The effect of group work and the traditional reading technique on the reading achievement of the second year students of SLTPK Santo Stanislaus I Surabaya - Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya Repository
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSTON
CHAPTERV
CONCLUSION
This chapterdealswith two parts,The first one is the summaryin which the
writer givesa summaryof the main pointsthat havebeendiscussedin the previous
chapters.The last part is about the suggestions
which includethe suggestionsfor
the English reading comprehensionteachersand also the recommendationfor
furtherresearch.
5.1 Summary
Englishas the internationallanguagehas beenrecognizedas the medium of
communicationor instructionin textbooksor printed materials.In line with this,
since the first year of junior high school and even elementary,students are
acquaintedto all Englishskillsnamelyspeaking,listening,writing, and readingwith
readingas the main emphasis.It is expectedto serve as a basic foundationfor
studentsto be ableto understandthe informationgiven in textbooksor reference
books written in Englishif they continueto highereducation.
However, in fact most high schoolstudentslack the abitityto comprehenda
passage.Moreover, this condition is not supportedwith the way of teaching
readingin school.The largesizeofclass makesthe teacherunableto focus his/her
attention to each student and thus, reducing the students' opportunity to
participatefully during the teachinglearningprocess.
In order to overcomethis problem,the teachershouldbe able to encourage
and at the sametime
the studentsto activelyparticipateduringthe readingpTocess
provide them with the appropriateteachingmethod which enablethem to learn
\ithout dependingtoo much on the teacheras what it is intendedto be in a
classroom.
learner-centered
In this study, the $riter takes the assumption that teaching reading
comprehensionthrough group tvork can help the studentsto comprehendthe
passagebetterand alsoencouragethem to participatein the classroom.
To prove this assumption,the *riter calculatesthe data obtainedduring the
experimentand finds out that there is a significant difference in the students'
reading comprehensionachievementbetrveenthe studentstaught uSing group
rvork anclthe ones taught using the traditional reading technique.The students
taught using group rvork have better reading comprehensionachievementthan the
onestaughtusingthe traditionalreadingtechnique
Besidesthe calculationabove,the writer also calculatesthe effectsof group
rvork on the three types of questionsused to measurethe students' reading
comprehensionachievement.The result is that in answering factual questions,
there is no significantditierencebetrveenthe scoresof the studentstaught using
group work and the onestaught using the traditionalreadingtechnique.In other
words,we can say that both group rvork and the traditionalreadingtechniqueare
useful in helping studcntsanswer factual questions.However, in ansrveringthe
othertypesof questionsnamelythe inferenceand main idea questions,the results
shorvthat the scoresof the studentstaught using group work are higher than the
scoresof the onestaughtusing the traditionalreadingtechnique.In other rvords,
we can say that group work can improve the studenls'reading comprehension
achievementbetter than the traditional readingtechnique.This happensbecause
in group work, studentsget more opportunitiesto participateduring the teaching
leaming process.Their active involvement in the classroomhelps them have
of the materialsbeing studied.As a result,the studentshave
better understanding
better understandingof the contentof the passagervhich enablethem to analyze
the ideasin the passagemore thoroughly.
All of the data during the experiment above are olrtained from the second
year studentsof SLTPK Santo StanislausI Surabayain the academicyear of
1997-1998.
5.2 Suggestions
for the Englishreadingcomprehension
This part dealswith suggestions
for furtherresearch.
andalsotherecommendation
teachers
5.2.1 Suggestionsfor the English Reading ComprehensionTeachers
There are many ways of presentingEnglish reading materials to the
students.The developmentin technologyas rvell as the developmentin the world
of teaching itself have enabled teachersto create many kinds of rnaterials,
teachingtechniques,and alsoteachingleaming activities
what a teachermustbearin mind in applyinga certainteachingtechnique
of the techniqueitselfto meetthe teaching
is the effectiveness
in the classroom
needs.
andthestudents'
objectives
the useof groupwork in teachingreading
In this study,the writer suggests
that teachersdivide
ln applyingthis technique,the writer suggests
comprehension.
