84
was 70.11 6 the students’ score for determining communicative purpose was 71.26 ,and 7
the students’ score for determining word meaning was 77.01.
3. Students’ Reading Comprehension in Cycle 2
Having identified the improvement, the benefits and thins which still needed to be improved during the implementation of Cycle 1, the researcher tried to make
the students get better improvement in the text cycle. Besides, the researcher also discussed with the collaborator about how to overcome the weaknesses of Cycle
1. Cycle 2 involves four stages: planning, action, observation and reflection. The detail about the stages is explained as follows:
a. Planning In order to get the maximum result, some activities were planned before the
implementation of Cycle 2. The activities planned were: sharing ideas with collaborator, making lesson plan, preparing material for new title of procedure
text, dividing the main teaching into three phase: pre-reading, whilst-reading, and post-reading activities; and designing post-test. Each activity in detail is described
below. 1 Sharing ideas with collaborator
There were several things that were shared by the researcher with the collaborator. They were about designing the lesson plan that covers what would
be applied in the research, selecting the material and preparing the media of teaching, how to do the observation, and how
to score the students’ reading comprehension. The researcher also had the collaborator give some suggestion for
the better practices for the next meeting. The researcher and the collaborator discussed about the aspect of reading comprehension which needed to be
85
improved. They are: 1 the ability to determine general information 2 the ability to find certain information 3 the ability to infer implicit information 4 the
ability to infer explicit information 5 the ability to determine reference 6 the ability to determine communicative purpose, and 7 the ability to determine word
meaning. The fourth aspect improved a bit during the Cycle 1. Therefore, the researcher and collaborator would emphasize on it without neglecting others. The
evaluation of the students ‘reading comprehension must cover all the seven
aspects. In order to measure the students’ improvement, both the researcher and the collaborator agreed to use a test in the form of multiple choices.
The collaborator also suggested the researcher to observe some other points during the implementation of the research. The point were about students’
presence and attention in the classroom, students’ response to the teaching and learning process, students’ participation in the teaching and learning process,
willingness to work on tasks, and unexpected thing that may occur in the classroom.
2 Making lesson plan The researcher and collaborator planned that the implementation of Cycle 2
consisted of 3 meetings. The first two meeting were focused on the treatment and the third meeting was focused on the post test. In the first two meeting, the
researcher used Lecfenco which contained procedure text entitled “How to wash
clothes using washing machine.” The researcher discussed the design of the lesson plan for Cycle 2 with the
collaborator. The lesson plan covers the following elements: goal, indicators, PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
86
time, material, teaching and learning activities, media and sources, and assessment. The elements were elaborated in the following table.
Table 4.7 The Elements of Lesson Plan
No Elements
Description 1
Goal The students will be able to comprehend procedure text
“ How to wash clothes using washing machine”
2 Indicators
• Identifying words’ meaning
• Identifying detailed information in the text
• Determine reference
• Inferring implicit information in the text.
3 Time
2 meeting x 80 minutes 4
material
• Meeting 1 : Presenting the procedure video “ How to
wash clothes using washing machine, “Generic structure, and grammar
• Meeting 2 : Procedure text “ How to wash clothes
using washing machine”
5 Teaching
and learning activities
• The opening
• Pre-reading activities
• Whilst reading activities
• Post reading activities
• The closing
6 Media
• A unit of LCD and laptop
• A multimedia Lecfenco
• Cambridge electronic dictionary
7 Assessment
Observing the students activity in the classroom and exercises
3 Preparing material for procedure text Since the research is about optimizing the use of Lecfenco, the researcher
collected many electronic materials. The materials were taken from internet and books were modified before being presented in the classroom. In order to give
visual clues to improve the students’ vocabulary mastery, the researcher also downloaded some pictures to ease the students determine the meaning of some
given words. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
87
4 Dividing the main teaching into three phase: pre-reading, whilst-reading, and post reading activities
The researcher and the collaborator agree to divide the teaching of reading into the three main activities: pre-reading activities, whilst-reading activities, and
post-reading activities. The activities were listed in Table 4.9 below.
