The effectiveness of teams-games-tournament to teach reading viewed from students’ self-esteem 73

i

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-GAMES-TOURNAMENT

TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM

STUDENTS’ SELF-ESTEEM

(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik

S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)

A Thesis

By:

Izah Farhani

S 890908011

ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GRADUATE S CHOOL

S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY

S URAKARTA

ii ABS TRACT

IZAH FARHANI. The Effectiveness of Teams-Games-Tournament to Teach

Reading Viewed from Students’ Self-Esteem: An Experimental Study at the

Seventh Grade Students of SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010. Thesis. Surakarta: English Education Department Graduate School, Sebelas M aret University of Surakarta. 2010.

This research is aimed at finding out whether: (1) Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than the lecture method to teach reading; (2) students having high self-esteem have better reading skill than those having low self-esteem; and (3) there is an interaction effect between teaching methods and students’ self-esteem on the students’ reading skill.

The research was carried out at SM P Batik Surakarta in the academic year of 2009/2010. The research method used was an experimental study. The population was the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta in the academic year of 2009/2010. The sample was taken by using cluster random sampling. The techniques of collecting the data were a non-test (a questionnaire) and a test technique (a reading test). The two instruments were valid and reliable after both were tried-out. The data were analyzed by using multifactor analysis of variance 2 x 2 and Tukey test.

Based on the result of inferential analysis of the data, there are some research findings that can be drawn. First, Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than the lecture method to teach reading. Second, students who have high self-esteem have better reading skill than those having low self-esteem. Third, there is an interaction effect between teaching methods and students’ self -esteem on the students’ reading skill.

Based on these research findings, it can be concluded that in this experimental research Teams-Games-Tournament is an effective method to teach reading at the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta.

It is hoped that the result of the study can be useful for teachers to determine and select the suitable teaching method for their students so that they can obtain an optimum result of reading achievement.

iii APPROVAL

This thesis has been approved by the consultants to be examined by the Board of Examiners of English Education Department Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University, Surakarta.

Consultant I Consultant II

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd. NIP. 196212311988031009 NIP.195203071980031005

The Head of English Education Department

Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University of Surakarta

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. NIP. 196212311988031009

iv

BOARD OF EXAMINERS

This thesis has been examined by the Board of Thesis Examiners of English Education Department Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University, Surakarta.

On

Board of Examiners Signature

1.

2.

3.

4.

Chairman :

Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M . Pd. NIP. 196101241987021001 Secretary :

Dr. Sujoko, M . A.

NIP. 195109121980031002 Examiner I :

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.

NIP. 196212311988031009 Examiner II :

Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd. NIP. 195203071980031005

………....

………....

………....

………....

The Director of Graduate School

Prof. Drs. Suranto, M . Sc., Ph. D NIP. 195708201985031004

The Head of Graduate School of English Department

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. NIP. 196212311988031009

v

PRONOUNCEMENT

This is to certify that I myself write this thesis, entitled “The Effectiveness of Teams-Games-Tournament to Teach Reading Viewed from

Students’ Self-Esteem (An Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)”. It is not a plagiarism or made by others. Anything related to others’ work is written in quotation, the source of which is listed on the bibliography.

If then this pronouncement proves incorrect, I am ready to accept any academic punishment, including the withdrawal or cancellation of my academic degree.

Surakarta, July, 2010

Izah Farhani NIM : S 890908011

vi MOTTO

Verily, my prayer, my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allah

(Al-

An’am: 162)

vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The writer would like to say alhamdulillaahirabbil ‘aalamiin to Allah who has given everything, so she can complete this thesis as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for getting the graduate degree of Education in English.

The writer is aware that this thesis cannot be finished without other people’s help. Therefore, she would like to express her special appreciation and gratitude to:

1. The Director of Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University for giving her permission to write this thesis.

2. The Head of the English Education Department of Graduate School who has given her support and guidance for writing this thesis.

3. Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. and Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd., the first and the second consultants, for their valuable guidance, advice, and feedback in writing this thesis.

4. Sri Sumarni, S. Pd., the headmistress of SM P Batik Surakarta who has given her permission to carry out the study in the school.

5. Her parents, siblings, sisters-in-law, and close friends by whom the writer has been assisted and encouraged.

The writer realizes that this thesis is still far from being perfect. Therefore, she will accept all constructive criticism. M ay this thesis be useful to increase the quality of the education.

Surakarta, July , 2010

0

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-GAMES-TOURNAMENT

TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM

STUDENTS’ SELF

-ESTEEM

(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik

S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)

A Thesis

By:

Izah Farhani

S 890908011

ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GRADUATE S CHOOL

S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY

S URAKARTA

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the S tudy

M astering English requires mastering the four language skills, namely: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Reading is considered the most important skill among the four language skills. Reading provides any exposure to English. It also provides good model for English writing and opportunities to study language and the way to construct sentences, paragraphs, and texts. By reading, students can absorb a lot of information and knowledge because much information can be gained from books, magazines, newspapers, and bulletins. Simply, reading gives students many advantages.

Therefore, students must have an ability to comprehend texts. The

understanding of the text varies according to both one’s knowledge of the word and the purpose one has in reading. It also varies according to one’s

knowledge of language and of text types. A reader has several possible purposes for reading, and each purpose emphasizes a different combination of skills and strategies. Reading emphasizes many criteria that define the nature of fluent reading abilities, it also reveals the many skills, processes, and knowledge bases that act in combination, and often in parallel, to create the overall reading comprehension abilities. It is necessary to have adequate understanding to suit a purpose since it is central to reading. Students need to understand how texts work and what they do when they read, and they must be able to monitor their own comprehension (Grabe and Stoller, 2002: 9-10).

However, many students have low reading skill which can be seen from their achievement. They have difficulties to know the words in the text and they have low understanding of the message from the text. The students

probably know the words but they don’t know the meaning of the text. Some

students may know the meaning of the words or vocabularies of the text but they cannot get the message of the text. Even, there are some students who

don’t know the meaning of the text at all.

2

M ethod of teaching is one of the important factors in the teaching-learning process. There are many kinds of methods. One of them is Teams-Games-Tournament. Teams-Games-Tournament can be one among the kinds of cooperative method suggested by experts for its superiority. Teams-Games-Tournament is supposed to be appropriate to develop students’ reading skill. Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is the first of the Johns Hopkins cooperative learning methods (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/ learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).

Cooperative learning refers to a broad range of instructional methods in which students work together to learn academic content. The use of

cooperative learning strategies results in improvements both in the students’

achievement and in the quality of their interpersonal relationships. Cooperative learning encourages students to discuss, debate, disagree, and ultimately to teach one another. Cooperative learning has been suggested as the solution for an astonishing array of educational problems: it is often cited as a means of emphasizing thinking skills and increasing higher-order learning; as an alternative to ability grouping, remediation, or special education; as a means of improving race relations and acceptance of mainstreamed students; and as a way to prepare students for an increasingly collaborative work force (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).

M ost cooperative learning lessons can be characterized by the following features: students work cooperatively in teams to master academic materials; teams are made up of high, average, and low achievers; whenever possible, teams include a racial, cultural, and sexual mix of students; and rewards systems are group oriented rather than individually oriented (Arends, 1997: 111). Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 206-207) also mention the characteristics of cooperative learning, as follows: heterogeneous (mixed) groups; group tasks, usually either mastery or project work; rule of behavior is all for one, one for all; group reward is shared equally by individual members.

