THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND INTEREST ON STUDETS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN READING COMPREHENSION.
THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND
INTEREST ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN READING COMPREHENSION
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistic Study Program in a
Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
BUSRI
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
A Thesis
THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND
INTEREST ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN READING COMPREHENSION
By:
BUSRI
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
English Applied Linguistics Study Program
Postgraduate School State University of Medan
This Thesis was examined on 21st of Desember 2016 by the Board Examoners
Approved by
Adviser Commission
First Adviser
Second Adviser
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd
Hum
NIP. 195706615 198203 1 005
Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M.
NIP. 19700522 200112 2001
The Head of English Applied
The Director of
Linguistics Study Program
Postgraduate School
Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed
NIP. 19620629 198803 1 002
Prof. Dr. Bornok Sinaga, M. Pd
NIP. 19650910 199102 1 001
APPROVAL
This Thesis was examined on 21st Desember 2016 by Board Examiners
Board Examiners
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd
NIP. 195706615 198203 1 005
________________________
Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum
NIP. 19700522 200112 2001
________________________
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M. Pd
NIP. 19590713 198601 1 001
________________________
Dr. Zainuddin, M. Hum
NIP. 19520102 198012 1 001
________________________
Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed
NIP. 19620629 198803 1 002
________________________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Alhamdulillahi rabbil’ alamin, All praises be to Allah SWT for the great
blessing that have been continuously poured to the writer in the process of
finishing and completing his study and this thesis. In the process of completing
this thesis, the writer got much guidence and suggestions from several people who
always care and love, and for which the writer would like to extend his sincere
and special thanks.
His thankfulness is directly to Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd, his first
adviser, for his valuable comments, encouragement, guidance and patience for
him in the process of finishing this thesis.
He is deeply greatful to Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum, his second
adviser, for her detailed and constructive coment, and her support throughout this
thesis. His respect and admiration to her cannot be adequately expressed in words.
Speial thanks are addressed to Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed and Dr. Anni
Holila Pulungan, M. Hum, Head and secretary of English Applied Linguistics
Study Program, for vompleting the administrative requirements.
He is deeply indebted to Dr. Zainuddin, M. Hum, Prof. Dr. Busmin
Gurning, M. Pd and Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed., his reviewes and examiners, for
their valuable suggestions to be included in this thesis. In addition, his special
gratitudes are delivered to all lecturers at the English Applied Linguistics Study
Program for sharing their knowledge and experiences.
i
He also expresses his special thaanks to Mr. Freddi Sinaga, S. Pd,
Headmaster of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu, for his permission to
conduct the research and for assisting her in collecting the data.
He would like to express his deepest admiration to his beloved wife
Ernawati, S. Pd, his handsome son Ikhwan Ananda Husna Gayo and beautiful
daughters Uswatun Hasanah Masra Tangse, Nurul Sakinah Masra Tangse and
Dinda Putri Muthmainnah who always pray for him and who always suport him to
bring them the success in the family.
His special gratitude is also addressed to his colegues and friends,
Yuliawati, Kholijah Chaniago and all teachers of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara,
Yuniar, S. Pd, Uziana, S. Pd, Ernila, and Evaline for their full support and
encouragement.
Medan,
Desember 2016
The writer
Busri
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
ii
ABSTRACT
Busri. The Effect of Teaching Techniques and Interest on Studets’
Achievement in Reading Comprehension. A Thesis. English Applied
Linguistics Study Program. State University of Medan. 2016.
The objectives of this study were to find out whether (1) students’ achievement in
reading comprehension that was taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting
(TELLS) technique was higher than Proposition Support Outlines Technique
(PSOT). (2) Students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high interest
higher than with low interest, and (3) there was interaction between teaching
techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading comprehension. The
population of this research was students social science grade XI of State Senior
High School (Sekolah Menengah Atas Negeri: SMA) 2 Rantau Utara
Labuhanbatu in the 2016 / 2017 school year. The total number of population was
280 students. There were 80 students selected as the sample of this research by
applying cluster random sampling technique. The research design was
experimental research design by using factorial design 2x2. The eleventh social
science one (XI IPS 1) was treated by using Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting
(TELLS) and the eleventh natural science three (XI IPA-3) was treated by using
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT). Interest test was conducted for
classifying the students upon the high interest and low interest. Students’
achievement in reading expository text was measured by using comprehension
test. The data were analized by applying two-ways analysis of variance (ANOVA)
at the level of significance α=0,05. The results reveals that (1)
students’achievement in reading expository text taught by using Title, Examine,
Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique was higer than that taught by using
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT) teaching technique with Fob =
17.902 > Ftab = 3.11, (2) students’ achievement in reading expository text of
students with hight interest was higher than that of students with low inerest, with
Fobs 38.988 > Ftab = 3.11, (3) there is interaction between teaching technique and
interes on students’ achievement in reading expository text with Fobs = 5.962 > Ftab
=3.11. After computing the Scheffe test, the result showed that high interest
students got higher result if they were taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) and low interest students got higher result if they were taught by
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT).
iii
ABSTRAK
Busri. Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran dan Minat terhadap Hasil Belajar
Siswa dalam Pemahaman Bacaan. Thesis Program Studi Linguistik Terapan
Bahasa Inggris. Universitas Negeri Medan. 2016
Penelitian eksperimen ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) hasil belajar
siswa dalam pemahaman bacaan yang diajarkan dengan teknik Title, Examine,
Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) lebih tinggi dari pada hasil belajarsiswa yang
diajarkan dengan Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT), (2) hasil
belajar siswa yang memiliki minat tinggi lebih tinggi dari pada siswayang
memiliki minat rendah, dan (3) ada interaksi antara teknik pembelajaran dengan
minat terhadap hasil pembelajaran dalam pemahaman bacaan siswa. Populasi
penelitian ini meliputi siswa kelas XI SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu
tahun pembelajaran 2016 / 2017. Jumlah populasi penelitian ini adalah 280 siswa.
