THE EFFECT OF STUDENT TEAM ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) METHOD ON STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT.
THE EFFECT OF STUDENT TEAM ACHIEVEMENT
DIVISION (STAD) METHOD ON STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement
for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
PUTRA PANGIHUTAN TUA TAMBUNAN
Reg.Number: 2113121056
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2015
ABSTRACT
Tambunan, Putra Pangihutan Tua. 2113121056. The Effect of Student Team
Achievement Division (STAD) Method on Students’ Reading Comprehension
Achievement. A Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of
Medan. 2015.
This study deals with the effect of Student Team Achievement Division (STAD)
method on students’ reading comprehension achievement. The objective of the
study is to find out whether STAD method significantly affects the students’
reading comprehension achievement or not. This study was conducted by using
experimental design. The population of the study was the students of grade X of
SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo in the academic year of 2014/2015, there were 4
parallel classes of grade X. There were two classes have been selected by
applying random sampling. There were Experimental group (X-1) was taught by
applying STAD method, while the control group (X-2) was taught by applying
conventional method. The data of the study was obtained from the students’ score
of writing test. To determine the reliability of the test, the writer used KuderRichardson (KR21) formula. Based on the data calculation showed that the
coefficient of reliability of the test was 0.81. It shows that the test was reliable and
the reliability was high. There were two data used in this study. They were pretest and post-test. The data were analyzed by applying t-test formula. After
analyzing the data, the result of the study showed that t-observed (3.71) was
higher than t-table (2.000) (t-observed ˃ t-table) at the level of significance of α =
0.05 and at the degree of freedom (df) = 58. It can be concluded that applying
STAD method significantly affects on the students’ reading comprehension
achievement, or in other words, the hypothesis is accepted.
Key Words : Students’ Achievement, Reading Comprehension, Descriptive Text,
STAD Method.
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The writer’s first gratitude absolutely goes to the Almight Lord Jesus
Christ for providing the countless blessing, never ending love and guidance to the
writer. It is just another blessing from God to the writer so the writer can finish
this final project, as the requirements to obtain the S1 Degree of Sarjana
Pendidikan at English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan.
In the process of doing this thesis, many people have given their
participation such as their support, motivation and pray. Therefore, the writer
would like to express his gratitude and special thanks to :
Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom. M.Pd., as the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Languages and
Arts.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English and Literture
Department.
Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English Department..
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.S., M.Hum., as the Head of English Education
Study Program.
Dra Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed as his Academic Advisor
Drs Willem Saragih Dipl;Appl, M.Hum as his Thesis Consultant
Indra Hartoyo ,S.Pd., M.Hum., as his Thesis Consultant
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning M.Pd., Rita Suswati, S.Pd, M.Hum, as his
Thesis Reviewer.
Euis Sriwahyuningsih, M.Pd., the academic staff and adminitrative staff.
Sir Pantes, the staff of English Education and Literature Department.
Berti Tumangger S.Pd as the Head Master of SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo,
for his supports to the writer so the writer could do the research.
ii
His beloved parents, M. Tambunan and H Siallagan for giving the
bestest from the very best of them, their love, time, prayers and all the
advices especially in the time of completing this thesis, the writer’s special
gratitude also goes to his dearest brothers Denra Tambunan.
His beloved uncle and aunt Dr. Haposan Siallagan, SH, MH and Lusia
Butarbutar, SE. for giving support and many advices during study period
in the university. And also his cousin Mahendra, Mahendro, and Mitcel,
thanks for your help.
His best friends from Regular C 2011 especially Partners In Crime (
Nancy, Ade, Connie, Christanti,
Dicky,
Renol,
Sartika)
for
unforgettable and amazing 4 years with them. And also with another
members of Regular C 2011, thanks for your support to me.