3

Teams-Games-Tournament is one type of cooperative learning which is easy to implement, involving the activities of all students without a difference in status, involving the role of st udents as peer tutors and an element of the game and reinforcement (http://dudy -adityawan.com/ education /team-games-tournament-method-tgt). Learning activities designed to play in TGT allow students to learn to relax in addition to cultivate responsibility cooperation, healthy competition and the involvement of learning.

Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is a strategy usually used to check for understanding information, for reviewing and test preparation (http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/pdfs/w/ii/TeachingM asters.doc). Johnson (1996: 114) states that Teams-Games-Tournament technique requires student groups to work cooperatively to rehearse information and/or skills before competing in a tournament against other groups. Teachers assign tasks to be completed collaboratively in groups, and eventually groups compete as teams against other teams.

However, many teachers still apply lecture in teaching reading. The activity in lecture is teacher-centered. Lecture encourages one-way communication. Students just become the followers and depend on the teacher during the teaching-learning process. In other words, lecture places students in a passive rather than an active role. The information tends to be forgotten quickly when students are passive.

Another factor influencing the learning process is affective domain. Affective as stated by Brown (2000: 143) refers to emotion and feelings. It is considered the emotional side of human behavior. Stern in Finch (http://www.finchpark.com/arts/) notes that the affective component contributes at least as much and often more to language learning than cognitive skills. In recent years, the importance of affective factors has been of interest in the field of language learning because of their high effects on learning a foreign or a second language (http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/ andres.html).

4

Affective factors in reading can be attitude, motivation, self-esteem, and self-actualization (Davies, 1995: 73). Brown in Aebersold and Field (2000: 8) details several individual factors that influence language learning, including self-esteem, inhibition, risk-taking, anxiety, and motivation. They can be positive or negative factors. All of these factors operate in reading classroom as well. For this reason, researchers call upon reducing anxiety and

inhibition and enhancing students’ motivation and self-esteem in the classroom context.

Self-esteem is the evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself; it expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which an individual believes himself to be capable, significant, successful, and worthy (Coopersmith in Brown, 2000: 103). Such evaluation is built up through repeated experiences of success and failure, other people’s impressions, and the self-appraisals in relation to ideal selves.

Self-esteem is considered as one of the important affective factors

because success or failure of a person depends mostly on the degree of one’s

self-esteem. Stevick in Finch (http://www.eslteachersboard.com/egibin/ articles/index.pl?page=3;read=949) states that success depends less on materials, techniques, and linguistics analysis, and more on what goes on inside and between the people in the classroom. Indeed, success is not measured of how much one gains but of how satisfies he is with his work. Hence, a person should put a high value for his performance and be confident of his achievement because the judgments he makes are the drive for mastering proficiency.

Self-esteem plays a crucial role in learning since it is the best predictors of academic success. It appears that high self-esteem is both a cause and a consequence of better academic grades (Biggs and Watkins, 1995: 75). Dickinson also stresses the importance of self-esteem in language learning (1996: 25). Littlewood (1998: 64) states that a study by Adelaide Heyde found that self-esteem was associated with second language proficiency. It is the

5

most crucial aspect of the affective factors because all are related or caused by self-esteem. Educators have long realized that self-esteem plays a crucial role in learning. Students with high esteem forge ahead academically while those with low esteem fall behind (Atwater, 1990: 155).

Learners with high self-esteem are less likely to feel threatened when communicating in a strange language or in an unfamiliar situation. They may also be more ready to risk making mistakes or projecting a reduced image of themselves (Adelaide Heyde in Littlewood, 1998: 64). They expect to do well in their accomplishments, try hard and try to be successful (Atwater, 1990: 155). M eanwhile, students with low esteem tend to expect the worst, exert less effort on their tasks especially challenging and demanding ones and achieve less success (Atwater, 1990: 155).

M any researchers agree upon the effect of teachers on building or

harming student’s self-esteem. Dornyei (2001: 31) suggests some strategies for ESL/EFL teachers to create a supportive atmosphere in the classroom, namely: establishing a norm of tolerance; encouraging risk-taking, and having mistakes accepted as a natural part of learning; bringing in and encouraging humor, and encouraging learners to personalize the classroom environment according their taste.

To make the students achieve adequate skill in reading, the writer applies Teams-Games-Tournament on the consideration that it can improve

the students’ reading skill and encourage students’ active role in the teaching

-learning process. She also considers the students’ self-esteem (high and low) to know whether Teams-Games-Tournament is suitable for students who have high self-esteem or those who have low self-esteem, and to know whether lecture is suitable for students who have high self-esteem or those who have low self-esteem.

Since students’ self esteem and the method of teaching applied by the teachers are important factors in teaching reading, the writer is interested in

conducting a research entitled: “THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

6

STUDENTS’ SELF-ESTEEM (An Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade

Students of SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)”. B. Problem Identification

Dealing with the background of the study, there are some problems that can be identified:

1. Why do the students tend to have low reading skill? 2. What factors cause low reading skill?

3. Does teacher professionalism affect students’ reading skill?

4. Does the technique or the method of teaching used by teachers influence

students’ reading skill?

5. Is Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) effective to teach reading? 6. Does the students’ self-esteem influence their reading skill?

7. Is it necessary to consider the method of teaching used in terms of the

students’ characteristics like, self-esteem? C. Problem Limitation

The writer realizes that it is impossible to investigate all the problems, therefore, the writer only limits the problems of the research which are

supposed to influence the students’ reading skill, namely: the methods used

by the teacher (Teams-Games-Tournament and lecture) and the students’ self -esteem (high and low).

D. Problem S tatement

From the background of the study, problem identification, and problem limitation, there are three problems that are formulated, as follows: 1. Is Teams-Games-Tournament more effective than lecture to teach reading? 2. Do students who have high self esteem have better reading skill than those

who have low self-esteem?

3. Is there any interaction effect between teaching method and students’

7

E. Objective of the S tudy

This research is aimed to know the influence of teaching method and

students’ self-esteem on the students’ reading skill. Particularly, this research is proposed to know whether or not (1) Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than lecture to teach reading; (2) students who have high self esteem have better reading skill than those who have low self-esteem; and (3) there is an interaction effect between teaching method and the students’ self-esteem

on the students’ reading skill.

F. Benefit of the S tudy

Hopefully, from this study whether the method of teaching used can

increase students’ reading skill or not will be significantly known, so the

writer is able to decide the next step in teaching reading. If the self-esteem

also influences students’ reading skill, it is crucial to have better steps in improving students’ self-esteem in order to have better competence in terms of students who have high self-esteem.

The result of the study can inform the interaction between self-esteem (high and low) and Teams-Games-Tournament toward students’ reading skill. If there is interaction between them, it is necessary to consider the use of Teams-Games-Tournament, which is appropriate to the students who have high self-esteem or those who have low self-esteem. It is hoped that the result of this study can help other researchers who conduct further research at the same subject and can be reference.

8

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Theoretical Description 1. Reading

a. Definition of Reading

Reading is a process whereby one looks and understands what has been written (Williams, 1996: 2). It means that reading is a process of obtaining meaning from written text. Reading is what hap pens when people look at a text and assign meaning to the written symbols in that text. Reading means reacting to a written text as a piece of communication (Wallace, 1996: 4). M eanwhile, Davies (1995: 1) states that reading is private. It is a mental, or cognitive, process which involves a reader in trying to follow and respond to a message from a writer who is distant in space and time. Because of this privacy, the process of reading and responding to a writer is not directly observable.

Reading is the p rocess of perceiving and deriving meaning from what has been written (Spolsky, 1999: 653). Reading is the process of combining textual information with the information a reader brings to a text. In this view, the reading process is not simply a matter of extracting information from the text. Rather, it is one in which the reading activates a range of knowledge in

the reader’s mind that he or she uses, and that, in turn, may be refined and

extended by the new information supplied by the text. Reading is thus viewed as a kind of dialogue between the reader and the text (Widdowson in Carrell, et al., 1996: 56).