Ada 80 siswa yang dipilih sebagai sampel penelitian ini dengan cara cluster
random sampling. Design penelitian ini adalah penelitian experimen dengan
menggunakan factorial design 2x2. Siswa kelas XI IPS – 1 telah diajarkan dengan
menggunakan teknik Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) dan siswa
kelas XI IPA – 3 telah diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Proposition Support
Outlines Technique (PSOT). Tes minat dilakukan untuk mengklasifikasikan siswa
pada minat yang tinggi dan minat yang rendah. Prestasi siswa dalam pemahaman
bacaan diukur dengan menggunakan soal-soal tes pemahaman bacaan. Data
dianalisis dengan menggunakan analisis varian dua arah (ANAVA) pada tingkat
signifikansi α = 0,05. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa (1) kemampuan siswa dalam
pemahaman bacaan diajarkan dengan menggunakan Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) technique lebih tinggi dibandingkan yang diajarkan dengan
menggunakan teknik mengajar Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT)
dengan Fob = 17.902 > Ftab = 3.11, (2) kemampuan siswa dalam pemahaman
bacaan dengan minat tinggi lebih tinggi daripada siswa yang mempunyai minat
rendah, dengan Fob= 38.988 > Ftab = 3.11, (3) ada interaksi antara teknik
mengajar dan interes pada prestasi siswa dalam pemahaman bacaan dengan Fob =
5.962 > Ftab = 3.11. Setelah menghitung uji Scheffe, hasilnya menunjukkan
bahwa siswa yang mempunyai minat tinggi mendapat hasil yang lebih tinggi jika
mereka diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) dan siswa yang mempunyai minat rendah mendapat hasil yang
lebih tinggi jika mereka diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Proposition
Support Outlines Technique (PSOT).
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................
i
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................
v
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................
ix
LIST OF FGURES .....................................................................................
x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1
The Background of the Study ......................................
1
1.2
The Problems of the Study ..........................................
7
1.3
The Objectives of the Study …....................................
8
1.4
The Scope of the Study ...............................................
8
1.5
The Significances of the Study ....................................
9
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 The Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension..
10
2.2 The Nature of Reading Comprehension ..........................
14
2.2.1 Reading ................................................................
14
2.2.2 Comprehension .....................................................
16
2.2.3 Factors Affecting Reading Comprehensions ........
18
2.2.4. Levels of Reading Comprehension.......................
19
2.2.5 The Assessment of Reading Comprehensio...........
21
2.3 Genre ..............................................................................
22
2.3.1 Expository Text .....................................................
22
v
2.4 Theories of learning and Teaching Techniques .............
24
2.4.1 Theories of learning ..............................................
24
2.4.2 Teaching Techniques ............................................
26
2.5 Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS)
Technique .......................................................................
29
2.5.1 Procedures of (TELLS) Technique ....................
31
2.6 Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT) .........
32
2.6.1 Procedure of (PSOT) .........................................
33
2.7 Interest ..........................................................................
35
2.7.1 High And Low Interest of Students in Learning.
38
2.7.1.1 High Interest of Students in Learning ....
38
2.7.1.2 Low Interest of Students in Learning .....
39
2.8 Relevant Studies on Teaching Techniques and
Interest on Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension ..................................................................
41
2.9 Conceptual Framework ......................................................
43
2.9.1 The Difference of Students’ Achievement
in Reading Comprehension Taught by TELLS
(Tittle – Examine– Look – Look - Setting) and
PSOT (Proposition Support Outline
Technique) .............................................................
43
2.9.2 The Difference of Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension Having High Interest and
Low Interest ...............................................................
2.9.3 Interaction Between Teaching Techniques and
vi
45
Interest on Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension ........................................................
47
2.10 Hypotheses of The Study ...................................................
50
CHATER III: RESEARCH PROCEDURES
3.1
Research Design ..............................................................
51
3.2
Population and Sample ....................................................
52
3.2.1 Population ...........................................................
52
3.2.2 Samples ...............................................................
53
3.3 Treatment and Implementation ..............................................
53
3.3.1 Experimental treatment of Title, Examine, Look
Look, Setting (TELLS) .......................................
54
3.3.2 Experimental treatment of Proposition Support
Outline Technique .................................................
55
3.4 Control of the Treatment ........................................................
56
3.5
3.6
3.5
Internal Validity .....................................................
57
3.6
External Validity ....................................................
59
Instrument of Data Collection ..........................................
60
3.5.1 Interest Questionaire ..............................................
60
3.5.2 Reading Comprehension Test ................................
60
3.5.2.1 Pre Test .....................................................
62
3.5.1.2 Post test ......................................................
63
Instrument Tryout of Data Collection .................................. 63
3.6.1 Validity of Reading Comprehension Test ..................
vii
64
3.7
3.8
3.6.2 Reliability of Reading omprehension Test .................
64
3.6.3 Difficulty Index of Reading omprehension Test ........
65
3.6.4 Discrimination Index of the Test Items .....................
66
The Technique of Analyzing Data ......................................
66
Statistical Hypotheses .........................................................
68
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, RESEARCH FINDING, AND
DISCUSSION .............................................................................
68
4.1
Data Analysis .....................................................................
68
4.1.1 Description of Research Data ................................
69
4.1.2 Requirement of Data Analysis ..............................
77
4.4.3 Testing Hypothesis ...............................................
78
4.2
Research Finding ................................................................
84
4.3
Discussions .........................................................................
85
4.4
Limitation of the Research .................................................
93
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION ..
5.1
Conclusions .......................................................................
94
5.2
Implications ......................................................................
94
5.3
Suggestions .......................................................................
96
REFERENCES .............................................................................................
APPENDIX 1 Questionaire ......................................................................
viii
97
103 – 123
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
1. Interest Questionaire ...................................................................
103
2. Reading Comprehension Test .....................................................
105
3. Lesson Plan for TELLS ...............................................................
115
4. Lesson Plan for PSOT ..................................................................
117
5. TELLS Chart ................................................................................
119
6. PSOT Chart
...............................................................................
120
7. The Computation of Validity ........................................................
121
8. The Computation of Reliability ..................................................... 122
9. The Computation of descrimination Index and Difficultty Index . 123
10. The discription of students’ score .................................................. 124
11. The computation of Normality test ................................................ 125
12. The computation of Homogeneity ................................................. 126
13. The Compotation of Two – Way ANOVA .................................... 127
14. F Distribution ................................................................................. 128
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.1 Eleventh Grade Students’ English score of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau
Utara Labuhanbatu ...........................................................................
3
3.1 Factorial Research Design (2x2) ......................................................
52
3.2 TELLS Phase Treatment ..................................................................
54
3.3 PSOT Phase Treatment .....................................................................
56
3.4 Specification of interest statement ....................................................
61
3.5 The description of Interest Questionnaire Validity ...........................
62
3.6 The Reliability of Questionaire items Alpha Cronbach ....................
62
3.7 The Specification of Reading Comprehension Test ..........................
64
3.8 The difficulty Index Creteria .............................................................
67
3.9 The discrimination Index Creteria .....................................................
67
3.10 The Relationship among hypothesis, research problems and
Technique of data Analysis ...............................................................
