedures of testing which used are Scheffe, Tukey’s-b and Waller-Duncan. The three of them are the procedure testing of Post-Hoc that most often to be used for detail information of the data comparison. Post-Hoc test presented on the following table: Table 4.8 Post-Hoc Test Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: ReadingScore I Group J Group Mean Differen ce I-J Std. Error Sig. 95 Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound S Visual Auditory -,752 4,285 ,985 -11,52 10,02 c h e f f e Kinesthetic -,899 3,713 ,971 -10,23 8,43 Auditory Visual ,752 4,285 ,985 -10,02 11,52 Kinesthetic -,146 3,627 ,999 -9,26 8,97 Kinesthetic Visual ,899 3,713 ,971 -8,43 10,23 Auditory ,146 3,627 ,999 -8,97 9,26 The Post-Hoc multiple comparisons showed that there is no significant difference among students’ reading comprehension based on their learning styles because the data clearly reports that all the result of significance value are higher than 0.05. Meanwhile, to have the significant difference, the sig, value or significance value should lower than 0.05. Moreover, the result on the Post-hoc multiple comparisons test told that between visual and auditory is 0.985, visual and kinesthetic is 0.971 and auditory and kinesthetic is 0.999. It can be conclude there is no significant difference on students’ reading comprehension based on their visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning styles.

D. Data Interpretation or Discussion

According to the data description, 8 th term students of English education department in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta have twenty five percent of students which are visual learners. In simple, the visual learners are students who learning through seeing, reading, watching people, videotapes and television. Visual learners typically, they seem to be able to read the textbook, journal, article, or newspaper on their own to increase their understanding. Then, twenty three percent of students are auditory learners, they rely on hearing for comprehending and remembering. They put hearing as the primary device to absorb information or knowledge. Moreover, fifty two percent of students are kinesthetic learners, this learners’ type are seem to be absorbing information through physical, likely they use their body or sense of touch to learn and