Reading is the way to get meaning (a message) from a text (Nuttal, 1996: 4 and 7). It means getting out of the text as nearly as possible the message the writer puts into it. The kinds of assumption one makes about the world depend on what he/she has got from his/her experiences. A useful way of thinking about this is provided by schema theory. The schema is a useful concept in understanding how to interpret texts. The purpose of reading is

9

actually grasping the meaning (the message) out from the text. One can do it if he/she has schemata, the knowledge he/she has got from his/her experiences. The success of interpretation depends on whether his/her schemata are

sufficiently similar to the writers’ or not. But the important thing here is that

the schemata are very useful to help him/her to understand and interpret the text adequately.

Reading is comprised of word recognition and linguistic comprehension (Catts and Kamhi, 2005: 25). The word recognition component translates print into linguistic from, and the comprehension component makes sense of the linguistic information. The process of recognizing printed words is called as decoding. M eanwhile, the process of understanding the message that the print convey is called as comprehension. Therefore, reading involves the reader, the text, and the interaction between reader and text. The text and the reader are the two physical entities necessary for the reading process to begin. It is, however, the interaction between the text and the reader that constitutes actual reading.

Reading is an interactive process, sociolinguistic process, involving a text, a reader, and a social context within which the act ivity of reading takes place (Bernhardt in Celce-M urcia, 2001: 154). In reading, an individual constructs meaning through a transaction with written text that has been created by symbols that represent language. The transaction involves the

reader’s acting on or interpreting the text, and the interpretation is influenced

the reader’s past experience, language background, and cultural framework, as well as the reader’s purpose for reading.

b. What M akes a Reading Text Easy or Difficult Generally, reading texts are easier if:

1) They contain simple language-the structures and vocabulary familiar to the students

2) They are short

10

4) They are clearly organized 5) They are factual

6) They are in standard English 7) The topic is concrete and familiar

8) There is support in the way of layout, titles, pictures, graphs, etc. (Gower, et al., 1995: 95)

c. Ways of Reading

Grellet (1998: 4) mentions the main ways of reading, as follows: 1) Skimming: quickly running one’s eyes over a text to get the gist for it. 2) Scanning: quickly going through a text to find a particular piece of

information.

3) Intensive reading: reading shorter texts, to extract specific information. This is more an accuracy activity involving reading for detail.

4) Extensive reading: reading longer texts, usually for one’s own pleasure. This is a fluency activity, mainly involving global understanding. Extensive reading is the practice of reading large amounts of text for extended periods of time (Celce-M urcia, 2001: 198). Extensive reading may play a role in developing the capacity for critical thinking (M ikulecky and Jeffries, 2007: 3).

d. M odels of Reading

There are three main models of how reading occurs (Aebersold and Field, 2000: 18) as follows:

1) Bottom-up

Reading is viewed as a process of decoding written symbols, working from smaller units (individual letters) to larger ones (words, clauses, and sentences (Nunan, 1998: 33). In other words, we use strategies to decode written forms in order to arrive at meaning.

11

2) Top-down

Top-down theory argues that readers bring a great deal of knowledge, expectations, assumptions, and questions to the text and, given a basic understanding of the vocabulary, they continue to read as long as the text confirms their expectations (Goodman in Aebersold and Field, 2000: 18). 3) Interactive

The interactive theories describe a process that moves both bottom-up and top-down, depending on the type of the text as well as on the reader’s background knowledge, language proficiency level, motivation, strategy use, and culturally shaped beliefs about reading.

e. Purposes for Reading

In general, there are two reasons for reading as stated by Grellet (1998: 4), namely: reading for pleasure and reading for information (in order to find out something or in order to do something with the information the reader gets).

Celce-M urcia (2001: 187) mentions four purposes of reading, as follows:

1) To search for information 2) For general comprehension 3) To learn new information

4) To synthesize and evaluate information

f. Types of Reading Task

There are four types of reading tasks which have been identified from the perspective of reading purpose (Enright, et al. in Qian, 2002: 519), as follows:

1) Reading to find information or search reading.

Reading to find information involves locating factual information in a text or a nonprose document (Guthrie in Qian, 2002: 519) and is the most straightforward type of task among the four.

12

2) Reading for basic comprehension.

Reading for basic comprehension generally refers to comprehending a subset of individual ideas mostly related to the thematic content or the main idea of the text (Enright in Qian, 2002: 519).

3) Reading to learn.

Reading to learn involves the processing of more complex information, such as causal relationships, comparisons and contrasts, and intentions (Carver in Qian, 2002: 519). This type of task requires the reader to reconstruct a coherent mental representation of the text based on the various types of information the reader has found.

4) Reading to integrate information across multiple texts.

Reading to integrate information is the most challenging among the four types. This type of task requires the reader to integrate information from multiple sources, which may include prose, diagrams, charts, or other forms of presentation (Goldman in Qian, 2002: 519).

g. Component Skills and Content Areas of Reading

Within the complex process of reading, six general component skills and content areas of reading have been identified. They are as follows:

1) Automatic recognition skills: a virtually unconscious ability, ideally requiring little mental processing to recognize text, especially for word identification.

2) Vocabulary and structural knowledge: sound understanding of language structure and a large recognition vocabulary.

3) Formal discourse structure knowledge: an understanding of how texts are organized and how information is put together into various genres of text. 4) Content/word background knowledge: prior knowledge of text-related

information and a shared understanding of the cultural information involved in text.

5) Synthesis and evaluation skills/strategies: the ability to read and compare information from multiple sources, to think critically about what one

13

reads, and to decide what information is relevant or useful for one’s

purpose.

6) M etacognitive knowledge and skills monitoring: an awareness of one’s mental processes and the ability to reflect on what one is doing and the strategies one is employing while reading.

(Celce-M urcia, 2001: 154)

h. Fluent Readers

Good readers typically do all of the following: 1) Read rapidly for comprehension.

2) Recognize words rapidly and automatically (without seeming to pay any attention to them).

3) Draw on a very large vocabulary store.

4) Integrate text information with their own knowledge. 5) Recognize the purpose(s) for reading.

6) Comprehend the text as necessary. 7) Shift purpose to read strategically.

8) Use strategies to monitor comprehension. 9) Recognize and repair miscomprehension. 10)Read critically and evaluate information.

(Grabe and Stoller in Celce-M urcia, 2002: 188).

i. M icro Skills for Reading

Brown (2001: 307) proposes fourteen skills the students of English as a second or foreign language need to have in order to become efficient readers, namely:

1) Discriminating among the distinctive graphemes and orthographic patterns of English.

2) Retaining chunks of language of different lengths in short -term memory. 3) Processing writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit the purpose.

14

4) Recognizing a core of words, and interpret word order patterns and their significance.

5) Recognizing grammatical word classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc.), systems (e.g. tense, agreement, pluralization), patterns, rules, and elliptical forms.

6) Recognizing that a particular meaning may be expressed in different grammatical forms.

7) Recognizing cohesive devices in written discourse and their role in signaling the relationship between and among clauses.

8) Recognizing the rhetorical forms of written discourses and their significance for interpretation.

9) Recognizing the communicative functions of written texts, according to form and purpose.

10)Inferring context that is not explicit by using background knowledge. 11)Inferring links and connections between events, ideas, supporting ideas,

etc., deducing causes and effects, and detecting such relations as main idea, supporting idea, new information, given information, generalization, and exemplification.