68
4.1 The Result of Normality Test .............................................................
78
4.2 The Result of Homogeneity Test ........................................................
79
4.3 Summary on the Calculation Result of Two – Ways ANOVA ..........
79
4.4 Summary of the Result on Scheffe Test .............................................. 83
ix
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The Background of the Study
Reading comprehension is an essential skill in English subject because it is
very necessary for the students to get information from what they read. Reading is
a receptive skill that can be defined as a process of looking at and understanding
written text. It means that when someone reads, he or she looks at something
written and tries to get the meaning to understand it. Sayler (2004) states that
reading comprehension is a process of obtaining or constructing meaning from a
word or a cluster of words, where in this activity, the readers read to construct
meaning from the words that they are reading in order to comprehend the message
and information of the text. Therefore reading comprehension is considered as the
most important skill for students in mastering English because it becomes a
significant tool in learning all academic subjects and getting information widely
without going anywhere.
At the present time students need to read and comprehend English
written texts successfully because English is communicated internationally in
global era. By having reading skill, students will be easy to read and comprehend
all referencies material which written in English. In other word students can
improve their knowledge when they read new message and information which are
acquired for their life purposes. As Bowman and Bowman (1991) state that
reading is as an appropriate medium to promote life-long learning. It means that
1
2
by reading, the students will give a prospective future to explore knowledge and
give chance for them to gain their lives’ purposes. Therefore the purpose of
teaching reading should primarily be helping students to acquire the techniques
needed for comprehending the materials in order to get new knowledge in their
subject.
In Educational Unit Level Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan
Pendidikan:TSP) clearly sates the objective of teaching reading for Senior High
School students. In this curruculum, students are expected to be competent in
comprehending short functual text, dialogue, and monologue text in form of
description, narration, procedure, recount, news item, report, exposition, spoof,
review and explanation (Badan Stanard Nasional Pendidikan: BSNP, 2006).
In facts, reading is not easy as people think. Eventhought students have
studied English for many years, and the curriculum has been improved for several
times, the teaching of English has not been successful in achieving the English
teaching objectives, particularly in reading comprehension skills. Internationaly,
Tom Loveless (2011) reported in the Brown Center on Education Policy that there are
top ten countries and bottom ten countries in PISA 2009. Indonesia achieved the
14th position of 22 countries with a score of 402 for reading comprehension and at
64th level of the 65 countries on PISA 2012. This report proves that Indonesian
students’ achievement in English reading comprehension is quite low. Hamra
(2010) also found that Indonesian students difficult to understand the English
texts although they are able to read fluently.
2
3
This fact was also supported by the observation results during two
semester in academic year 2015 /2016 to the students at Eleventh grade of SMA
Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu which was applying educational unit level
curriculum, the students’ score was not as satisfactory as exspected in curriculum.
They had difficulties in understanding the English text, partcularly analytical
exposition text which was as learning material in grade eleventh. They did not
achieve minimal completeness creterion (Kreteria Ketuntasan Minimai: KKM)
score that 75 in English including their achievement in reading comprehension. It
happens most students in eight paralel classes (science and social educational
program). It can be seen from average of students’ English score at two semester
in academic year 2015/2016 as follows:
Table 1.1 Eleventh Grade Students’ English score of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau
Utara Labuhanbatu 2015/2016 Academic Year
Semester
Odd semester
Even semester
Class
2015 – 2016
2015 - 2016
70
72
XI. IPA 1
63
65
XI. IPA 2
64
64
XI. IPA 3
63
64
XI. IPA 4
60
62
XI. IPS 1
60
62
XI. IPS 2
60
61
XI. IPS 3
Average
63
64
(Source: Semester score in SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara 2015/2016)
Based on the table above, it can be explained that students’ skill at
eleventh grade of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu is low, the average of
score in both semester do not achieve minimal completeness creterion (Kreteria
Ketuntasan Minimai: KKM) scores. When the researcher did the observation in
3
4
the classroom and interviewed with the English teachers and students, the
researcher concluded that they had difficulties in understanding the analytical
exposition text. They had difficulties in comprehending the characteristics of the
text including the social function and generic structure, and language features.
Generic structure includes finding detail information and determinning the parts
of text. While the language features includes vocabulary, finding references and
understanding the tenses used in the text.
Low of students’ achievement in reading comprehension actually
influenced by some factors. Alexander (1988) states, some factors that influence
the reading comprehension comes from the students’ own personality, reading
materials and teachers personality. So the researcher idetified some problems
from the students’ own personality factors such as (1) the lack of students’
willingness and interest in reading comprehension, (2) students’ lack of
vocabulary mastery, (3) low students’ activity in reading at home and (5) genders
differencies and their social economic background. While from reading material
factors the researcher found such as (1) Most reading materials are in scientific
ones, so the students are not interesting to read them. (2) vocabulary in the text is
almost in high level, so they are difficult to comprehend some new words in the
text.
The other factor comes from the teachers personality. The teachers have
low professional development, such as (1) lack of teaching inovation in using new
teaching technique, (2) use inappropriate teaching techniques and medias, (3)
teacher’s book references, teachers frequently use the handout book and give
4
5
reading exercise on it to the students and (4) reading is taught by the teacher
throught traditional way which known as teachers-centered learning. This
traditional approach often represents an exercise in one way communication that
places the students in a passive role and which ultimately minimizes the students’
ability to develope higher skills such analysis, evaluation and synthesis of idea
and concepts. Reading passage will be difficult for students because they only get
the knowledge from their teacher. Students do not actively involved in reading
process, reading activity only covers reading the text and answer the questions
provided that indivdually done by the students. Consequently, students feel bored
and do not interested with the materials in reading comprehension tasks.
Therefore, their reading achievement is unsatisfying and hard for them to analize
the text they read.
Suitable teaching techniques is needed to achieve the teaching reading
objectives, because the achievement of the teaching reading objectives depends on
teaching techniques that teachers apply in teaching reading process. So teachers
should find suitable techniques and change paradigm of teaching from teachers centered to becomes students – centered. It is as the effort to help and to make
them to be independent learners.