Table 4.8 The Activities for Main Teaching Reading Comprehension
Session Time Activities
Opening 5’
• Greet students
• Checks students’ attendance
Pre-teaching 10’
• Reviewing the previous material
• Identifying the purpose of the meeting
• Presenting the procedure video “ How to wash
clothes using washing machine.” Whilst-reading
50’ •
Presenting the material •
Asking students to read the text •
Presenting grammar used •
Introducing the new vocabulary taken form the passage supported with visual clues
• Giving the task to the students
• Providing time for students to discuss the
questions •
Giving assistance
to the
students to
comprehend the text •
Discussing the result of the students’ work •
Giving explanation and examples to determine reference and to infer implicit information
• Noticing students’ achievement
Post-reading 10’
• Asking the students what they have learned in
the meeting •
Giving students a chance for questioning or suggesting
• Reviewing students’ performance during the
class Closing
5’ •
Motivating students for better exploration of Lecfenco
• Leaves taking
88
5 Designing post test The researcher and collaborator agreed that the post-test should cover: 1
the ability to determine general information 2 the ability to find certain information 3 the ability to infer implicit information 4 the ability to infer
explicit information 5 the ability to determine reference 6 the ability to determine communicative purpose, and 7 the ability to determine word meaning.
In order to measure the students’ improvement, both the researcher and the collaborator agreed to use a test in the form of multiple choices.
b. Action Researcher carried out the activities based on the designed plan for
optimizing the use of Lecfenco in teaching reading comprehension in Cycle 2. The materials give in Cycle 2 were procedure texts. The overall implementation of
Cycle 2 can be seen in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10 The Overall Implementation of Cycle 2
Planning Optimizing the use of Lecfenco
to improve students’ reading comprehension
Action Title of the text : How to wash clothes using washing
machine
Meeting 1 Title of the text : How to wash clothes using washing
machine •
Presenting the procedure video : Instruction Manual How to wash clothes using washing machine
• Reviewing generic structure by presenting material from
Lecfenco •
Reviewing the simpre present tense •
Introducing new vocabularies taken from a procedure text titled “How to wash clothes using washing machine”
• Presenting the procedure text
• Asking students to read the text
• Providing time for students to categorize the grammar;
action verb, noun group PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
89
• Giving assistance to the students to comprehend the text
• Giving questions about the text presented
• Noticing students’ and class situation improvement
Meeting 2 •
Presenting the procedure text “ How to wash clothes using the washing machine”
• Asking students to read the text
• Giving explanation and examples to determine reference
and to infer implicit information •
Presenting slides containing pronounce reference •
Giving explanation and examples to determine reference •
Giving assistance to correlate supporting details to infer implicit information
• Giving tasks to answer the questions related to the text.
• Discussing students’ work
Observation Students
• Did not came with blank mind anymore
• Enjoyed the class with electronic material presented
• Vocabulary improved by visual clue
• Determine reference more easily
• Still need help in inferring implicit information
• More active to take part during the teaching and learning
process •
Pay attention to materials presented •
Had been brave to speak up when the teacher asked them to say the meaning of unfamiliar words
• Did not talked with friend when the teacher was
explaining the materials Teacher
• Prepared teaching material well
• Presented the electronic material of Lecfenco using LCD
• Not dominated the teaching and learning process
• Gave visual clues to ease the students deducing
unfamiliar words •
Gave visual clue to help students determine reference correctly
• Assisted the low students better
Class situation
• Students were more ready to follow the class
• Students paid attention more to the materials presented
• Students were more brave to take part in the class
• The class was rather noisy but joyful
Reflection Strengths
• Vocabulary improved
• Understanding toward text is better especially in finding
detailed information and determining reference •
The average reading comprehension score is increased •
Students paid attention more to the materials presented because the media was interesting
90
• Students were more brave to take part in the class
Weakness •
The increase of the average score was still far from the teacher’s expectation. The average score was until under
KKM. •
The low students needed encouragement to take part in the class
• Some students were still passive.