Medan, September 2015
The Writer,
Putra Pangihutan Tua Tambunan
Reg. No. 2113121056
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ....................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Study ............................................................................1
B. The Problem of Study ..................................................................................3
C. The Object of Study .....................................................................................4
D. The Scope of Study ......................................................................................4
E. The Significant of the Study .........................................................................4
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Framework ................................................................................5
1. Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension ................................5
2. Reading and Reading Comprehension .....................................................6
a. Reading ...............................................................................................6
b. The Purpose of Reading ......................................................................7
c. Reading Comprehension .....................................................................8
d. Level of Comprehension ...................................................................10
1) Literal Comprehension .................................................................10
2) Interpretive Comprehension .........................................................11
3) Critical Comprehension ...............................................................11
4) Creative Comprehension ..............................................................11
e. Assesment of Reading Comprehension................................................ 12
3. Narrative .................................................................................................13
4. Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) ......................................14
a. Definition of STAD ................................................................................ 14
b. Process of Using STAD ......................................................................... 16
iv
c. The Advantages and Weaknesses of STAD ........................................ 17
5. Questioning-Answer Method .................................................................18
B. Relevant Studies.. .......................................................................................19
C. Conceptual Framework.. ............................................................................20
D. Hypothesis ..................................................................................................22
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Design .........................................................................................23
B. Population and Sample ...............................................................................23
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data .............................................................24
D. Scoring the Test .........................................................................................25
E. The Procedure of Research .........................................................................25
F. The Validity and Reliability of the Test .....................................................29
1. The Validity of the Test .........................................................................29
2. The Reliability of the Test ......................................................................30
G. The Analysis of Data ..................................................................................31
H. Statistical Hypothesis .................................................................................31
CHAPTERIV : DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. The Data .....................................................................................................33
B. Data Analysis .............................................................................................34
C. Testing of Hypothesis .................................................................................37
D. Research Findings ......................................................................................38
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions ................................................................................................40
B. Suggestions.................................................................................................40
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................41
APPENDIX ...........................................................................................................43
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.1 The Students’ Score In Reading.............................................................23
Table 3.2 Specification of the Test ........................................................................25
Table 3.3 Teaching Procedure for Experimental Group ........................................26
Table 3.4 Teaching Procedure for Control Group ........................................................... 28
vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Score of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Experimental Group ...........43
Appendix B The Score of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Control Group ....................44
Appendix C The Score of Reliability of The Test .................................................45
Appendix D The Calculation of T-Test ................................................................47
AppendixE T-Table Distribution ................................................................................. 48
Appendix F Reading Test ......................................................................................50
Appendix G Lesson Plan for Experimental Group ................................................61
Appendix H Lesson Plan for Control Group .............................................................. 81
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Study
Language mastery is divided into four skills namely listening, speaking,
reading, and writing. Reading is one of skills is very important in learning
English. According to Grabe and Stoller (2002:4) reading can be taught as a way
to draw information from the text and to form an interpretation of that
information. It brings reading as one of many ways to recognize everything that
happened in the world. They also explain that without reading, the opportunities
for improving one’s life is limited. So, people are expected to increase their
interest in reading information and try to develop their reading ability. Reading
ability can be developed as much as the reading interest is increased too. People
are possible to use some reading strategies to make them fluent and interested in
reading. According to Grabe and Stoller (2002:15) strategies are often defined as a
set of abilities under conscious control of the reader.
Reading is one of the skills which is important in developing students’
knowledge. Moreover, reading is one skill that is tested in the National
Examination. In the latest Indonesia’s Curriculum (KTSP), students are expected
to be able to comprehend the meaning of both interpersonal and transactional
written text formally and informally in the forms of recount, narrative, procedure,
descriptive and report in daily life context. Even in the national examination
which was conducted for the third level of senior high school in year 2014, we can
foind there was about 75% of the test is about reading.