To engage the students to be actively in the reading process and
understand the text easily, teacher can pose TELLS techique which developed by
Idol-Maestas (1985), Ridge & Skinner, (2011). This technique was able to
improve the students performance on comprehension questions and raised their
scores on a standardized reading test. TELLS stands for Title, Examine, Look,
5
6
Look, and Setting. Each word is a sequential step that is used in the strategy
process. The first step is title. Students are taught to look at the title of the
selection and generate clues or guess what the material is going to be about. The
second step is examine. students skim the passage and look for clues about the
content. Third step look for, students are supposed to look for important words
that may be repeated often. When students look again, they are looking for words
that they do not know the meaning. The final step setting, students read the
passage again and look for information related to setting. This can be places,
dates, descriptions, or time periods. When using TELLS, students essentially read
the passage at least three times, thus giving them a greater chance at
comprehending the materials. This method is particularly useful when reading
textbooks.
Another way to help students to monitor their comprehension was by
using PSOT. PSOT is stand for Proposition Support Outlines Technique which
developed by Buehl (1995). This technique helps students to learn to be critical
readers who can recognize the differences of viewpoints, theories, hypotheses, and
debatable assertions. Santa (1988) indicates that Proposition Support Outlines
Techniques is an organizational technique that helps students select and evaluate
information from a text, so that they can support an argument with evidence.
Proposition Support Outlines Technique can improve critical tinking of the
students and to find some supporting outlines and find some statements, such as
fact, statistics, examples, expert authority and logic and reasoning.
6
7
As mentioned above, there are many factors that influence reading
comprehension. Students’ comprehension is most influenced by their interest,
besides the teaching techniques were applied by teachers, interest of students are
also determine the success of students in learning process. Interest is one of the
psychological aspects that can encourage people achieve goals. According to
Winkel, (1984) interest is the tendency to feel settled in the subject field or
interest in certain things and feel happy working in that field. It means a person
who has an interest in an object, tend to give attention or feel greater pleasure to
those objects. However, if the object is not the cause of pleasure, the person will
have no interest in the object. Therefore, the level of attention or object pleasure
influences the interest level of a person.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher was intended in conducting
a reseach on the effect of TELLS and PSOT techniques and interested on
students’ achievement in reading comprehension. In other words, this study was
inteded to find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
by applying TELLS and PSOT technique and the level of students’ interest to
ward the students’ achievement in reading comprehension.
1.2
The Problems of the Study
In relation to the background of the study, the problems of this research
were formulated as follow:
1. Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by
using Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique, higher than
7
8
that was taught by using Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT)?
2. Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high interest,
higher than that with low interest?
3. Is there any interaction between teaching technique and interest on the
students’ achievement in reading comprehension?
1.3. The Objectives of the Study
The primary objectives of this study are to answer the questions that
mentioned in the problem of study, they can be listed:
1. To find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
that is taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique
is significantly higher than Proposition Support Outlines Technique.
2. To find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with high interest higher than with low interest.
3. To find out whether there is any interaction between teaching techniques
and interest on students’ achievement in reading comprehension.
1.4. The Scope of the Study
There are many techniques could be used in teaching reading
comprehension to improve the students’ achievement. In this study the researcher
focused on the usage of two teaching techniques namely Title, Examine, Look,
Look, Setting (TELLS) and Proposition Support Outlines Techniques (PSOT) in
8
9
teaching anaytical exposition text with the students who have high and low
interest. By high and low interest of students, this sudy expected to give clear
description on the effect of teaching techniques was there any interaction between
teaching techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading
comprehension.
1.5. The Significances of the Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful theoritically and
practically. Theoretically, the finding of this study can enrich knowledge of
theories on the implementation of TELLS and PSOT in teaching reading
especially in teaching analitycal exposition text. Therefore the finding of this
study are expected to be basses for other researchers who want to do in depth
research as the follow-up of this study.
Practically, the findings of this study are expected to be useful for English
teachers as the information about the effect of teaching techniques and interest on
students’ achievement in reading analytical exposition text. The English teachers
can get information of application of TELLS and PSOT as alternative teaching
techniques in teaching reading comprehension.
9
96
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the research findings and discussions that are stated before, it
can be concluded that (1) Students’ achievement in reading expository text taught
by using TELLS is higher than that taught by using PSOT. (2) Students’
achievement in reading expository text of students with high interest is higher
than that of students with low interest. (3) There is significant interaction between
teaching techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading expository
text. It can be said that students’achievement in reading expository text is
influenced by teaching techniques and interest.
5.2 Implication
Students’ achievement in reading expository text taught by using TELLS
is higher than that taught by using PSOT. This result implies to the English
teacher’s choice of teaching technique. It is better for the teacher to apply TELLS
in teaching reading expository text because it will make students more active.
TELLS promotes student-centered learning and cognitive processes. It places
students’ prior-knowledge as the starting point of the laerning. By working
together in groups and analyzing a text, students can be actively involved in
reading comprehension process. Students will get more knowledge because they
97
are asked to search many difficult words and sentences clues actively to
comprehend the information in the text.
Students’ achievement in reading expository text of students with high
interest is higher than that of students with low interest. It gives implication to the
teachers that they should consider students’ learning achievement. Thus, it is
better to the teacher not to be monotonous in teaching. The teacher should give
chances to students to solve the problem which appeared in every lesson.
There is significant interaction between teaching techniques and interest
on students’ achievement in reading expository text. This shows that teaching
techniques and interest are variables that give significant influence in students’
learning achievement. Thus, it is needed to relate the teaching techniques with
students’ interest. Furthermore, this research found that by applying TELLS,
students are accustomed to answer the questions to solve problems which
appeared in learning process. They will discuss the text with their group. They are
asked to find the answer by reading some sentence clues, difficult words to
comprehend the information in the text. So that high interest is so needed. If it can
be done, students will get involved in meaningful learning process. It can be
assumed that TELLS is more applicable in improving students’ achievement in
reading expository text. But, PSOT still can be used in teaching reading. Students
with low interest are better taught by PSOT because in this technique teacher still
have important role in guiding the students and students cooperate each other in
their cooperative learning groups.
98
5.3 Suggestions
In connection with the conclusions and implications, there are some
suggestions or recomendation (1) Teachers are recommended to use TELLS and
PSOT in teaching reading since these two strategies can improve students’
achievement in reading expository text. (2) Teachers are recommended to use
TELLS for class which dominated by students with high interest. Otherwise for
class which dominated by low interest students, teacher can use PSOT. (3)
Teachers should consider the students’ characteristics, especially students’ interest
in choosing teaching technique. It is hoped that teacher can guide students with
low interest in oreder to get better achievement in reading expository.