• The class was rather noisy
Post test The post test was conducted
1 First Meeting The first meeting of cycle 2 was conducted on Saturday, November 14th
2015. The lesson started at 10.05 a.m. The researcher greeted the students for opening the lesson and checked the students’ attendance. No one was absent that
day. Then, the teacher asked them to review what had been learnt in the previous meeting. The teacher asked the students to recall their memory about the material
they had ever heard before. The students mentioned some procedure texts such as how to plant a tree, how to iron the clothes etc. Then the researcher explained the
objective of the meeting. The opening and pre-reading activity lasted for 15 minutes.
The researcher started the whilst-reading activity by presenting a material about how to wash clothes using washing machine. When the researcher asked the
students who had washing machine, no one had the washing machine. It means that the instruction of how to operate washing machine is new for the students.
The researcher showed the procedure video “ how to wash clothes using washing machine” from Lecfenco. The students got audio-visual explanation and examples
about how to operate washing machine. No one talked during presentation. They seemed to be amazed by the new material. The researcher gave table of generic
91
structure of procedure text to make sure the students understand the material well. After the presentation about procedure text
“how to wash clothes using washing machine”, the teacher asked some students to read the text and the others repeated
it. Having finished reading the text, the researcher introduced some new vocabularies. The teacher helped the students by presenting pictures to ease the
students determine the meaning of the new vocabularies taken from the passage. During this stage, the students were actively guessing the meaning of the new
words. Most of them made correct guess since they were supported by visual clues presented. They were rather noisy since most of them answered the
questions. After dealing with the new vocabularies, the researcher categorized the new
word into two part; noun and verb. The researcher asked the students to categorize the words into two parts. The researcher gave an opportunity for the students to
discuss the new word in a pair. The students opened the dictionary. Having finished, the students write the new words into two categories. The researcher and
the students discussed the result of works. The high students had no problem but the low students needed teacher’s help to categorize the new words. Then, the
students in a group translate the procedure text by helping dictionary. All students did the activity actively. The activity took long time than that the researcher
planned. The discussion finished at 11.20. After that, the researcher and the students discuss the right translation together. Some students revised their
translation on the book. The post-reading activity was carried out by asking the students what they
have learned in the meeting. The high students were actively gave respond to the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
92
teacher. Then, the researcher asked the students if they have some questions or suggestion. Oetari said that the material was a little bit difficult for he because
there were some new words that she did not understand, especially the buttons on the washing machine. The researcher reviewed some new words that used on that
day. He encouraged the low students to be more active. The closing was done by motivating students for better exploration of their
ability. The researcher explained that by providing pictures and presentation, the students were able to understand the material easily. Then the researcher closed
the first meeting at 11.25. 2 Second Meeting
The second meeting was conducted on Wednesday, November 18th 2015. The lesson started at 10.05 a.m. All the students were quietly sat down on their
chairs as the previous meeting. When the researcher came, the researcher asked,“Good morning, class?” They said, “Good morning, sir” Then the
researcher asked again, “Are you ready for English?” “ Yes, ready sir,” they answered enthusiasm. Then the researcher checked the students’ attendance and
no one was absent that day. The researcher said, “We have learnt about procedure text in previous meeting. Do you remember what procedure in the previous
meeting?” The students answered together, “How to wash clothes using washing machine, sir.” The teacher said, “Good, Do you got the point?” Many of them
replied, “Yes.” The researcher asked octa to mention the ingredient of how to wash clothes using washing machine as they had learnt in the previous meeting.
Octa mentioned, “Detergent, water,” The researcher appreciate by giving applause.