the studentsby using random basis. it is better to mix the less able studentsand
the smart ones in each group-By doing this, the groups will be more effective
passage
sincethe membersof each gloup can help one anotherin analyzingthe
gap
and solving the problems given. Besides random groups will close the
betrveenthe less able studentsand the smart ones
The writer also suggeststhat teachersshould actively and continuously
encouragethe studentsto be active and to participatemore during the teaching
rvith
learning process. A class with mixed ability students consists of students
this
different characters.Some are shy while some others are very outgoing.In
case, teachersshould be able to treat each individual student rvith different
easy
approaches.For studentswho have natural outgoingpersonality,it may be
in the
for them to mingle themselveswith the others and to involve themselves
different
discussion.But for those rvho are shy and a little isolated,it may be a
at first to
experiencefor them to work in groups.They may have somedifficulties
the role
mix and to involvethemselvesactivelyduring the disc'rssion.In this case,
gloup to
of teachersis important.Teachersshould supewisethe flow of eaah
in the
knorv rvhich studentshave difficulties to participateduring the discussion
group.Teachersshouldencouragethemtoexpresstheiropinionfreely.Evenif
they give incorrectanswers,teachersshouldnot criticize them but guide them by
clarif-ving the questionsbeing asked or giving the examples so that they get the
ideasand can expresstheir opinion. In this case,studentswill not be discouraged
to answersincethey feel that their eftbrts to respondare worthy. In short, teachers
can be a great help to put them at easeso that eventuallythey overcornetheir
difficultres and can enjoy the natural give-and-takeand rnutual cooperatlon
amongthe studentsin small gfoups.
Finally, the rvriter hopesthat this studywill give valuablecontributionto the
teachingof readingin high school,especiallyin the secondyear students'as an
altemativeway of presentingreadingmaterialsin the classroom'
5.2.2 Recommendationfor Further Research
The rwiter reaiizes that this study is still far from being perfect. In this
study, the effects of group work on the students' reading comprehension
achievementare seen only from the three types of questionsnamely factual,
inference,and main idea questions.The writer expectsthat there will be other
researcherswho will cary out a more thorough study by analyzing the effects of
grouprvorkon manyothertypesofquestions.
As for the treatment which was only given to the secondyear students
during three meetingsdue to the limited time, the writer also hopesthat later on
there will be other researcherswho will conduct an experiment by using a wider
subjector populationand in a longer period in order to get more completeand
more valid results.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBI,IOGRAPIIY
Adenan,Ferry 1989. Let's Discuss Reading. Teflin Joumal, Vol.2, No. 1,
February.
Bejarano, Yael. 1987. A Cooperative Small-Group Methodology in the
LanguageClassroom.TESOL Ouarterl)r,Vol. 21, No. 3, September.
Boeshaar,Stephen.1984.Using Group Mini-Lessons.Enslish TeachinsForum,
Vol. XXII, No. 4' October.
Brumfit, Christopher. 1984. Communicative Methodology in
Teaching.Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
[,anguage
Byrne,Donn. 1976.Teaching Oral English. England: LongmanGroup Ltd.
Chastain,Kenneth. 1976. DevelopingSecond Language Skills : Theory to
Practice. Second Edition. Chicago : Rand McNally College Publishing
Company.
Christison,Mary Ann. 1990. CooperativeLearning in the EFL Classroom.
English TeachineForum,Vol. XXVllI, No. 4, October.
Davies,Norman F. 1980.Oral Fluency Training and Small Groups. English
TeachingForum,Vol. XVIII, No. 3, July.
DepartemenPendidikandan KebudayaanRepublik lndonesia.1993. Kurikulum
Sekolah Nlenengah Umum. Garis-Garis Besar Program Pengajaran
(GBPP).Jakarta.
Dupuis, Mary M. and Eunice N. Askov. 1982. Content Areas Reading : An
Individualized Approach. New Jersey: PrenticeHall Inc.
Eskey,David E. 1986. Teaching Second Language Reading for Academic
Purpose.Massachusetts
: Addison-WesleyPublishing,Co.
Evangelidou,Evangeliaet al. 1990. Reading Skills. EnrrlishTeachinq Forum,
Vol. XVIII, Vol. XNo.4, October.