INTEREST ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN READING COMPREHENSION
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistic Study Program in a
Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
BUSRI
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
A Thesis
THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND
INTEREST ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN READING COMPREHENSION
By:
BUSRI
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
English Applied Linguistics Study Program
Postgraduate School State University of Medan
This Thesis was examined on 21st of Desember 2016 by the Board Examoners
Approved by
Adviser Commission
First Adviser
Second Adviser
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd
Hum
NIP. 195706615 198203 1 005
Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M.
NIP. 19700522 200112 2001
The Head of English Applied
The Director of
Linguistics Study Program
Postgraduate School
Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed
NIP. 19620629 198803 1 002
Prof. Dr. Bornok Sinaga, M. Pd
NIP. 19650910 199102 1 001
APPROVAL
This Thesis was examined on 21st Desember 2016 by Board Examiners
Board Examiners
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd
NIP. 195706615 198203 1 005
________________________
Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum
NIP. 19700522 200112 2001
________________________
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M. Pd
NIP. 19590713 198601 1 001
________________________
Dr. Zainuddin, M. Hum
NIP. 19520102 198012 1 001
________________________
Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed
NIP. 19620629 198803 1 002
________________________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Alhamdulillahi rabbil’ alamin, All praises be to Allah SWT for the great
blessing that have been continuously poured to the writer in the process of
finishing and completing his study and this thesis. In the process of completing
this thesis, the writer got much guidence and suggestions from several people who
always care and love, and for which the writer would like to extend his sincere
and special thanks.
His thankfulness is directly to Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd, his first
adviser, for his valuable comments, encouragement, guidance and patience for
him in the process of finishing this thesis.
He is deeply greatful to Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum, his second
adviser, for her detailed and constructive coment, and her support throughout this
thesis. His respect and admiration to her cannot be adequately expressed in words.
Speial thanks are addressed to Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed and Dr. Anni
Holila Pulungan, M. Hum, Head and secretary of English Applied Linguistics
Study Program, for vompleting the administrative requirements.
He is deeply indebted to Dr. Zainuddin, M. Hum, Prof. Dr. Busmin
Gurning, M. Pd and Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed., his reviewes and examiners, for
their valuable suggestions to be included in this thesis. In addition, his special
gratitudes are delivered to all lecturers at the English Applied Linguistics Study
Program for sharing their knowledge and experiences.
i
He also expresses his special thaanks to Mr. Freddi Sinaga, S. Pd,
Headmaster of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu, for his permission to
conduct the research and for assisting her in collecting the data.
He would like to express his deepest admiration to his beloved wife
Ernawati, S. Pd, his handsome son Ikhwan Ananda Husna Gayo and beautiful
daughters Uswatun Hasanah Masra Tangse, Nurul Sakinah Masra Tangse and
Dinda Putri Muthmainnah who always pray for him and who always suport him to
bring them the success in the family.
His special gratitude is also addressed to his colegues and friends,
Yuliawati, Kholijah Chaniago and all teachers of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara,
Yuniar, S. Pd, Uziana, S. Pd, Ernila, and Evaline for their full support and
encouragement.
Medan,
Desember 2016
The writer
Busri
Registration Number: 8116 112 002
ii
ABSTRACT
Busri. The Effect of Teaching Techniques and Interest on Studets’
Achievement in Reading Comprehension. A Thesis. English Applied
Linguistics Study Program. State University of Medan. 2016.
The objectives of this study were to find out whether (1) students’ achievement in
reading comprehension that was taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting
(TELLS) technique was higher than Proposition Support Outlines Technique
(PSOT). (2) Students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high interest
higher than with low interest, and (3) there was interaction between teaching
techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading comprehension. The
population of this research was students social science grade XI of State Senior
High School (Sekolah Menengah Atas Negeri: SMA) 2 Rantau Utara
Labuhanbatu in the 2016 / 2017 school year. The total number of population was
280 students. There were 80 students selected as the sample of this research by
applying cluster random sampling technique. The research design was
experimental research design by using factorial design 2x2. The eleventh social
science one (XI IPS 1) was treated by using Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting
(TELLS) and the eleventh natural science three (XI IPA-3) was treated by using
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT). Interest test was conducted for
classifying the students upon the high interest and low interest. Students’
achievement in reading expository text was measured by using comprehension
test. The data were analized by applying two-ways analysis of variance (ANOVA)
at the level of significance α=0,05. The results reveals that (1)
students’achievement in reading expository text taught by using Title, Examine,
Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique was higer than that taught by using
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT) teaching technique with Fob =
17.902 > Ftab = 3.11, (2) students’ achievement in reading expository text of
students with hight interest was higher than that of students with low inerest, with
Fobs 38.988 > Ftab = 3.11, (3) there is interaction between teaching technique and
interes on students’ achievement in reading expository text with Fobs = 5.962 > Ftab
=3.11. After computing the Scheffe test, the result showed that high interest
students got higher result if they were taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) and low interest students got higher result if they were taught by
Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT).
iii
ABSTRAK
Busri. Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran dan Minat terhadap Hasil Belajar
Siswa dalam Pemahaman Bacaan. Thesis Program Studi Linguistik Terapan
Bahasa Inggris. Universitas Negeri Medan. 2016
Penelitian eksperimen ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) hasil belajar
siswa dalam pemahaman bacaan yang diajarkan dengan teknik Title, Examine,
Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) lebih tinggi dari pada hasil belajarsiswa yang
diajarkan dengan Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT), (2) hasil
belajar siswa yang memiliki minat tinggi lebih tinggi dari pada siswayang
memiliki minat rendah, dan (3) ada interaksi antara teknik pembelajaran dengan
minat terhadap hasil pembelajaran dalam pemahaman bacaan siswa. Populasi
penelitian ini meliputi siswa kelas XI SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu
tahun pembelajaran 2016 / 2017. Jumlah populasi penelitian ini adalah 280 siswa.