93
Then the researcher presented the text of how to wash clothes using washing machine” again. The researcher and the students translated the text together. Then
the researcher presented text with several colours indicated the reference. The same colour indicated reference. Then the researcher gave them questions about
the text and gave them time to work in pair s. The students’ work was then
discussed together. During the discussion, the teacher observed their participation and improvement. The teacher gave 5 essays about the procedure text “how to
wash clothes using washing machine.” The researcher presented the questions on screen by applying Lecfenco. Having finished the students exchanged their answer
each other. The researcher asked 5 group to write their answers on the white board. After that, the researcher and students discussed the answers to get the
right answers. The students revised their false answers. The whilst-reading activities ended at 11.20. a.m.
The post-reading activity was carried out by asking the students what they have learned in the meeting. He also encouraged the low students to be more
active. Then the researcher asked the students if they have some questions or suggestion but no one give questions or suggestion. The researcher closed the
meeting at 11.30, 5 minutes later than it should be 3 Post-Test
The post-test was conducted on Saturday, November 21st 2015. The test was followed by 29 students and no one was absent. The test was started at 10.05
– 11.55 a.m. The teacher urged the students to work on the test individually. The teacher also informed that cheating was not permitted and useless. The students
did the test quietly. The post-test consist of 40 multiple choices items. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
94
c. Observation There were two things that were observed by the researcher and
collaborator. They were the process of teaching and learning in the classroom and the learning progress that student achieved. The result of the observation is
described in the following section. 1 Teaching and Learning Process
The teaching and learning process during the meetings in Cycle 2 ran better than Cycle 1. The students paid more attention to the material presented. They
followed the class more actively and less noisily. They also enjoyed the class with Lecfenco presented. They enjoyed the material presented in Cycle 2. Their interest
toward the texts increased since basically they loved reading procedure text. Their vocabulary mastery also improved. The visual clues presented helped them much
in guessing the meaning of the words. Since they got the meaning of the vocabularies by guessing the words themselves, the vocabularies entered their
long term memory. Previously, they would easily forget the meaning new words easily. The students also determined reference more easily. There was
improvement in inferring implicit information in the text. During the meeting of Cycle 2, almost all students brought dictionaries. They were also more active to
take part during the teaching and learning process. They had a strong will to work on the tasks given by teacher. They also had been brave to speak up when the
teacher asked them to say the meaning of unfamiliar words. They did not talk with friends when the teacher explained the material. The low students became more
active and were not afraid of making mistakes anymore. 2 Learning Progress
95
Optimizing the use of Lecfenco in Cycle 2 was also beneficial to improve the class situation and the students’ reading comprehension. All of students were
active to take part in the class activities. They participate actively to guess the meaning of the new vocabularies. All students did the tasks actively. They did not
just depend on their friends’ work. The class was also less noisy. They paid attention to the material seriously. They also enjoyed the presentation, picture,
video and animation. The material in Lecfenco succeeded to attract the students to read. No one missed the sentence being read by their friends.
Learning progress could be seen when students guessed the meaning of new vocabularies given. After observing visual clues presented on the LCD monitor
they could give the correct meaning of the words. The progress also could be seen on the students’ ability to find detailed information of the text. They could answer
questions about the text. They could show in which sentence or in which paragraph they found the answer. They also improved well in determining
reference. The use of the identical colour for the reference made them understood about reference well. They could answer almost all of the questions about
reference correctly. By observing and discussing how to infer implicit information in procedure text, the students also made some progress in inferring implicit
information. Their ability to infer implicit information was also better than that in Cycle 1. The students’ progress was also described in Figure 4.15 below.
96
Figure 4.15 Students’ Score of Post-Test in Cycle 2
Based on the figure 4.15 above, it can be seen that there are still 4 students 13.79 got score under 70 and 25 students 86.21 got score above 70. It
means that there were only 4 students need improvements of reading comprehension.
Moreover, based on the result of post-test, it could be reported that the mean score was 77.41. The scores were better compared to those of the pre-test and the
post-test in Cycle 1. The average score in the post-test in Cycle 1 was 70.52. In brief, the score of the post-test is described in the following table.