12)Distinguishing between literal and implied meanings

13)Detecting culturally specific references and interpreting them in a context of the appropriate cultural schemata.

14)Developing and using a battery of reading strategies, such as scanning and skimming, detecting discourse markers, guessing the meaning of words from context, and activating schemata for the interpretation of texts.

Harmer (1998: 8) proposes the following skills in reading: 1) Reading for gist

2) Reading to extract specific information 3) Reading for detailed understanding 4) Reading for information transfer

15

Langan (2002: 582) mentions several important reading skills, namely:

1) Understanding vocabulary in context

2) Summarizing the selection by providing a title for it 3) Determining the main idea

4) Recognizing key supporting details 5) M aking inferences

Burgess and Head (2005: 29-33) mentions a list of reading skills, as follows:

1) Understanding the main ideas

2) Finding specific information and detail 3) Recognizing the writer’s attitude and opinion 4) Identifying the tone

5) Understanding implication

6) Identifying the purpose for which the text was written 7) Understanding text structure and organization

8) Understanding cohesion and coherence

9) Understanding the meaning of specific words in context

Reading involves a variety of skills. The main ones are listed below: 1) Recognizing the script of a language

2) Deducing the meaning and use of unfamiliar lexical items 3) Understanding explicitly stated information

4) Understand information when not explicitly stated 5) Understanding conceptual meaning

6) Understanding the communicative value (function) of sentences and utterances

7) Understanding relations within the sentence

8) Understanding relations between the parts of a text through lexical cohesion devices

16

9) Understanding cohesion between parts of a text through grammatical cohesion devices

10)Interpreting text by going outside it 11)Recognizing indicators in discourse

12)Identifying the main point or important information in a piece of discourse 13)Distinguishing the main idea from supporting details

14)Extracting salient points to summarize

15)Selective extraction of relevant points from a text 16)Basic reference skills

17)Skimming

18)Scanning to locate specifically required information 19)Transcoding information to diagrammatic display

(Grellet, 1998: 4)

In addition, Brindley (1995: 18) mentions the micro-skills for reading, as follows:

1) Understand literal and implied meaning. 2) Skim for gist

3) Scan to extract specific information. 4) Read for overall comprehension.

5) Decode meaning within reasonable time. 6) Interpret text for attitude and style.

Barret in Brown (1995: 85) and in Alderson and Urquhart (1996: xvi) distinguishes five skills in reading, namely:

1) Literal comprehension 2) Reorganization

3) Inferential comprehension 4) Evaluation

17

j. Reading Strategies

Brown (2001: 306-310) proposes ten reading strategies, namely: 1) Identifying the purpose in reading

2) Using graphemic rules and patterns to aid in bottom-up decoding (for beginning level learners

3) Use efficient silent reading techniques for relatively rapid comprehension (for intermediate to advanced level)

4) Skimming the text for main ideas

5) Scanning the text for specific information 6) Semantic mapping or clustering

7) Guessing when you aren’t certain 8) Analyzing vocabulary

9) Vocabulary analysis

10) Distinguishing between literal and implied meaning

11) Capitalizing on discourse markers to process relationships

Grabe and Stoller (2002: 16) also propose sample reading strategies, namely:

1) Specifying a purpose for reading 2) Planning what to do/what steps to take 3) Previewing the text

4) Predicting the contents of the text or section of text 5) Checking predictions

6) Posing questions about the text 7) Finding answer s to posed questions 8) Connecting text to background knowledge 9) Summarizing information

10) M aking inferences

11) Connecting one part of the text to another 12) Paying attention to text structure

18

14) Guessing the meaning of a new word from context 15) Using discourse markers to see relationships 16) Checking comprehension

17) Identifying difficulties

18) Taking steps to repair faulty comprehension 19) Critiquing the author

20) Critiquing the text

21) Judging how well objectives were met

22) Reflecting on what has been learned from the text

k. Types of Classroom Reading Performance

The following are types of classroom reading performance as stated by Brown (2001: 312):

1) Oral and silent reading

For students at the beginning and intermediate levels, oral reading can serve as an evaluative check on bottom-up processing skills, double as a pronunciation check, and serve to add some extra student participation if the teacher wants to highlight a certain short segment of a reading passage. For advance levels, oral reading has some disadvantages, namely: oral reading is not a very authentic language activity; while one student is reading, others can easily lose attention; and it may have the outward appearance of student participation when in reality it is mere recitation. 2) Intensive and extensive reading

Silent reading may be subcategorized into intensive and extensive reading.

Intensive reading calls students’ attention to grammatical forms, discourse

markers, and other surface structure details for the purpose of understanding literal meaning, implications, rhetorical relationship, and the like. M eanwhile, extensive reading is carried out to achieve a general understanding of a usually somewhat longer text, such as book, long article, or essays, etc. M ost extensive reading is performed outside of class time and for pleasure.

19

In conclusion, reading skill is a mental process to get meaning from the text involving activating past experience, language background, and cultural framework. It includes understanding main ideas, finding specific

information and detail, recognizing the writer’s opinion, identifying the

purpose for which the text was written, understanding text structure and organization, and understanding the meaning of specific words in context.

2. Cooperative Learning

a. Definition of Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning is an approach to teaching that makes maximum use of cooperative activities involving pairs and small groups of learners in the classroom (Richards & Rodger, 2001: 192). Cooperative learning is group learning activity organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learners in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others (Olsen and Kagan in Richards & Rodger, 2001: 192).

Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 205) state that cooperative learning is the term used to describe instructional procedures whereby learners work together in small groups and are rewarded for their collective accomplishments. In cooperative learning, the groups or teams typically number from four to six. Their usual tasks are either to collectively learn or master content the teacher has previously presented, or to complete a teacher-assigned project as a team.

Slavin in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis_ 2006. pdf states that cooperative learning refers to instructional methods involving small heterogeneous groups working together, usually toward a common goal. He adds that this approach to learning involves changes to both task structure and incentive structure. The task structure refers to the ways in which the teacher or students set up activities designed to result in student learning where a cooperative structure involves students working together to help one another. The incentive structure moves away from a competitive one in many

20

classrooms to a cooperative one so that the success of one student is positively related to the success of others.

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_ thesis_2006.pdf highlight the importance of how students interact, arguing that it can affect learning, liking of school and other students, as well as self-esteem. Abu and Flowers in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis _ 2006.pdf add to this, stating that cooperative interactions provide students with the skills needed for working with others outside of the school setting. As Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis _ 2006.pdf, point out, however, it is not enough to just put students in groups and tell them to work together for cooperative learning to work. How such groupings are structured will largely determine whether or not they will be more effective that competitive or individualistic groupings. Cooperative learning is important for creating inclusive classroom environments that meet the needs of all students because it takes the heterogeneity into account, encouraging peer support and connection. Given that most classrooms are heterogeneous, it only makes sense to use an approach to teaching and learning which accounts for this heterogeneity.

Cooperative learning refers to a broad range of instructional methods in which students work together to learn academic content. Research comparing cooperative learning and traditional methods has found positive effects on the achievement of elementary and secondary students, especially when two key conditions are fulfilled. First, groups must be working toward a common goal, such as the opportunity to earn recognition or rewards based on group performance. Second, the success of the groups must depend on the individual learning of all group members, not on a single group product. In cooperative learning, all can succeed because each has something unique to contribute to the enterprise (Rivers, 1996: 78).