Ada 80 siswa yang dipilih sebagai sampel penelitian ini dengan cara cluster
random sampling. Design penelitian ini adalah penelitian experimen dengan
menggunakan factorial design 2x2. Siswa kelas XI IPS – 1 telah diajarkan dengan
menggunakan teknik Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) dan siswa
kelas XI IPA – 3 telah diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Proposition Support
Outlines Technique (PSOT). Tes minat dilakukan untuk mengklasifikasikan siswa
pada minat yang tinggi dan minat yang rendah. Prestasi siswa dalam pemahaman
bacaan diukur dengan menggunakan soal-soal tes pemahaman bacaan. Data
dianalisis dengan menggunakan analisis varian dua arah (ANAVA) pada tingkat
signifikansi α = 0,05. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa (1) kemampuan siswa dalam
pemahaman bacaan diajarkan dengan menggunakan Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) technique lebih tinggi dibandingkan yang diajarkan dengan
menggunakan teknik mengajar Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT)
dengan Fob = 17.902 > Ftab = 3.11, (2) kemampuan siswa dalam pemahaman
bacaan dengan minat tinggi lebih tinggi daripada siswa yang mempunyai minat
rendah, dengan Fob= 38.988 > Ftab = 3.11, (3) ada interaksi antara teknik
mengajar dan interes pada prestasi siswa dalam pemahaman bacaan dengan Fob =
5.962 > Ftab = 3.11. Setelah menghitung uji Scheffe, hasilnya menunjukkan
bahwa siswa yang mempunyai minat tinggi mendapat hasil yang lebih tinggi jika
mereka diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Title, Examine, Look, Look,
Setting (TELLS) dan siswa yang mempunyai minat rendah mendapat hasil yang
lebih tinggi jika mereka diajarkan dengan menggunakan teknik Proposition
Support Outlines Technique (PSOT).
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................
i
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................
v
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................
ix
LIST OF FGURES .....................................................................................
x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1
The Background of the Study ......................................
1
1.2
The Problems of the Study ..........................................
7
1.3
The Objectives of the Study …....................................
8
1.4
The Scope of the Study ...............................................
8
1.5
The Significances of the Study ....................................
9
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 The Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension..
10
2.2 The Nature of Reading Comprehension ..........................
14
2.2.1 Reading ................................................................
14
2.2.2 Comprehension .....................................................
16
2.2.3 Factors Affecting Reading Comprehensions ........
18
2.2.4. Levels of Reading Comprehension.......................
19
2.2.5 The Assessment of Reading Comprehensio...........
21
2.3 Genre ..............................................................................
22
2.3.1 Expository Text .....................................................
22
v
2.4 Theories of learning and Teaching Techniques .............
24
2.4.1 Theories of learning ..............................................
24
2.4.2 Teaching Techniques ............................................
26
2.5 Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS)
Technique .......................................................................
29
2.5.1 Procedures of (TELLS) Technique ....................
31
2.6 Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT) .........
32
2.6.1 Procedure of (PSOT) .........................................
33
2.7 Interest ..........................................................................
35
2.7.1 High And Low Interest of Students in Learning.
38
2.7.1.1 High Interest of Students in Learning ....
38
2.7.1.2 Low Interest of Students in Learning .....
39
2.8 Relevant Studies on Teaching Techniques and
Interest on Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension ..................................................................
41
2.9 Conceptual Framework ......................................................
43
2.9.1 The Difference of Students’ Achievement
in Reading Comprehension Taught by TELLS
(Tittle – Examine– Look – Look - Setting) and
PSOT (Proposition Support Outline
Technique) .............................................................
43
2.9.2 The Difference of Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension Having High Interest and
Low Interest ...............................................................
2.9.3 Interaction Between Teaching Techniques and
vi
45
Interest on Students’ Achievement in Reading
Comprehension ........................................................
47
2.10 Hypotheses of The Study ...................................................
50
CHATER III: RESEARCH PROCEDURES
3.1
Research Design ..............................................................
51
3.2
Population and Sample ....................................................
52
3.2.1 Population ...........................................................
52
3.2.2 Samples ...............................................................
53
3.3 Treatment and Implementation ..............................................
53
3.3.1 Experimental treatment of Title, Examine, Look
Look, Setting (TELLS) .......................................
54
3.3.2 Experimental treatment of Proposition Support
Outline Technique .................................................
55
3.4 Control of the Treatment ........................................................
56
3.5
3.6
3.5
Internal Validity .....................................................
57
3.6
External Validity ....................................................
59
Instrument of Data Collection ..........................................
60
3.5.1 Interest Questionaire ..............................................
60
3.5.2 Reading Comprehension Test ................................
60
3.5.2.1 Pre Test .....................................................
62
3.5.1.2 Post test ......................................................
63
Instrument Tryout of Data Collection .................................. 63
3.6.1 Validity of Reading Comprehension Test ..................
vii
64
3.7
3.8
3.6.2 Reliability of Reading omprehension Test .................
64
3.6.3 Difficulty Index of Reading omprehension Test ........
65
3.6.4 Discrimination Index of the Test Items .....................
66
The Technique of Analyzing Data ......................................
66
Statistical Hypotheses .........................................................
68
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, RESEARCH FINDING, AND
DISCUSSION .............................................................................
68
4.1
Data Analysis .....................................................................
68
4.1.1 Description of Research Data ................................
69
4.1.2 Requirement of Data Analysis ..............................
77
4.4.3 Testing Hypothesis ...............................................
78
4.2
Research Finding ................................................................
84
4.3
Discussions .........................................................................
85
4.4
Limitation of the Research .................................................
93
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION ..
5.1
Conclusions .......................................................................
94
5.2
Implications ......................................................................
94
5.3
Suggestions .......................................................................
96
REFERENCES .............................................................................................
APPENDIX 1 Questionaire ......................................................................
viii
97
103 – 123
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
1. Interest Questionaire ...................................................................
103
2. Reading Comprehension Test .....................................................
105
3. Lesson Plan for TELLS ...............................................................
115
4. Lesson Plan for PSOT ..................................................................
117
5. TELLS Chart ................................................................................
119
6. PSOT Chart
...............................................................................
120
7. The Computation of Validity ........................................................
121
8. The Computation of Reliability ..................................................... 122
9. The Computation of descrimination Index and Difficultty Index . 123
10. The discription of students’ score .................................................. 124
11. The computation of Normality test ................................................ 125
12. The computation of Homogeneity ................................................. 126
13. The Compotation of Two – Way ANOVA .................................... 127
14. F Distribution ................................................................................. 128
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.1 Eleventh Grade Students’ English score of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau
Utara Labuhanbatu ...........................................................................
3
3.1 Factorial Research Design (2x2) ......................................................
52
3.2 TELLS Phase Treatment ..................................................................
54
3.3 PSOT Phase Treatment .....................................................................
56
3.4 Specification of interest statement ....................................................
61
3.5 The description of Interest Questionnaire Validity ...........................
62
3.6 The Reliability of Questionaire items Alpha Cronbach ....................
62
3.7 The Specification of Reading Comprehension Test ..........................
64
3.8 The difficulty Index Creteria .............................................................
67
3.9 The discrimination Index Creteria .....................................................
67
3.10 The Relationship among hypothesis, research problems and
Technique of data Analysis ...............................................................