Table 4.11 Students’ Score of Post-test
No Explanation
Student’s score of post test 1
Highest score 92.50
2 Lowest score
57.50 3
Average score 77.41
Table 4.12 Students’ Mean Score per indicator
No Indicators
Mean Score 1
General Information 75.86
2 Certain Information
78.16 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
97
3 Implicit Information
76.44 4
Explicit Information 76.49
5 Pronoun Reference
78.16 6
Communicative Purpose 79.31
7 Word Meaning
78.16 Based on table 4.12 above, it can be concluded that the
students’ reading comprehension improved. It is indicated that: 1 the students’ score for
determining general information was 75.86 2 the students’ score for finding certain information was 78.16 3 the students’ score for inferring implicit
informati on was 76.44 4 the students’ score for inferring explicit information
was 76.49 5 the students’ score for determining reference was 78.16 6 the students’ score for determining communicative purpose was 79.31, and 7 the
students’ score for determining word meaning was 78.16. d. Reflection
Based on the teacher’s and the collaborator’s observation during the treatment of Cycle 2, the researcher could note down the strengths and weakness
which appeared during the treatment of Cycle 2. 1 The strengths
Teaching reading comprehension using Lecfenco was proved to be able to improve the students’ reading comprehension. The use of Lecfenco also improved
the classroom situation. The students were more ready to follow the class. The presentation of the picture
s and animation as the visual clues gained students’ attention more.
Based on the result of Observation of teaching learning process in Cycle 2, the teacher score of teaching learning activity in first meeting was 4 baikgood
98
and in second meeting was 4 baikgood. Moreover, conclusion of teaching learning activity for the first meeting was class was conducive and control as the
lesson plan. The students really pay attention. See appendix 4C 4D. The conclusion of Observation of teaching learning process for the second meeting
was good, teaching learning process run well. The students were very enthusiastic in teaching learning activities using IT. See appendix 4
Meanwhile, the students can determine the general information better. The mean score for determining the implicit information increased from 64.94 in the
test in Cycle 1 to 76.44 in the post test. The students could answer the questions about general information.
2 The weakness During Cycle 2, the observer did not write the suggestion for the teacher but
it did not mean that there was no weakness. May be it was not necessary thing to write there or the teaching learning activity could run well.
e. Summary of Finding in Cycle 2 The implementation of Cycle 2 was divided into three meetings and carried
out in three main teaching activities namely pre-reading activity, whilst-reading activity and post-reading activity. The first two meeting were focused on the
teaching of reading comprehension on procedure text. The last meeting was for the students’ reading comprehension assessment or the post-test.
Although all students did not get score above 70.00, but the improvement of Cycle 2 was better than Cycle 1.The students’ ability to determine general
information also improved. There was also an increase o n the students’ ability to
infer implicit information in the text PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
99
The presentation of procedure text “how to wash clothes using washing machine” attracted their attention better. The students paid attention to the
materials being presented more. They also actively took part in the teaching and learning process.
The class situation also improved better in Cycle 2. No Students came late and they were very ready to follow the class. They also picked the researcher up
before the meeting. It never happened befor e and the students’ activeness also
increased. All students actively participated in the class. Students also enjoyed the materials being presented. Students paid attention to the materials and the
researcher also less dominated the class. He gave more opportunity for students to discuss the materials and to work on the tasks themselves. The atmosphere in the
class was better than that in Cycle 1. The class was less noisy. The result of post-
test indicated an improvement toward the students’ reading comprehension since the average score of the post-test was better than
that of the pre-test and of the test in Cycle 1. The average score was 77.41. f. Summary Finding during the Research
In order to know the improvement of the research, the researcher compared the
previous condition of students’ reading comprehension and classroom situation with the condition after the research.
In the previous condition, the students’ reading comprehension was very low including all aspects of reading such determining general information, certain
information, implicit information, explicit information, reference, communicative purpose and word meaning. From the seven indicators above, most of the students
100
were unable to give incorrectly inferring implicit information. It means that they till need teacher’s help.