'feflin
Fachrunazy. 1993. SuggestedTechniques of EFL fnr Large Classes.
Joumal,Vol. VII, No. 2, September.
Goodman,Kenneth. 1973.Analysis of oral Reading Miscues, in Frank smith,
ed., Psycholinguisticsand Reading. New York : Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston.
Gronlund, Norman E. 1982. Constructing Achievement Tests. Third Edition.
Jersey: Prentice-HallInc.
New
Harvey, Anamaria. 1980. Why Reading. EnslisllTeaching Forum, Vol' XVIII'
1 ,J a n u a r y .
No.
Jacobs,GeorgeM. 1996. Cooperative Learning and Group Activities. Teflin
Seminar44, 7-10October.
Jacobs,GeorgeM., Kikuyo MatsumotoandLisa Ilola. 1989.Structuring Student
Interaction to Promote Learning. EnelishTeachingForum,Vol. XXVII,
No. 3,, July.
Karim, Aliyah Abdul. 1989.Power skills in Reading.New York : McGraw Hill
Book Company.
'fhe
Road Towards Reliability. Enelish
Krigas, E. J. 1980. Group work :
TeachingForum,Vol. XXVIII, No. 4, October'
Long, Michael H. and Patricia A. Porter. 1985. Group Work, Interlanguage
fly, Vol. XIX,
Talk, and SecondLanguageAcquisition,TESOL Ouarterly
No.2, June.
Marksheffel,Ned D. 1966.Better Reading in the secondary School : Principles
and Proceduresfor Teachers.New York : RonaldPressCompany'
Mc Greal, Rory. 1989.Coping with Large Classes.EnglishTeachinsForum,
Vol. XXVII, No.2, APril.
Mc Wlrorter, KathleenT. lgg2, Efticient and Flexible Reading. Third Edition.
New York : HarperCollinsPublishers.
Murphey, Tim. 1990. You and I : Adjusting Interaction to Get
Input. EnslishTeachingForum,vol. XXVill, No. 4,
comprehensible
October.
Nelson, Gayle. 1984. Reading : A Student-CenteredApproach' Enelish
TeachinsForum,Vol. XXII, No. 4, October'
Ngadiman,Agustinus.1990.The Effectivenessof the Purpose-BasedModel lbr
Teaching Reading Comprehension at the English Department.
Unpublished
Thesis.Malang: FPS-IKIP.
Nuttal, Christine. 1982. Teaching Reading Skills as a Foreign Language.
London: HeinemannEducationalBooks Inc.
Paulston,ChristinaB. and Mary N. Bruder. 1976.Teaching English a Second
Language : Techniques and Procedures. Massachusetts Winthrop
PublishersInc.
Read,Siew-Flean.1982.Staging Group Activities in the Classroom.Guidelines
A Periodicalfor ClassroomLanquaseTeachers,Vol. IV, No. 2, December.
Said, Habimrdin. 1996. English '94 for SLTP 2. Surabaya: PT Bina Pustaka
Tama.
Shaw, Marvin E. 1981.Group Dinamics : The -Pr;ychology
of Small Group
Behaviour. Nerv York : Mc Graw Hill Book Comoanv.
Smith, Nila B. and Alan Robinson.1980. Ileading Instruction for Today's
Children. SecondEdition. Nerv York : Princeand Hall Inc.
Tuckman, Bruce. 1978. Conducting Educational Research. New York .
I larcourtBraceJovanovichlnc.
Ur, Penny. 1987. Discussionsthat Work : Task-Centered Fluency Practice.
Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Vacca,RichardT. 1981.Content Area Reading.Boston: Brown Co.
Wardhaugh,Ronald. 1969. Reading : A Linguistic Perspective. Nerv York :
HarcourtBrace Inc
Winardi, Lindawati. 1992.The Effect of Advanced Organizer and Experience
Text Relationshipon the ReadingAchievementof the SecondYear tligh
School Students at SMAK Frateran Surabava. Unoublished Thesis.
Surabaya: Widya MandalaUniversity.
Wahyudi,Anrvar. 1996.BahasaInggris untuk SisrvaKelas 2 SLTP. Surakarta:
PT Pabelan.