1
2
Based on the researcher’ observation in SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo, he
observed that the process of reading a text was still a serious problem for the
students. Students’ ability to relate or to connect their experiences with the ideas
presented in the text. However, they were actually able to read English words and
sentences. The difficulties made them unmotivated to read, since they
preconceived that the theme or topic of reading was not interesting for them. The
students also felt bored while reading due to being unmotivated. Some of the
students just read the text without trying to connect the presented ideas of text
with their thinking patterns. The problem to contextualize the difficult words that
they found also led them to achieve what actually they should have
comprehended. These problems finally arose and they were unable to achieve the
desired reading comprehension.
In addition, based on the observation in that school, the score of minimum
competence (KKM) of English subject in SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo is 70. The
English teacher usually uses Questioning-Answer Method to teach reading. Here
are the recapitulations of students’ scores in reading by using Questioning-Answer
Method.
Table 1.1
Students’ Scores of Reading Comprehension Tests in Two Semester
(2014 – 2015)
Semester
Score
Students
Percentage
Mean
< 70
16 Students
45.7%
1st Semester 2014/ 2015
51.9
≥ 70
19 Students
54.3%
< 70
17 Students
48.5%
2nd Semester 2014/ 2015
50.9
≥ 70
18 Students
42.5%
Source: Students’ accumulated score of Grade X1 students at SMA Negeri 1
Simanindo academic year 2014/2015
3
Based on the description above, we found that many students did not have
the passing grade because they had difficulties to comprehend the text. Especially
in narrative text, students face difficulties because of reluctance to question or less
motivation, difficult to build and develop their ideas, difficult to get the main idea
from the text, and confused in determining the generic structure of the text. The
Questioning-Answer Method was not effective. This situation made the students’
motivation in reading decrease. Sharon (2003:39) says that the learning of
language depends not so much on the number of years it is studied, but on the
motivation of the students, the type of teachers, method of teaching adopted, and
instructional material designed.
From the problems mentioned above, the researcher chooses to conduct
this study by using Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method.
Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method the researcher believe that
all of the students in the class will be more active in teaching and learning
process. It can also increase their motivation and achievement in Reading. From
the explanation above, the writer is interested in conducting a study under the title
“The effect of Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method on Students’
Reading Comprehension Achievement.”
B. The Problem of The Study
Based on the background of the study, the research problem is formulated
as follows: “Is student achievement in reading comprehension taught by Student
Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method higher than that taught by using
Questioning-Answer Method?”
4
C. The Objective of the Study
In relation to the problem above, the objective of the study is to find out
the student achievement in reading comprehension taught by Student Team
Achievement Division (STAD) Method is higher than that taught by using
questioning-answer Method
D. The Scope of the Study
Reading text has several types of texts, such as narrative, descriptive,
procedure, etc. In this study,the researcher focuses on Student Team Achievement
Division Method to improve students’ reading comprehension in narrative text.
E. The Significance of the Study.
The result of this study is expected to be useful and meaningful for:
1. The teachers. To apply this teaching strategy to improve their students’
reading comprehension.
2. The students. To improve and increase their reading comprehension by
adapting with this Student Team Achievement Division.
3. The readers. To broaden and update their knowledge and understanding
about how to improve reading skill and as the reference for those who are
interested to conduct a further research
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis and discussion, the researcher
concludes that use of STAD Method affects the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension, since the score of the students who were taught by STAD Method
is higher than using Questioning-answer Method. Therefore, the formulated
hypothesis as “The students’ achievement taught by using STAD Method in
Reading comprehension is higher than those taught by Questioning-answer
Method” is accepted. This is approved by the data analysis results in which the tobserved (3.27) is higher than the t-table (2.00) at the significant level of 0.05.
B. Suggestions
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher gives some suggestions for
those who are interested in teaching reading as follows:
1. English teachers are suggested to use STAD Method in their teaching
learning process in order to improve their students’ achievement in reading
comprehension.
2. Students follow the steps on STAD Method to improve their achievement
in reading comprehension particularly.