The previous condition of class situation was also very poor. Many students came to the class with blank-minded. They also did not actively participate in the
class. They just kept silent when the teacher gave questions and they talked with friends.
After implementing the research and collecting the data, there were several things which the researcher would like to summarize. They were findings in Cycle
1 and Cycle 2 and the teaching learning results. To identify the improvement toward the students’ reading comprehension,
the researcher compared the score of the pre-test in the previous condition, the test score in Cycle 1 and the post-test. There were two sets of score that the researcher
would like to compare among the previous condition, the test in Cycle 1, and the post test. They were the reading comprehension score and the score of each
aspects of reading comprehension. The comparison of the scores in described in the following table.
Table 4.10 The Comparison among students’ reading comprehension scores of the pre-test, the test in Cycle 1 and the post-test
No Explaination
Pre-test Post test
Cycle 1 Post test
Cycle 2 1
The highest score 80.00
80.00 92.50
2 The lowest score
25.00 52.50
57.50 3
The average score 54.05
70.52 77.41
Standard Deviation 21.238
7.629 8.331
101
Based on the table above, it can be concluded that there was improvement among students’ reading comprehension scores in the previous condition, in the
test in Cycle1, and in the post-test. The highest score increase from 80 in the pre- test, and in the test in Cycle 1, but to 92.50 in the post-test. The lowest score also
increased from 25.00 in pre-test to 52.50 in the test in Cycle1, and to 57.50 in the post-test. The average score increased from 54.05 in the pre-test, to 70.52 in the
test in Cycle 1, and 77.41 in the post-test.
Table 4.11 The Comparison among students’ mean score of Indicators in the pre-test, the post-test in Cycle 1 and the post-test in Cycle 2
No Indicators
Pre-test Post-Test in
Cycle 1 Post-test in
Cycle 2 1
Determining the general information
39.66 74.14
75.86 2
Finding the certain information
61.78 70.69
78.16 3
Inferring the implicit information
56.90 64.94
76.44 4
Determining the explicit information
48.28 70.85
76.49 5
Determining the reference
44.83 70.11
78.16 6
Determining the communicative
purpose 57.47
71.26 79.31
7 Determining the word
meaning 54.02
77.01 78.16
Based on the table above, it can be concluded that there were improvements among students’ mean score for determining general information the previous
condition, the post-test in Cycle 1, and the post-test. The average score increased from 39.66 in the pre-test, to 74.14 in the test in Cycle 1, and to 75.86 in the post-
102
test. For finding certain information, there was improvement among the previous condition, in the test in Cycle 1, and in the post-test. The mean score increased
from 61.78 in the pre-test, to 70.69 in the test in Cycle 1, and to 78.16 in the post- test. For inferring the implicit information there was an improvement in the
previous condition, the post-test in Cycle 1, and in the post-test. The mean score increased from 56.90 in the pre-test, to 64.94 in the post-test in Cycle 1, and to
76.44 in the post-test in Cycle 2. Next, there was also an improvement for determining general information in
the previous condition, the post-test in Cycle 1, and the post-test in Cycle 2. The mean score increased from 48.28 in the pre-test, to 70.85 in the post-test in Cycle
1, and to 76.49 in the post-test in Cycle 2. Then there was also an improvement among students’ score in determining reference in the previous condition, in the
test in Cycle 1, and in the post-test. The average score increased from 44.83 in the pre-test, to 70.11 in the post-test in Cycle 1, and to 78.16 in the post-test in Cycle
2. For determining communicative purpose of the text there was also an improvement
of students’ mean score in previous condition, the post-test in Cycle 1, and the post-test in Cycle 2. The mean score increased from 57.47 in the pre-
test, to 71.26 in the post-test in Cycle 1, and to 79.31 in the post-test in Cycle 2. The last, there was also improvement among students’ mean score of determining
word meaning in the previous condition, the post-test in Cycle 1, and the post-test in Cycle 2. The mean score increased from 54.05 in the pre-test, to 70.52 in the