CONCLUSTON
CHAPTERV
CONCLUSION
This chapterdealswith two parts,The first one is the summaryin which the
writer givesa summaryof the main pointsthat havebeendiscussedin the previous
chapters.The last part is about the suggestions
which includethe suggestionsfor
the English reading comprehensionteachersand also the recommendationfor
furtherresearch.
5.1 Summary
Englishas the internationallanguagehas beenrecognizedas the medium of
communicationor instructionin textbooksor printed materials.In line with this,
since the first year of junior high school and even elementary,students are
acquaintedto all Englishskillsnamelyspeaking,listening,writing, and readingwith
readingas the main emphasis.It is expectedto serve as a basic foundationfor
studentsto be ableto understandthe informationgiven in textbooksor reference
books written in Englishif they continueto highereducation.
However, in fact most high schoolstudentslack the abitityto comprehenda
passage.Moreover, this condition is not supportedwith the way of teaching
readingin school.The largesizeofclass makesthe teacherunableto focus his/her
attention to each student and thus, reducing the students' opportunity to
participatefully during the teachinglearningprocess.
In order to overcomethis problem,the teachershouldbe able to encourage
and at the sametime
the studentsto activelyparticipateduringthe readingpTocess
provide them with the appropriateteachingmethod which enablethem to learn
\ithout dependingtoo much on the teacheras what it is intendedto be in a
classroom.
learner-centered
In this study, the $riter takes the assumption that teaching reading
comprehensionthrough group tvork can help the studentsto comprehendthe
passagebetterand alsoencouragethem to participatein the classroom.
To prove this assumption,the *riter calculatesthe data obtainedduring the
experimentand finds out that there is a significant difference in the students'
reading comprehensionachievementbetrveenthe studentstaught uSing group
rvork anclthe ones taught using the traditional reading technique.The students
taught using group rvork have better reading comprehensionachievementthan the
onestaughtusingthe traditionalreadingtechnique
Besidesthe calculationabove,the writer also calculatesthe effectsof group
rvork on the three types of questionsused to measurethe students' reading
comprehensionachievement.The result is that in answering factual questions,
there is no significantditierencebetrveenthe scoresof the studentstaught using
group work and the onestaught using the traditionalreadingtechnique.In other
words,we can say that both group rvork and the traditionalreadingtechniqueare
useful in helping studcntsanswer factual questions.However, in ansrveringthe
othertypesof questionsnamelythe inferenceand main idea questions,the results
shorvthat the scoresof the studentstaught using group work are higher than the
scoresof the onestaughtusing the traditionalreadingtechnique.In other rvords,
we can say that group work can improve the studenls'reading comprehension
achievementbetter than the traditional readingtechnique.This happensbecause
in group work, studentsget more opportunitiesto participateduring the teaching
leaming process.Their active involvement in the classroomhelps them have
of the materialsbeing studied.As a result,the studentshave
better understanding
better understandingof the contentof the passagervhich enablethem to analyze
the ideasin the passagemore thoroughly.
All of the data during the experiment above are olrtained from the second
year studentsof SLTPK Santo StanislausI Surabayain the academicyear of
1997-1998.
5.2 Suggestions
for the Englishreadingcomprehension
This part dealswith suggestions
for furtherresearch.
andalsotherecommendation
teachers
5.2.1 Suggestionsfor the English Reading ComprehensionTeachers
There are many ways of presentingEnglish reading materials to the
students.The developmentin technologyas rvell as the developmentin the world
of teaching itself have enabled teachersto create many kinds of rnaterials,
teachingtechniques,and alsoteachingleaming activities
what a teachermustbearin mind in applyinga certainteachingtechnique
of the techniqueitselfto meetthe teaching
is the effectiveness
in the classroom
needs.
andthestudents'
objectives
the useof groupwork in teachingreading
In this study,the writer suggests
that teachersdivide
ln applyingthis technique,the writer suggests
comprehension.