21

b. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning

All teaching models are characterized, in part, by their task structures, their goal structures, and their reward structures (Arends, 1997: 110). Task structures refer to the way lessons are organized and to the kind of work students carry out in the classroom. It encompasses whether the teacher is working with the class or small groups, what students are expected to accomplish as well as the cognitive and social demands placed on them as they work to accomplish assigned learning tasks. Task structures differ according to the various activities involved in particular teaching approaches. For example, some lessons require students to sit passively while receiving

information from a teacher’s talk; other lessons require students to complete

worksheets and still others to discuss and debate.

A lesson’s goal structure is the amount of interdependence required

of students as they perform their work. Goal structures are individualistic if achievement of the instructional goal requires no interaction with others and is unrelated to how well others do. Competitive goal structures exist when students perceive they can obtain their goals if the other students fail to obtain theirs. Cooperative goal structures exist when students can obtain their goal only when other students with whom they are linked can obtain theirs.

The reward structure for various instructional models can also vary. Just as goal structures can be individualistic, competitive, or cooperative, so too can reward structures. Individualistic reward struct ures exist when a reward can be achieved regardless of what anyone else does. The satisfaction of running a 4-minute mile is an example of an individualistic reward structure. Competitive reward structures are those in which rewards are obtained for individual effort in comparison to others. Grading on a curve is an example of a competitive reward structure as is the way winners are defined in many track and field events. In contrast, situations in which individual effort helps others to be rewarded use cooperative reward structures. Winning at team sports, such as in football, is an example of a

22

cooperative reward system in place, even though teams may compete with each other.

Lessons organized around direct instruction and most other teaching models are characterized by task structures where teachers work mainly with a whole class of students or where students are working individually to master academic content. The goal and reward structures for direct instruction are based on individual competition and effort. On the other hand, as its name implies, the cooperative learning model is characterized by cooperative task, goal, and reward structures. Students working in cooperative learning situations are encouraged and/or required to work together on a common task, and they must coordinate their efforts to complete task. Using cooperative learning, two or more individuals are interdependent for a reward they will share if they are to be successful as a group.

M eanwhile, Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 206-207) state that cooperative learning systems are generally characterized by:

1) The way the groups or teams are made up

According to advocates, including Slavin in Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 206), groups must be heterogeneous in terms of gender, academic ability, race, and other traits. Heterogeneity is promoted for at least two reasons. First, cooperative learning is based partly on the humanistic school of thought about learning. That school of thought focuses on the importance of personal and social development. One of its major objectives is to make students feel better about themselves and to be more accepting of others. M ixed groups offer a major means of achieving this goal.

Another reason to form heterogeneous teams is so that each member will have an equal opportunity to learn, since talent is about equally distributed to each group. Finally, heterogeneity is fostered because students with lower abilities are more likely to improve their achievement in mixed groups than in homogeneous groups. Thus,

23

heterogeneous teams would seem especially beneficial for students who are at risk of academic failure.

2) The kinds of tasks they do

A second way cooperative learning can be characterized is by the kinds of tasks teachers typically assign to the teams. The most common assignment requires each team to master material the teacher presented previously. For example, M rs. Braggins does a presentation on why the seasons change. She then asks the teams to review and learn the material in preparation for a quiz. Another common task is to ask teams to work on projects. M r. Cruz asks his teams to read about the settling of California and then to collaboratively compose a letter as if a settler were writing to relatives in Spain describing the conditions of mission life.

3) The groups’ rules of behavior

Cooperative learning is characterized by rules of behavior required of team members: individual responsibility and accountability to oneself and the team, support and encouragement of team members, peer helping and tutoring, and, of course, cooperation.

4) Their self-esteem and reward systems.

Cooperative learning is characterized by a unique system of rewards. Rather than a mark based on personal effort, the individual

receives a mark based on the team’s achievement. If the students studied

for and took a quiz on why the seasons change, the team’s mark may be

the average score for all team members. In letter-writing assignment, all team members receive the score the letter earns. Again, we can liken such a situation to a sport where the team has a collective score and thereby wins or loses. Of course, this arrangement usually arouses peer pressure to do well and to help others do well. Thus, we think cooperative learning also derives some of its ideas from the behavioral school of thought, particularly operant conditioning and social learning.

24

c. Key Components of Effective Cooperative Learning

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_thesis_2006.pdf outline five key components for effective cooperative learning; positive interdependence, individual accountability, promotive face to face interaction, small group skills, and group processing. 1) Positive Interdependence

It is important for students to perceive themselves as interdependent, sharing a mutual fate which is mutually caused. This

creates a “sink or swim” mentality where the success of the group is

dependent on the success of all of the group members, ensuring a social interdependence in the group. Students come to perceive that they are linked with group mates in such a way that they cannot succeed unless their group mates do (and vice versa) and/or that they must coordinate their efforts with the efforts of others in the group to complete a task. Cooperation allows for positive interdependence where all group members work together to accomplish shared goals. Thus, individuals seek outcomes that are both beneficial to themselves and the group members. Promotive goal interdependence where goals are positively linked in such a way that the probability of one person obtaining his/her goal is positively correlated with the probability of others doing so. Reward interdependence where all members in the group are given the same reward.

2) Individual Accountability

Slavin in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis _ 2006.pdf argues that when cooperative learning is poorly constructed,

cooperative learning methods can allow for the “free rider” effect “in

which some group members do all or most of the work (and learning) while others do little or nothing. The key to eliminating this is to create individual accountability to ensure that all students learn and that no members in the group are ignored. By having both group goals and

25

individual accountability, students are provided with an incentive to help each other and to encourage each other to put forth maximum effort.

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_thesis_2006.pdf argue that individual accountability can be achieved through the use of individual assessment which is then used to determine the success level of the group as a whole. Individual accountability can be achieved by frequently highlighting the contributions of each member, assessing who needs more help, and redundancy among

members’ efforts and identifying unique contributions of each group

member. Teachers need to assess how much effort each member is

contributing to the group’s work, provide feedback to groups and

individual students, help groups avoid redundant efforts by members, and ensure that all members are responsible for the final outcome.

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_thesis_2006.pdf highlight key factors for structuring individual accountability. They are keeping the group size small, giving students individual tests where they cannot seek help form others, randomly choosing students to answer questions, observe the group and record the frequency on contribution of each member, assigning one member to be a

“checker” who asks other group members to explain the reasoning and

rational underlying group answers, and having students teach what they learned to someone else.

3) Promotive face-to-face interaction

The physical arrangement of small heterogeneous groups,

encourages students to help, share, and support each other’s learning. By working closely together, students can promote each other’s success

through explanations, teaching, checking for understanding, discussions, connecting old and new learning.

26

4) Interpersonal and small group skills

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_thesis_2006.pdf argue that the more socially skillful students are, and the more attention teachers pay to teaching and rewarding the use of social skills, the higher the achievement that can be expected within cooperative learning groups. Students need to learn interpersonal skills such as active listening, staying on task, asking questions, conflict management and resolution and so forth.

5) Group processing

Johnson believes that group processing takes place on two levels, in small groups and the whole class. To allow for group processing at the group level, they argued that teachers should allow time and the end of each class for groups to process how effectively the members worked together. Doing so, they argued would: Enable learning groups to focus on maintaining good working relationships among members. Facilitate learning of cooperative skills. Ensure that members receive feedback on their participation in the group. Ensure that students think on the metacognitive as well as cognitive level. Provide a means to celebrate the success of the group and to reinforce positive behaviors. Processing at the class level can be done by having the teacher occasionally observe groups, analyze problems and then provide feedback to the whole class.