post-test in Cycle 1, and to 77.41 in the post-test in Cycle 2. After the implementation of the research, there was an improvement on the
stu dents’ reading comprehension as well as on the class situation during the
103
teaching and learning process. The improvement after the implementation can be summarized in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12 The Improvements After Implementation
Condition before the research Improvement in Cycle 1
Improvement in Cycle 2 Students’ Competence
Meeting 1 Meeting 2
Meeting 1 Meeting 2
1. Difficulties in determining
general information
Unable to
determine general
information Low
students did not say
anything when they
asked
to determine
general informatio
n Fewer
students could not
determinin g
general informatio
n Almost all
of the
students could
determine general
informatio n
Students actively
guess the general
informatio n when the
teacher asked
2. Difficulties in finding certain
information from text
Incorrectly answered
questions based on a
text The
high students
could did the
questions The
high students
could answer
almost questions
correctly The
low students
still made some
mistakes The
low students
made fewer
mistakes
3. Difficulties in determining
implicit information
Incorrectly answering
implicit information
Most of
the students
did questions
on implicit informatio
n incorrectly
The students
still made mistakes to
answer questions
on implicit informatio
n The
high students
made fewer
mistakes Teacher’s
help was
still needed,
but fewer students
made mistakes
4. Difficulties in determining
explicit information
Incorrectly answering
explicit information
Most of
the students
did questions
on implicit informatio
n incorrectly
The students
still made mistakes to
answer questions
on explicit informatio
n The
low students
made fewer
mistakes Fewer
students made
mistakes
5. Difficulties in determining
reference Incorrectly
determined pronoun
reference. Most
of the
students were
still confused
about how Some
students from
low group had
tried to
determine Fewer
students could not
determine pronoun
reference Fewer
students made
mistakes in
determinin
104 to
determine pronoun
reference actively
but failed incorrectly
g pronoun reference
6. Difficulties in determining
communicativ e purpose
Incorrectly answering
questions on communicati
ve purpose Most
of the
students had
been able
to determine
communic ative
purpose The
high students
could answer
almost all questions
correctly The
low students
made fewer
mistakes Fewer
students made
mistakes in
determinin g
communic ative
purpose
7. Difficulties in finding word
meaning Unable
to give
the meaning of
unfamiliar words.
Low students
did not say anything
when they are asked
to
finding unfamiliar
words used in the text
Some students
forgot the meaning of
some words.
Teacher presented
the visual clues and
they could mention
the meaning of
the word Almost all
of the
students could
mention the
meaning of unfamiliar
word used in text
Students actively
guess the meaning
of unfamiliar
words give. They
could also guess the
meaning of
unfamiliar words that
were
not supported
with visual
clues
Test Score Pre-test
Mean Score = 54.05
Post-test Mean
Score =
70.52 Post-test
Mean Score
= 77.41
Moreover, when the researcher gave the questionnaire to the students, the researcher got some findings as follow:
Table 4.13 The Result of Questionnaire
No Statement
The Options Yes
No Don’t know
1. Lecfenco can help the students to
22 3
4
105 understand the procedure texts
Students Students
Students 2.
Lecfenco can improve the students more confident
14 Students
4 Students
11 Students
3. Lecfenco can improve the students’
motivation to practice reading of procedure texts
28 Students
1 Students
4. Lecfenco can improve the students’
ability to answer the questions 24
Students Students
5 Students
5. The students know the benefit of
Lecfenco’s use in reading learning. 11
Students 2
Students 16
Students
Based on the table 4.13, it can be concluded that there was improvement on students’ motivation and reading comprehension. The averages of answer for
choosing option A was 99 68.28, 10 6.90 for option B, and 36 24.82 for option C. The result of questionnaire can be one of the proofs that Lecfenco
improve the students’ motivation and reading comprehension. The results of questionaire was in appendix 9.
B. Discussion