68
4.1 The Result of Normality Test .............................................................
78
4.2 The Result of Homogeneity Test ........................................................
79
4.3 Summary on the Calculation Result of Two – Ways ANOVA ..........
79
4.4 Summary of the Result on Scheffe Test .............................................. 83
ix
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The Background of the Study
Reading comprehension is an essential skill in English subject because it is
very necessary for the students to get information from what they read. Reading is
a receptive skill that can be defined as a process of looking at and understanding
written text. It means that when someone reads, he or she looks at something
written and tries to get the meaning to understand it. Sayler (2004) states that
reading comprehension is a process of obtaining or constructing meaning from a
word or a cluster of words, where in this activity, the readers read to construct
meaning from the words that they are reading in order to comprehend the message
and information of the text. Therefore reading comprehension is considered as the
most important skill for students in mastering English because it becomes a
significant tool in learning all academic subjects and getting information widely
without going anywhere.
At the present time students need to read and comprehend English
written texts successfully because English is communicated internationally in
global era. By having reading skill, students will be easy to read and comprehend
all referencies material which written in English. In other word students can
improve their knowledge when they read new message and information which are
acquired for their life purposes. As Bowman and Bowman (1991) state that
reading is as an appropriate medium to promote life-long learning. It means that
1
2
by reading, the students will give a prospective future to explore knowledge and
give chance for them to gain their lives’ purposes. Therefore the purpose of
teaching reading should primarily be helping students to acquire the techniques
needed for comprehending the materials in order to get new knowledge in their
subject.
In Educational Unit Level Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan
Pendidikan:TSP) clearly sates the objective of teaching reading for Senior High
School students. In this curruculum, students are expected to be competent in
comprehending short functual text, dialogue, and monologue text in form of
description, narration, procedure, recount, news item, report, exposition, spoof,
review and explanation (Badan Stanard Nasional Pendidikan: BSNP, 2006).
In facts, reading is not easy as people think. Eventhought students have
studied English for many years, and the curriculum has been improved for several
times, the teaching of English has not been successful in achieving the English
teaching objectives, particularly in reading comprehension skills. Internationaly,
Tom Loveless (2011) reported in the Brown Center on Education Policy that there are
top ten countries and bottom ten countries in PISA 2009. Indonesia achieved the
14th position of 22 countries with a score of 402 for reading comprehension and at
64th level of the 65 countries on PISA 2012. This report proves that Indonesian
students’ achievement in English reading comprehension is quite low. Hamra
(2010) also found that Indonesian students difficult to understand the English
texts although they are able to read fluently.
2
3
This fact was also supported by the observation results during two
semester in academic year 2015 /2016 to the students at Eleventh grade of SMA
Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu which was applying educational unit level
curriculum, the students’ score was not as satisfactory as exspected in curriculum.
They had difficulties in understanding the English text, partcularly analytical
exposition text which was as learning material in grade eleventh. They did not
achieve minimal completeness creterion (Kreteria Ketuntasan Minimai: KKM)
score that 75 in English including their achievement in reading comprehension. It
happens most students in eight paralel classes (science and social educational
program). It can be seen from average of students’ English score at two semester
in academic year 2015/2016 as follows:
Table 1.1 Eleventh Grade Students’ English score of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau
Utara Labuhanbatu 2015/2016 Academic Year
Semester
Odd semester
Even semester
Class
2015 – 2016
2015 - 2016
70
72
XI. IPA 1
63
65
XI. IPA 2
64
64
XI. IPA 3
63
64
XI. IPA 4
60
62
XI. IPS 1
60
62
XI. IPS 2
60
61
XI. IPS 3
Average
63
64
(Source: Semester score in SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara 2015/2016)
Based on the table above, it can be explained that students’ skill at
eleventh grade of SMA Negeri 2 Rantau Utara Labuhanbatu is low, the average of
score in both semester do not achieve minimal completeness creterion (Kreteria
Ketuntasan Minimai: KKM) scores. When the researcher did the observation in
3
4
the classroom and interviewed with the English teachers and students, the
researcher concluded that they had difficulties in understanding the analytical
exposition text. They had difficulties in comprehending the characteristics of the
text including the social function and generic structure, and language features.
Generic structure includes finding detail information and determinning the parts
of text. While the language features includes vocabulary, finding references and
understanding the tenses used in the text.
Low of students’ achievement in reading comprehension actually
influenced by some factors. Alexander (1988) states, some factors that influence
the reading comprehension comes from the students’ own personality, reading
materials and teachers personality. So the researcher idetified some problems
from the students’ own personality factors such as (1) the lack of students’
willingness and interest in reading comprehension, (2) students’ lack of
vocabulary mastery, (3) low students’ activity in reading at home and (5) genders
differencies and their social economic background. While from reading material
factors the researcher found such as (1) Most reading materials are in scientific
ones, so the students are not interesting to read them. (2) vocabulary in the text is
almost in high level, so they are difficult to comprehend some new words in the
text.
The other factor comes from the teachers personality. The teachers have
low professional development, such as (1) lack of teaching inovation in using new
teaching technique, (2) use inappropriate teaching techniques and medias, (3)
teacher’s book references, teachers frequently use the handout book and give
4
5
reading exercise on it to the students and (4) reading is taught by the teacher
throught traditional way which known as teachers-centered learning. This
traditional approach often represents an exercise in one way communication that
places the students in a passive role and which ultimately minimizes the students’
ability to develope higher skills such analysis, evaluation and synthesis of idea
and concepts. Reading passage will be difficult for students because they only get
the knowledge from their teacher. Students do not actively involved in reading
process, reading activity only covers reading the text and answer the questions
provided that indivdually done by the students. Consequently, students feel bored
and do not interested with the materials in reading comprehension tasks.
Therefore, their reading achievement is unsatisfying and hard for them to analize
the text they read.
Suitable teaching techniques is needed to achieve the teaching reading
objectives, because the achievement of the teaching reading objectives depends on
teaching techniques that teachers apply in teaching reading process. So teachers
should find suitable techniques and change paradigm of teaching from teachers centered to becomes students – centered. It is as the effort to help and to make
them to be independent learners.