Simply, the use of cooperative learning strategies results in improvements both in the achievement of students and in the qualit y of their interpersonal relationships (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/ prof150-155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).

d. Definition of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is the first of the Johns Hopkins cooperative learning methods (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf). Teams-Games- Tournament (TGT) is a strategy usually used to check for understanding

27

information, for reviewing and test preparation (http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/ pdfs/w/ii/TeachingM asters.doc). It works best for information that is relatively objective. TGT is one type of cooperative learning which is easy to implement, involving the activities of all students without a difference in status, involving the role of students as peer tutors and an element of the game and reinforcement (http://dudy -adityawan.com/education/team-games-tournament-method-tgt/)

e. The Procedure of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

There are five main components in Teams-Games-Tournament (http://dudy -adityawan.com/education/team-games-tournament-method-tgt/): 1) Serving Class

At the beginning, teachers deliver learning materials in the classroom presentation, usually done by direct instruction or with lectures, discussions led by teachers. At the same time of presentation of this class, students should really pay attention and understand the material presented by the teachers because it helps students perform better at work and at the game because the game score will determine the score of the group.

2) Group (Team)

Groups usually consist of 4 to 5 students who are members of heterogeneous views of academic achievement, gender, and race or ethnicity. The group of the group is to further explore the material with friends and more specific group to prepare group members to work properly and optimally at the time of the game.

3) Game

Game consists of questions which are designed to test students’ knowledge gained from classroom presentation and study groups. M ost games consist of simple questions numbered. Students choose a numbered card and try to answer the questions according to the number. Students who correctly answer that question will get a score. These scores of students who later collected for the tournament week.

28

4) Tournaments

Tournaments are usually conducted on weekends or on each unit after the teacher and the classroom presentation group work on the worksheet. The teacher divides students into several table tournaments. The three highest student achievements grouped in table I, three more students on table II and so on.

5) Team Recognize (Group Award)

Teachers then announce the winning group, each team will receive a gift certificate or if the average score to meet the specified criteria. Team

earned the nickname “Super Team” if the average scores of 45 or more, “Great Team” when the average reached 40-45, and “Good Team” if the average is 30-40.

TGT uses the same teacher presentations and teamwork as in STAD, but replaces the quizzes with weekly tournaments (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/documents/ Slavincooplrng.pdf). In these, students compete with members of other teams to contribute points to their team scores. Students compete at three-person "tournament tables" against others with similar past records in mathematics. A "bumping" procedure changes table assignments to keep the competition fair. The winner at each tournament table brings the same number of points to his or her team, regardless of which table it is; this means that low achievers (competing with other low achievers) and high achievers (competing with other high achievers) have equal opportunities for success. As in STAD, high-performing teams earn certificates or other forms of team rewards. TGT is appropriate for the same types of objectives as STAD.

Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 207) also states that t he procedure of TGT follows STAD except that, instead of an individual quiz being given, the teams compete against one another. It is supported in http://www.csos.jhu.edu/ crespar/techReports/Report11.pdf that TGT is the same as STAD except that students play academic games with members of the other teams to add points

29

to an overall team score. Instead of quizzes, there are weekly tournament tables composed of four-member teams, with each member contributing points to the particular team score. In STAD, students work in four-member, heterogeneous learning teams. First the teacher provides the lesson content through direct instruction. Then, students work in their teams to help each other master the content, using study guides, worksheets, or other material as a basis for discussion, tutoring, and assessment among students. Following this, students take brief quizzes, on which they cannot help each other. Teams can earn recognition or privileges based on the improvement made by each team member over his or her own past record.

The TGT procedure is: teacher p resentation, teamwork, team-versus-team competition, scoring, and team-versus-team reward (Cruickshank,, 1999: 207). In the team-versus-team competition phase, each member of a team is assigned to a table where he or she will compete against members from other teams. Low achievers compete with other low achievers, and high achievers compete with other high achievers for equal points. Thus, the impact of low achievers is equal to that of high achievers.

Another source mentions the procedures of TGT, namely:

1) Students work in a Home Teams of three and review the information learned.

2) They then break into Tournament Groups where one student from each group gets together with two students, each from one other group.

3) Tournament groups then respond to a number of questions. The questions are placed on cards with the answers on the back.

4) When they have completed the questions, or the time is up, they return to their home team and add up their individual tournament scores. The group with the most points receives an incentive.

30

f. The Advantages of TGT

The following are the advantages of TGT:

1) TGT is a general cooperative learning method adaptable to most subjects and grade levels. TGT applies to most subjects and grade levels (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/ readings/documents/ Slavincooplrng.pdf).

2) In studies of methods like TGT, effects on achievement have been consistently positive (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof 150 -155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).

3) TGT emphasizes the use of group goals (in this case, recognition) in which teams can only achieve success if each team member can perform well on an independent assessment. This motivates team members to do a good job of teaching and assessing each other. (Fashola, et al. in http://www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report11.pdf). TGT brings positive effects on intergroup relations, including follow-ups of intergroup friendships several months after the end of the studies (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/

documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).

4) It increases students’ self-esteem, motivation, altruism, and respect for others and decreases prejudice (Spolsky, 1999: 558).

TGT requires interaction among students which is beneficial for them

because it influences students’ educational aspirations and achievement, develop social competencies, and encourage taking on perspectives of others (Johnson, 1996: 112). Furthermore, Orrnstein and Lasley (2000: 323) state that cooperation among students can help foster: positive and coherent personal identity, self-esteem, knowledge and trust of others, communication skills, acceptance and support of others, wholesome intergroup relationships, and reduced conflicts among students.

31

3. Lecture

a. Definition of Lecture

Lecture is derived from the Latin word “legere” which means to read (https://www.csupomona.edu/~jkupsh/instructional/Text_and_Worksheets/ text5.pdf). Lecture is an oral presentation intended to present information or teach students about a particular subject (http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/ Lecture). Lecture is used to convey critical information, history, background, theories and equations. It is widely known that lecture is usually applied by teachers. Good and Brophy (1990: 328) state that lecturing is commonly used because it is efficient (in brief time, the teacher can expose students to content that might take them much longer to locate on their own). It can be used with groups or entire classes rather than just with individuals, it gives the teacher control over the content, and it is easily combined with other methods and adjustable to fit the available time, the physical setting and situational constraints.

b. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Lecture

There are some benefits and weaknesses of lecturing in teaching and learning process. The strong facts coming from lecture are as follows:

1) Lecture can present large amounts of information. 2) It can be presented to large audiences.

3) It presents little risk for students.

4) It appeals to students whose learn by listening.

(Bonwell in http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/cl/advlec.html).

Further, M oore (1999: 181) mentions the strengths of lecture as follows:

1) Lecture is an excellent way of presenting background information 2) A short lecture can effectively wrap up unit, an activity, or a lesson. 3) Lecture is time-efficient; that is, p lanning time is devoted to organizing

32

However, critics point out that lecturing is mainly a one-way method of communication that does not involve significant audience participation. Therefore, lecturing is often contrasted to active learning. This passive mode of lecture although still common in education can easily be transformed into a more active learning process. Lectures delivered by talented speakers can be highly stimulating; at the very least, lectures have survived in academia as a quick, cheap and efficient way of introducing large numbers of students to a particular field of study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecture).

Some disadvantages of lecture are stated below:

1) Lecture fails to provide instructors with feedback about the extent of student learning

2) Information tends to be forgotten quickly when students are passive 3) Lecture presumes that all students learn at the same pace and are at the

same level of understanding

4) Lecture emphasizes learning by listening, which is a disadvantage for students who have other learning style

(Bonwell in http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/doingcl/advlec/ htm).

