Research Findings Discussions

B. Research Findings Discussions

1. The Common Responses of the Research Problem

In the research, the research problem was “How does Cause and Effect Strategy increase the students’ ability in reading comprehension especially in narrative text at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016 ?” After doing the research in cycles, it was found that the average of the students’ value in Cycle I was 50.8. While in Cycle II was 86. And it showed the students’ ability in reading comprehension increases from Cycle I to Cycle II.

Based on the result, the common response of the problem responds that Cause and Effect Strategy increases the students’ ability in reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016 by explaining and giving example more cause and effect with the students and motivation students to analytical thinkers and minds that can work through complex problems. It will also help students socially, they will understand and be more willing to accept the consequences for their actions –whether good or bad, the researcher take a conclusion that Cause and Effect Strategy increases the students’ ability in reading comprehension.

2. The Analysis and Interpretation of Research Findings

The researcher analyzed and interpretation in the research was done in Cycle I and Cycle

II and the result observed during taught the students in the classroom.

a. Cycle I

In the first meeting of Cycle I, the researcher analyzed the weaknesses during teaching- learning process as follows. (1) Some of the students did not find out the main idea in narrative text.

(2) Some of the students did not were not able connected to each other about cause and effect in narrative text. (3) Some of the students were not able to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (4) Some of the students were not able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

To overcome the weaknesses, the researcher should do the interpretation in the next meeting as follows. (1) The researcher asked the students practice to find out the main idea in narrative text at home. (2) The researcher asked the students to connected each other about cause and effect in narrative

text. (3) The researcher asked the students to able comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (4) The researcher asked the students to able identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

In Cycle I of the second meeting, the researcher did the evaluation to the students and there were three students (12 %) can be classified in “good” level. There were seven students (28 %) in “enough” level. There were nine students (36%) in “less” level and there were six students (24 %) in “fail” level. The average of the students‟ mark was 50.8. Although the highest mark was in the high level, it was not satisfying because most of the students were in very low level and they did not pass the Minimum Competence Criterion 65 point. Therefore the researcher continued the research to the next cycle.

Before the researcher continued the action to the next cycle, the researcher improved the weaknesses of Cycle I as follows.

1) The researcher asked the students to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text.

2) The researcher asked the students to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

b. Cycle II

In Cycle II, In the first meeting, the researcher still found some weaknesses such as:

1) Some of the students to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text.

2) Some of the students difficult to find the specific facts in narrative text.

To overcome the students problems, the researcher should be done some improvements, as follows. (1) The researcher asked the students to practice to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text. (2) The researcher asked gave practiced to the students to find the specific facts in narrative text. Based on the analyzed above, the researcher interpretation based the result ability in reading comprehension in the second meeting that there were 17 students (72%) who had done the activities, and 2 students (0%) who had not done the activities. The result of the students‟ evaluation sheet was there was no student in “fail level” and “less level”. However, there were14 student(56%) in “very good” level. There were 10 students (40%) in “good” level. There was one students (4 %) in “enough” level. The highest mark was 100 and the lowest mark was 65. The average of the students’ mark was 86.

In conducting the research in Cycle II for second meeting, the researcher did not found the weaknesses but the strength of the students in teaching learning process was succesfull based in the identification problem as follows. (1) All the students were able to find out the main idea in narrative text.

(2) All the students were able to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text. (3) All the students were able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text. (4) All the students found the spesific facts in narrative text.

Regarding to the analyzed of identification problem, the percentage of the researcher’s activities that had been done were able to comprehend reading text and categorized into very good level (100%). The researcher saw the students were able to find out the main idea in narrative text, the students were able to comprehend the generic structures in narrative text, the students were able to identify the key words and phrases in narrative text, and the students were able to find the spesific facts in narrative text.

Based on the analyzed of the research findings, there was a significant increased. In which, the students’ ability in Cycle II was better than in Cycle I. The students were able to comprehend reading text (narrative text) by using Cause and Effect Strategy. Therefore, the researcher stopped the research because the students’ ability in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy could be achieve the MCC which been had been decided in SMP Negeri 6 Susua that was 65 points. While the avarage of students mark was 86, the research was successful.

3. The Research Findings versus the Latest Related Research

The research has been conducted by the other researcher. The latest related research was investigated by Mrs. Kealoha (2011) search about “The students can identify cause and effect in the text of Cause and Effect Strategy in Reading Comprehension in the First In Junior High School in Honolulu Hawai’i. Whereas, in the research, the researcher does research “Increasing The research has been conducted by the other researcher. The latest related research was investigated by Mrs. Kealoha (2011) search about “The students can identify cause and effect in the text of Cause and Effect Strategy in Reading Comprehension in the First In Junior High School in Honolulu Hawai’i. Whereas, in the research, the researcher does research “Increasing

Meanwhile in the research, the researcher noticed that both of the latest related research above has the differences in the result of the research by using Cause and Effect Strategy. The differences as follows.

1) The researcher succesful to use the nine steps of Cause and Effect Strategy while she used seven steps of Cause and Effect Strategy succesfully.

2) The researcher conducted in two cycle. Each cycle consisted of two meetings then the researcher evaluated the students in the second meeting of each cycle while she evaluated the students in the first meeting of each cycle.

3) The result of the students in Cycle I was 50.8 while she was found 50.1.

4) The result of the students in Cycle II was 86 while she was found 84. Thus, the researcher concluded that Cause and Effect Strategy increased the students’ ability in reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016.

4. The Research Findings versus Theory

The researche findings of the research showed that the students’ ability in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy increased the students ability in in reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016. As Grabe and Stoller (2002:17) says, “Reading comprehension is the ability of the students to understand the information in a text and interpret it appropriately”. While in the research finding from Cycle I until Cycle II, the students were not able to make interactive and contractive process involving The researche findings of the research showed that the students’ ability in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy increased the students ability in in reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016. As Grabe and Stoller (2002:17) says, “Reading comprehension is the ability of the students to understand the information in a text and interpret it appropriately”. While in the research finding from Cycle I until Cycle II, the students were not able to make interactive and contractive process involving

5. The Research Findings Implications

The result of the research findings can be implicated to: (1) The researcher feel interested to use Cause and Effect Strategy to the students in teaching reading comprehension. (2) The students need Cause and Effect Strategy as a stimulation to increase their knowledge in reading comprehension. (3) The students were active to follow Cause and Effect Strategy in reading comprehension related the identification problem. (4) The readers are motivated to the Cause and Effect Strategy to overcome their problem in reading comprehension.

6. The Analyis of the Research Findings Limitations

During conducting the research, there were some limitations of the analysis and the research finding as follows.

1) Most of the students less knowledge to comprehend the content of the reading text.

2) Most of the students felt new things strategy about Cause and Effect Strategy in reading comprehension.

3) Most of the students difficulties to find out familiar word in narrative text.

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusions

Based on the result of the research for teaching the students in reading comprehension by using Cause and Effect Strategy at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 6 Susua in 2015/2016, in the first meeting of Cycle I, there were three students (12%) can be classified in “the good” level. There were seven students (28%) in “the enough” level. There were nine students (36%) in “the less” level and there were six students (24%) in “the fail” level.

In addition, the average of the students’ mark was 50.8. While the students’ ability in Cycle II was in “ the Good” level, it shows that there were fourteen students (56%) in “the very good” level. There were ten students (40%) in “the good” level. There was one students (4 %) in “the enough” level. The result shows that the students of SMP Negeri 6 Susua at the eighth grade are able to comprehend the reading text by using Cause and Effect Strategy. The students’ average mark was higher than the KKM (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal) that was 86.