To engage the students to be actively in the reading process and
understand the text easily, teacher can pose TELLS techique which developed by
Idol-Maestas (1985), Ridge & Skinner, (2011). This technique was able to
improve the students performance on comprehension questions and raised their
scores on a standardized reading test. TELLS stands for Title, Examine, Look,
5
6
Look, and Setting. Each word is a sequential step that is used in the strategy
process. The first step is title. Students are taught to look at the title of the
selection and generate clues or guess what the material is going to be about. The
second step is examine. students skim the passage and look for clues about the
content. Third step look for, students are supposed to look for important words
that may be repeated often. When students look again, they are looking for words
that they do not know the meaning. The final step setting, students read the
passage again and look for information related to setting. This can be places,
dates, descriptions, or time periods. When using TELLS, students essentially read
the passage at least three times, thus giving them a greater chance at
comprehending the materials. This method is particularly useful when reading
textbooks.
Another way to help students to monitor their comprehension was by
using PSOT. PSOT is stand for Proposition Support Outlines Technique which
developed by Buehl (1995). This technique helps students to learn to be critical
readers who can recognize the differences of viewpoints, theories, hypotheses, and
debatable assertions. Santa (1988) indicates that Proposition Support Outlines
Techniques is an organizational technique that helps students select and evaluate
information from a text, so that they can support an argument with evidence.
Proposition Support Outlines Technique can improve critical tinking of the
students and to find some supporting outlines and find some statements, such as
fact, statistics, examples, expert authority and logic and reasoning.
6
7
As mentioned above, there are many factors that influence reading
comprehension. Students’ comprehension is most influenced by their interest,
besides the teaching techniques were applied by teachers, interest of students are
also determine the success of students in learning process. Interest is one of the
psychological aspects that can encourage people achieve goals. According to
Winkel, (1984) interest is the tendency to feel settled in the subject field or
interest in certain things and feel happy working in that field. It means a person
who has an interest in an object, tend to give attention or feel greater pleasure to
those objects. However, if the object is not the cause of pleasure, the person will
have no interest in the object. Therefore, the level of attention or object pleasure
influences the interest level of a person.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher was intended in conducting
a reseach on the effect of TELLS and PSOT techniques and interested on
students’ achievement in reading comprehension. In other words, this study was
inteded to find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
by applying TELLS and PSOT technique and the level of students’ interest to
ward the students’ achievement in reading comprehension.
1.2
The Problems of the Study
In relation to the background of the study, the problems of this research
were formulated as follow:
1. Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by
using Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique, higher than
7
8
that was taught by using Proposition Support Outlines Technique (PSOT)?
2. Is the students’ achievement in reading comprehension with high interest,
higher than that with low interest?
3. Is there any interaction between teaching technique and interest on the
students’ achievement in reading comprehension?
1.3. The Objectives of the Study
The primary objectives of this study are to answer the questions that
mentioned in the problem of study, they can be listed:
1. To find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
that is taught by Title, Examine, Look, Look, Setting (TELLS) technique
is significantly higher than Proposition Support Outlines Technique.
2. To find out whether the students’ achievement in reading comprehension
with high interest higher than with low interest.
3. To find out whether there is any interaction between teaching techniques
and interest on students’ achievement in reading comprehension.
1.4. The Scope of the Study
There are many techniques could be used in teaching reading
comprehension to improve the students’ achievement. In this study the researcher
focused on the usage of two teaching techniques namely Title, Examine, Look,
Look, Setting (TELLS) and Proposition Support Outlines Techniques (PSOT) in
8
9
teaching anaytical exposition text with the students who have high and low
interest. By high and low interest of students, this sudy expected to give clear
description on the effect of teaching techniques was there any interaction between
teaching techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading
comprehension.
1.5. The Significances of the Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful theoritically and
practically. Theoretically, the finding of this study can enrich knowledge of
theories on the implementation of TELLS and PSOT in teaching reading
especially in teaching analitycal exposition text. Therefore the finding of this
study are expected to be basses for other researchers who want to do in depth
research as the follow-up of this study.
Practically, the findings of this study are expected to be useful for English
teachers as the information about the effect of teaching techniques and interest on
students’ achievement in reading analytical exposition text. The English teachers
can get information of application of TELLS and PSOT as alternative teaching
techniques in teaching reading comprehension.
9
96
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the research findings and discussions that are stated before, it
can be concluded that (1) Students’ achievement in reading expository text taught
by using TELLS is higher than that taught by using PSOT. (2) Students’
achievement in reading expository text of students with high interest is higher
than that of students with low interest. (3) There is significant interaction between
teaching techniques and interest on students’ achievement in reading expository
text. It can be said that students’achievement in reading expository text is
influenced by teaching techniques and interest.
5.2 Implication
Students’ achievement in reading expository text taught by using TELLS
is higher than that taught by using PSOT. This result implies to the English
teacher’s choice of teaching technique. It is better for the teacher to apply TELLS
in teaching reading expository text because it will make students more active.
TELLS promotes student-centered learning and cognitive processes. It places
students’ prior-knowledge as the starting point of the laerning. By working
together in groups and analyzing a text, students can be actively involved in
reading comprehension process. Students will get more knowledge because they
97
are asked to search many difficult words and sentences clues actively to
comprehend the information in the text.
Students’ achievement in reading expository text of students with high
interest is higher than that of students with low interest. It gives implication to the
teachers that they should consider students’ learning achievement. Thus, it is
better to the teacher not to be monotonous in teaching. The teacher should give
chances to students to solve the problem which appeared in every lesson.
There is significant interaction between teaching techniques and interest
on students’ achievement in reading expository text. This shows that teaching
techniques and interest are variables that give significant influence in students’
learning achievement. Thus, it is needed to relate the teaching techniques with
students’ interest. Furthermore, this research found that by applying TELLS,
students are accustomed to answer the questions to solve problems which
appeared in learning process. They will discuss the text with their group. They are
asked to find the answer by reading some sentence clues, difficult words to
comprehend the information in the text. So that high interest is so needed. If it can
be done, students will get involved in meaningful learning process. It can be
assumed that TELLS is more applicable in improving students’ achievement in
reading expository text. But, PSOT still can be used in teaching reading. Students
with low interest are better taught by PSOT because in this technique teacher still
have important role in guiding the students and students cooperate each other in
their cooperative learning groups.
98
5.3 Suggestions
In connection with the conclusions and implications, there are some
suggestions or recomendation (1) Teachers are recommended to use TELLS and
PSOT in teaching reading since these two strategies can improve students’
achievement in reading expository text. (2) Teachers are recommended to use
TELLS for class which dominated by students with high interest. Otherwise for
class which dominated by low interest students, teacher can use PSOT. (3)
Teachers should consider the students’ characteristics, especially students’ interest
in choosing teaching technique. It is hoped that teacher can guide students with
low interest in oreder to get better achievement in reading expository.