the studentsby using random basis. it is better to mix the less able studentsand
the smart ones in each group-By doing this, the groups will be more effective
passage
sincethe membersof each gloup can help one anotherin analyzingthe
gap
and solving the problems given. Besides random groups will close the
betrveenthe less able studentsand the smart ones
The writer also suggeststhat teachersshould actively and continuously
encouragethe studentsto be active and to participatemore during the teaching
rvith
learning process. A class with mixed ability students consists of students
this
different characters.Some are shy while some others are very outgoing.In
case, teachersshould be able to treat each individual student rvith different
easy
approaches.For studentswho have natural outgoingpersonality,it may be
in the
for them to mingle themselveswith the others and to involve themselves
different
discussion.But for those rvho are shy and a little isolated,it may be a
at first to
experiencefor them to work in groups.They may have somedifficulties
the role
mix and to involvethemselvesactivelyduring the disc'rssion.In this case,
gloup to
of teachersis important.Teachersshould supewisethe flow of eaah
in the
knorv rvhich studentshave difficulties to participateduring the discussion
group.Teachersshouldencouragethemtoexpresstheiropinionfreely.Evenif
they give incorrectanswers,teachersshouldnot criticize them but guide them by
clarif-ving the questionsbeing asked or giving the examples so that they get the
ideasand can expresstheir opinion. In this case,studentswill not be discouraged
to answersincethey feel that their eftbrts to respondare worthy. In short, teachers
can be a great help to put them at easeso that eventuallythey overcornetheir
difficultres and can enjoy the natural give-and-takeand rnutual cooperatlon
amongthe studentsin small gfoups.
Finally, the rvriter hopesthat this studywill give valuablecontributionto the
teachingof readingin high school,especiallyin the secondyear students'as an
altemativeway of presentingreadingmaterialsin the classroom'
5.2.2 Recommendationfor Further Research
The rwiter reaiizes that this study is still far from being perfect. In this
study, the effects of group work on the students' reading comprehension
achievementare seen only from the three types of questionsnamely factual,
inference,and main idea questions.The writer expectsthat there will be other
researcherswho will cary out a more thorough study by analyzing the effects of
grouprvorkon manyothertypesofquestions.
As for the treatment which was only given to the secondyear students
during three meetingsdue to the limited time, the writer also hopesthat later on
there will be other researcherswho will conduct an experiment by using a wider
subjector populationand in a longer period in order to get more completeand
more valid results.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBI,IOGRAPIIY
Adenan,Ferry 1989. Let's Discuss Reading. Teflin Joumal, Vol.2, No. 1,
February.
Bejarano, Yael. 1987. A Cooperative Small-Group Methodology in the
LanguageClassroom.TESOL Ouarterl)r,Vol. 21, No. 3, September.
Boeshaar,Stephen.1984.Using Group Mini-Lessons.Enslish TeachinsForum,
Vol. XXII, No. 4' October.
Brumfit, Christopher. 1984. Communicative Methodology in
Teaching.Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
[,anguage
Byrne,Donn. 1976.Teaching Oral English. England: LongmanGroup Ltd.
Chastain,Kenneth. 1976. DevelopingSecond Language Skills : Theory to
Practice. Second Edition. Chicago : Rand McNally College Publishing
Company.
Christison,Mary Ann. 1990. CooperativeLearning in the EFL Classroom.
English TeachineForum,Vol. XXVllI, No. 4, October.
Davies,Norman F. 1980.Oral Fluency Training and Small Groups. English
TeachingForum,Vol. XVIII, No. 3, July.
DepartemenPendidikandan KebudayaanRepublik lndonesia.1993. Kurikulum
Sekolah Nlenengah Umum. Garis-Garis Besar Program Pengajaran
(GBPP).Jakarta.
Dupuis, Mary M. and Eunice N. Askov. 1982. Content Areas Reading : An
Individualized Approach. New Jersey: PrenticeHall Inc.
Eskey,David E. 1986. Teaching Second Language Reading for Academic
Purpose.Massachusetts
: Addison-WesleyPublishing,Co.
Evangelidou,Evangeliaet al. 1990. Reading Skills. EnrrlishTeachinq Forum,
Vol. XVIII, Vol. XNo.4, October.