M oore (1994: 182) states that lecture has several serious flaws, namely:

1) Lecture fosters passive learning, with very low student involvement. Students are expected, and even encouraged, to sit quietly, listen, and perhaps take notes.

2) It is not good for helping students develop skills in thinking, problem solving, and creativity.

3) Lectures frequently are boring and do not motivate.

4) Because lecture tends to focus on the lowest level of cognition, understanding and transfer are often limited.

33

5) It may lead to the development of discipline problem. M ost lectures

generate little interest, and students’ attention soon wanes and turns to

more stimulating and often undesirable activities.

4. Self- Esteem

a. Definition of Self-Esteem

M any experts have the similar perspectives related to what self-esteem is. Newman and Newman (2009: 259) define self-self-esteem as an evaluation of worthiness. Self-esteem is the overall evaluation of one’s self -worth or self-image (Santrock, 2006: 83). Self-esteem is an evaluative judgment of self-worth (Woolfolk, 2007: 85). It is the evaluative feelings associated with our self-image (Williams and Burden, 1997: 97). Self-esteem is the personal judgment we make about our own worth (Atwater, 1990: 154). Self-esteem is the students’ evaluations and feelings about themselves (Woolfolk, 2007: 88). In other words, self-esteem refers to how the students evaluate and feel about themselves. Such evaluation is built up through

repeated experiences of success and failure, other people’s impressions, and the self-appraisals in relation to ideal selves.

Further, Woolfolk (2007: 85) states that self-esteem is the value each of us places on our own characteristics, abilities, and behaviors. It means that self-esteem is related to characteristics, abilities, and behaviors. Self-esteem means how positively or negatively we feel about ourselves (Passer and Smith, 2004: 441). Self-esteem is the component of personality that encompasses our positive and negative self-evaluations (Feldman, 2005: 334).

In other words, students’ self-esteem can be either positive or negative. Students may have either high or low self-esteem.

Lickona in Parsons, et al. (2001: 80) defines self-esteem as a

student’s sense of mastery or competence. It means that self-esteem is strongly

related to the students’ judgment about their competence. Self esteem may

reflect a belief about whether someone is intelligent and attractive (Santrock, 2006: 84). Self-esteem is a self-judgment of worth or value, based on feelings

34

of efficacy, a sense of interacting effectively with one’s own environment

(Spolsky, 1999: 557). It can be said that the students’ feeling of efficacy

influences their-judgment of worth.

The term self-esteem has been used to refer to some hypothetical overall or global level of self-evaluation or self-regard (Corsini, 1994: 361). Self-esteem is the way one feels about oneself, including the degree to which one possesses self-respect and self-acceptance (Corsini, 1994: 361). Self-esteem is the sense of personal worth and competence that persons associate with their self-concepts (Corsini, 1994: 361). M eanwhile, M altby (1995: 336) states that self-esteem refers to generalized feelings about the value we place on our attributes and personality.

Furthermore, Coopersmith in Brown (2000: 103) gives the following definition:

“By self-esteem, we refer to the evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself; it expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which an individual believes himself to be capable, significant, successful, and worthy. In short, self-esteem is a personal judgment of worthiness that is expressed in the attitudes that the individual holds towards himself. It is a subjective experience which the individual conveys to

others by verbal reports and other overt expressive behavior.”

b. Sources of Self-Esteem

Newman and Newman (2009: 259) state that self-esteem is based on three sources, namely:

1) M essages of love, support, and approval from others

Views of the self as being loved, valued, admired, and successful contribute to a sense of worth. By contrast, views of the self as being ignored, rejected, scorned, and inadequate contribute to a sense of worthlessness.

2) Specific attributes and competencies

Information about specific aspects of the self is accumulated through experiences of success and failure in daily tasks or when particular aspects

35

3) The way one regards those specific asp ect of the self in comparison with

others and in relation to one’s ideal self

Self-esteem is influenced by the value one assigns to specific competencies

in relation to one’s overall life goals and personal ideals.

c. Elements of Self-esteem

Self-esteem includes two important components, namely: a sense of self-efficacy and a sense of self-respect or worthiness (Branden in http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem). Self-efficacy is beliefs

in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainment (Bandura in Woolfolk, 2007: 332).

Self-esteem seems to be composed of several elements that contribute

to students’ sense of worth (Elliott, et al., 2000: 101), namely:

1) A sense of physical safety

Students who feel physically secure aren’t afraid of being harmed, which helps to develop feelings of confidence.

2) A sense of emotional security

Students who aren’t humiliated or subjected to sarcasm feel safe

emotionally, which translates into a willingness to trust others. 3) A sense of identity

Students who know who they are have achieved a degree of self-knowledge that enables them to take responsibility for their actions and relate well with others.

4) A sense of belonging

Students who are accepted by others are comfortable in seeking out new relationships and begin to develop feelings of independence and interdependence.

5) A sense of competence

Students who are confident in their ability to do certain things are willing to try to learn to do new things and persevere until they achieve mastery.

36

d. Characteristics of Students Having High and Low Self-Esteem

Self-esteem has a high impact on success in EFL/ESL learning (http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/andres.html). Self-esteem plays a crucial role in learning since it is the best predictors of academic success (Biggs and Watkins, 1995: 75). Littlewood (1998: 64) states that a study by Adelaide Heyde found that self-esteem was associated with second language proficiency. Learners with high self-esteem are less likely to feel threatened when communicating in a strange language or in an unfamiliar situation. They may also be more ready to risk making mistakes or projecting a reduced image of themselves.

Atwater (1990: 155) states that the students having high level of self-esteem are generally pleased with themselves and make inferences about themselves that are slightly more positive than might be expected. Self-esteem

exerts a powerful influence on students’ expectations, their judgments about

themselves and others, and their behavior. Students with high self-esteem are willing to test the validity of their inferences about themselves. Having a high level of self-acceptance, they tend to be accepting of others, including those with different opinions than themselves, and enjoy satisfying relationships with others. They also expect to do well in their accomplishments, try hard and try to be successful. They are inclined to attribute their success to their abilities, and to make due allowance for circumstances in interpreting their failures. As a result, students with high self-esteem generally enjoy a great deal of self-confidence and have a realistic assessment of their strengths and weaknesses.

M eanwhile, the students having low self-esteem are generally less willing to put their ideas about themselves to the test and are never really convinced of their own self-assessment. Furthermore, students with low level of self-esteem tend to expect the worst, exert less effort on their tasks, especially challenging, demanding ones, and achieve less success. Even, when students having low self-esteem achieve success, they are less apt to attribute their success to their abilities or to enjoy it. In other words, students with high

37

esteem forge ahead academically while those with low esteem fall behind (Atwater, 1990: 155).

Dealing with the characteristics of students having high and low self-esteem, Passer and Smith (2004: 442) state that self-esteem is related to many positive behaviors and life outcomes. Students with high self-esteem are happier with their lives, have fewer interpersonal problems, achieve at a higher and more consistent level, are less susceptible to social pressure, and are more capable of forming satisfying love relationship. In contrast, students with low self-esteem are less likely to try to make themselves feel better when they experience negative moods in response to perceived failures in their lives. This is may be one reason why they are more prone to psychological problems, such as anxiety and depression, to physical illness, and to poor social relationships, and underachievement.

e. Effects of Self-Esteem

Self esteem is one of our most basic psychological needs. The degree of our self-esteem (or lack of it) impacts every major aspect of our lives. It has profound effects on our thinking processes, emotions, desire, values, choices, and goals. Deficit in self-esteem contribute to virtually all psychological problems (http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem).

M eanwhile, Sprinthall, et al. (1998: 562-563) mentions the effects of self-esteem, as follows:

1) Effects on academic performance

Since the more academically successful students tend to display higher level of various affective components, including self-esteem, it might seem to follow

that increasing any student’s feeling of self-esteem would then be translated into an increase in academic performance

2) Effects on later success

Closely related to the issue of self-esteem is that students will be more motivated and work harder in school if they believe that their efforts will lat er pay off in the job market.

71

The procedures of Teams-Games-Tournament are: (1) the teacher explains the material; (2) the students work in a group of four; (3) each member of a group plays a game in the given tournament table with members from other groups; (4) the students go back to their groups to add up their individual tournament scores; (5) the teacher announces the winning group and gives certificates to groups based on specified criteria.

Hopefully, by applying the suitable teaching method, that is Teams-Games-Tournament, the students are able to obtain an optimum result in reading achievement.

C. S uggestion 1. For Teachers

a. Teachers can use Teams-Games-Tournament to teach reading to improve students’ reading skill.

b. Teachers have to consider that self-esteem plays a crucial role in learning.

2. For Students

a. Students must be more active in the teaching and learning process in order to improve their reading skill.

b. Students having low self-esteem should encourage themselves and realize the importance of active involvement in the teaching learning process.

3. For Other Researchers

a. Other researchers can use this result of the study as the starting point to continue the next study.

b. They are also able to do a better study by developing another research with different attributive variables, such us students’ risk-taking, intelligence, or language attitude.

72

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aebersold, Jo Ann and Field, M ary. 2000. From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Alderson, J. Charles and Urquhart, A. H. 1996. Reading in a Foreign Language. London: Longman.

Andres, Veronika de. 2002-2003. The Influence of Affective Variables on EFL/ESL Learning and Teaching. The Journal of the Imagination in Language Learning and Teaching. Volume VII: http://www.njcu.edu/ CILL /vol7/andres.html.

Arends, I. Richard. 1997. Classroom Instruction and Management. New York: M cGraw-Hill.

. 2004. Learning to Teach. 6th ed. New York: M cGraw-Hill. Atwater, Eastwood. 1990. Psychology of Adjustment: Personal Growth in a

Changing World. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Bennett, Barrie and Rolheiser, Carol. 2001. Teaching Masters: Adapted from Beyond Monet, The Artful Science of Instructional Integration. Jan Kielven: http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/pdfs/w/ii/T eachingMasters.doc.

Biggs, John and Watkins, David. 1995. Classroom Learning: Educational Psychology for the Asian Teacher. London: Prentice Hall.

Brindley, Geoff. 1995. Language Assessment in Action. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Brown, H. Douglas. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Longman.

. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An3 Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Longman.

Brown, James Dean. 1995. The Element of Language Curriculum: A Systematic Approach to Program Development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Burgess, Sally and Head, Katie. 2005. How to Teach for Exams. Essex: Longman.

73

Carrell, Patricia L, et al. 1996. Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Catts, Hugh W. and Kamhi, Alan G. 2005. The Connections Between Language and Reading Disabilities. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Celce-M urcia, M arianne. 2001. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning.

Christensen, Larry B. 2007. Experimental Methodology. 10th ed. London: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Corsini, Raymond J. 1994. Encyclopedia of Psychology. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Creswell, John W. 2008. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. New Jersey: M errill Prentice Hall.

Cruickshank,, Donald R., et al. 1999. The Act of Teaching. 2nd ed. New York: M cGraw- Hill College.

Davies, Florence. 1995. Introducing Reading. England: Penguin Books.

Dornyei, Zoltan. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Elliott, Stephen N., et.al. 2000. Educational Psychology: Effective Teaching, Effecting Learning. 3rd ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill

Fashola, et al. 1997. Effective Programs for Latino Students in Elementary and Middle Schools. University of California at Santa Barbara

Feldman, Robert S. 2005. Understanding Psychology. 7th ed. New York: The M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Fraenkel, Jack R. and Wallen, Norman E. 2000. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. 4th ed. New York: M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Good, Thomas L. and Brophy, Jere E. 1990. Educational Psychology: A Realistic Approach. New York: Longman.

74

Grellet, Franqoise. 1998. Developing Reading Skills: A Practical Guide to Reading Comprehension Exercises. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex: Longman.

http://dudy -adityawan.com/education/team-games-tournament-method-tgt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Lecture. http://www.adprima.com/teachmeth.htm.

http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem.

https://www.csupomona.edu/~jkupsh/instructional/Text_and_Worksheets/ text5. pdf.

http://www.eslteachersboard.com/egibin/ articles/index.pl?page=3;read=949

http://www.finchpark.com/arts/

http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/ andres.html

http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/cl/advlec.html

Johnson, Burke and Christensen, Larry. 2000. Educational Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Johnson, David W., et al. 2000. Cooperative Learning Methods: A Meta-Analysis. M innesota: http://www.co-operation.org/pages/cl-methods.html.

Johnson, Karen E. 1996. Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Langan, John. 2002. English Skills with Reading. 5th ed. Boston: M cGraw Hill. Littlewood, William T. 1998. Foreign and Second Language Learning. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

M altby, Florence, et al. 1995. Educational Psychology: An Australian and New Zealand Perspective. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

75

M ason, Emanuel J. and Bramble, William J. 1997. Research in Education and the Behavioral Sciences: Concepts and Methods. London: Brown and Benchmark Publishers.

M ikulecky, Beatrice S. and Jeffries, Linda. 2007. Advanced Reading Power: Extensive Reading, Vocabulary Building, Comprehension Skills, Reading Faster. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

M oore, Kenneth D. 1999. Middle and Secondary School Instructional Methods. 2nd ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill College.

Newman, Barbara M . and Newman, Philip R. 2009. Development Through Life: A Psychosocial Approach. 10th ed. New York: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Norman, G. Dion. 2005. Using STAD in an EFL Elementary School Classroom in South Korea: Effects on Student Achievement, Self-esteem, and Attitude Toward Cooperative Learning. University of Toronto.

Nunan, David. 1992. 1998. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nuttal, Christine. 1996. Teaching Reading Skill in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

Orrnstein, Allan C. and Lasley, Thomas J. 2000. Strategies for Effective Teaching. 3rd ed. Boston: M cGrawHill.

Parsons, Richard D., et al. 2001. Educational Psychology: A Practitioner-Researcher Model of Teaching. London: Wadsworth.

Passer, M ichael W. and Smith, Ronald E. 2004. Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behavior. New York: The M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Qian, David D. 2002. September. Investigating the Relationship Between Vocabulary Knowledge and Academic Reading Performance: An Assessment Perspective. A Journal of Research in Language Studies: Language Learning. 52 (3), 513.

Richards, Jack C and Rodgers Theodore S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rivers, Wilga M . 1996. Communicating Naturally: Theory and Practice in

76

Santrock, John W. 2006. Human Adjusment. Boston: M cGraw-Hill.

Silberstein, Sandra. 1994. Techniques and Resources in Teaching Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Spolsky, Bernard. 1999. Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Oxford: Elsevier.

Sprintal, Richard C., et al. 1998. Educational Psychology: A Developmental Approach. 7th ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill.

Sudjana. 2002. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: PT Tarsito Bandung.

Suharsimi Arikunto. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.

Wallace, Catherine. 1996. Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wiersma, William. 2000. Research Methods in Education: An Introduction. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Williams, Eddie. 1996. Reading in the Language Classroom. Hertfordshire: Phoenix ELT.

Williams, M arion and Burden, Robert L. 1997. Psychology for Language Teachers: a Social Constructivist Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Woolfolk, Anita. 2007. Educational Psychology. 10th ed. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.