'feflin
Fachrunazy. 1993. SuggestedTechniques of EFL fnr Large Classes.
Joumal,Vol. VII, No. 2, September.
Goodman,Kenneth. 1973.Analysis of oral Reading Miscues, in Frank smith,
ed., Psycholinguisticsand Reading. New York : Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston.
Gronlund, Norman E. 1982. Constructing Achievement Tests. Third Edition.
Jersey: Prentice-HallInc.
New
Harvey, Anamaria. 1980. Why Reading. EnslisllTeaching Forum, Vol' XVIII'
1 ,J a n u a r y .
No.
Jacobs,GeorgeM. 1996. Cooperative Learning and Group Activities. Teflin
Seminar44, 7-10October.
Jacobs,GeorgeM., Kikuyo MatsumotoandLisa Ilola. 1989.Structuring Student
Interaction to Promote Learning. EnelishTeachingForum,Vol. XXVII,
No. 3,, July.
Karim, Aliyah Abdul. 1989.Power skills in Reading.New York : McGraw Hill
Book Company.
'fhe
Road Towards Reliability. Enelish
Krigas, E. J. 1980. Group work :
TeachingForum,Vol. XXVIII, No. 4, October'
Long, Michael H. and Patricia A. Porter. 1985. Group Work, Interlanguage
fly, Vol. XIX,
Talk, and SecondLanguageAcquisition,TESOL Ouarterly
No.2, June.
Marksheffel,Ned D. 1966.Better Reading in the secondary School : Principles
and Proceduresfor Teachers.New York : RonaldPressCompany'
Mc Greal, Rory. 1989.Coping with Large Classes.EnglishTeachinsForum,
Vol. XXVII, No.2, APril.
Mc Wlrorter, KathleenT. lgg2, Efticient and Flexible Reading. Third Edition.
New York : HarperCollinsPublishers.
Murphey, Tim. 1990. You and I : Adjusting Interaction to Get
Input. EnslishTeachingForum,vol. XXVill, No. 4,
comprehensible
October.
Nelson, Gayle. 1984. Reading : A Student-CenteredApproach' Enelish
TeachinsForum,Vol. XXII, No. 4, October'
Ngadiman,Agustinus.1990.The Effectivenessof the Purpose-BasedModel lbr
Teaching Reading Comprehension at the English Department.
Unpublished
Thesis.Malang: FPS-IKIP.
Nuttal, Christine. 1982. Teaching Reading Skills as a Foreign Language.
London: HeinemannEducationalBooks Inc.
Paulston,ChristinaB. and Mary N. Bruder. 1976.Teaching English a Second
Language : Techniques and Procedures. Massachusetts Winthrop
PublishersInc.
Read,Siew-Flean.1982.Staging Group Activities in the Classroom.Guidelines
A Periodicalfor ClassroomLanquaseTeachers,Vol. IV, No. 2, December.
Said, Habimrdin. 1996. English '94 for SLTP 2. Surabaya: PT Bina Pustaka
Tama.
Shaw, Marvin E. 1981.Group Dinamics : The -Pr;ychology
of Small Group
Behaviour. Nerv York : Mc Graw Hill Book Comoanv.
Smith, Nila B. and Alan Robinson.1980. Ileading Instruction for Today's
Children. SecondEdition. Nerv York : Princeand Hall Inc.
Tuckman, Bruce. 1978. Conducting Educational Research. New York .
I larcourtBraceJovanovichlnc.
Ur, Penny. 1987. Discussionsthat Work : Task-Centered Fluency Practice.
Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Vacca,RichardT. 1981.Content Area Reading.Boston: Brown Co.
Wardhaugh,Ronald. 1969. Reading : A Linguistic Perspective. Nerv York :
HarcourtBrace Inc
Winardi, Lindawati. 1992.The Effect of Advanced Organizer and Experience
Text Relationshipon the ReadingAchievementof the SecondYear tligh
School Students at SMAK Frateran Surabava. Unoublished Thesis.
Surabaya: Widya MandalaUniversity.
Wahyudi,Anrvar. 1996.BahasaInggris untuk SisrvaKelas 2 SLTP. Surakarta:
PT Pabelan.