3. Other researchers., who want to study more about STAD Method, this
research could be advisable reference in conducting similar language skills
reading, with different genre
40
41
REFERENCES
Arikunto, S. 1999. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta
:Rineka Cipta.
Ary. Donald et al 1979. Introduction to Research Education.Second Edition. New
York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles :An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 2nd Edition. New Jersey: Longman.
Burns, Paul. C. et al. Teaching Reading in Todays Elementary Schools. Third
Edition. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company Boston
Day, R and Bamford , J. 2002. Top ten Principles for Teaching Extensive
Reading.
Available
at
http://nlfrc.hawaii.edu/rlf/october2002/day/day.html.(Accessed on May
09th 2015).
Elizabeth. S, Angaluki, Michael. L. 2003. Teaching Reading. UNESCO:
International Bureau of Education.
Grabe, William and Stoller.L Fredericka. 2002. Teaching and Researching
Reading. England: Pearson Education.
Http.//hutura.hubpages.com/hub/Literal-Inferential-and-Critical-ComprehensiveReading (Accessed on 7th May 2015).
Henniger, M. 2004. The Teaching Experience: An Introduction To Reflective
Practice. Upper Sadle River,NJ: Pearson Education.
Jacobsen, D.A.,Eggen, P. & Kauchak,D. 2002. Methods for Teaching( 6th
Edition).Upper Side River NJ: Merril-Prentice Hall
McNeil, J.D. 1992.Reading Comprehension New Directions for Classroom
Practice (3rd Edition). Los Angeles: U. of California.
Mella, Cuna. Dwi. 2013. The Effect of Applying Student Achievement Divison on
Students Writing Descriptive Text. Medan: State University of Medan.
Paradiyono. 2007. PastiBisa! Teaching Genre-Based Writing, Metode Mengajar
Writing Berbasis Genre Secara Efektif. Yogyakarta: ANDI.
Singh, Y.K. 2006.Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistics. New
Delhi: New Age.
42
Slavin, R.E. 2005. Cooperative Learning: Theory,Research and Practice.
London: Allymand Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. 1991. Student Team Learning. Third Edition.Washington, D.C.
National Education Association.
Slavin, R. E. 1990.Using Student Team Learning. Baltimore: John Hopkins
University.
Taylor, B. M. and Pearson,P.D. 2009. Teaching Reading, Effective Schools,
Accomplished Teacher. New Jersey: Hill Higher Education.
DIVISION (STAD) METHOD ON STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement
for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
PUTRA PANGIHUTAN TUA TAMBUNAN
Reg.Number: 2113121056
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2015
ABSTRACT
Tambunan, Putra Pangihutan Tua. 2113121056. The Effect of Student Team
Achievement Division (STAD) Method on Students’ Reading Comprehension
Achievement. A Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of
Medan. 2015.
This study deals with the effect of Student Team Achievement Division (STAD)
method on students’ reading comprehension achievement. The objective of the
study is to find out whether STAD method significantly affects the students’
reading comprehension achievement or not. This study was conducted by using
experimental design. The population of the study was the students of grade X of
SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo in the academic year of 2014/2015, there were 4
parallel classes of grade X. There were two classes have been selected by
applying random sampling. There were Experimental group (X-1) was taught by
applying STAD method, while the control group (X-2) was taught by applying
conventional method. The data of the study was obtained from the students’ score
of writing test. To determine the reliability of the test, the writer used KuderRichardson (KR21) formula. Based on the data calculation showed that the
coefficient of reliability of the test was 0.81. It shows that the test was reliable and
the reliability was high. There were two data used in this study. They were pretest and post-test. The data were analyzed by applying t-test formula. After
analyzing the data, the result of the study showed that t-observed (3.71) was
higher than t-table (2.000) (t-observed ˃ t-table) at the level of significance of α =
0.05 and at the degree of freedom (df) = 58. It can be concluded that applying
STAD method significantly affects on the students’ reading comprehension
achievement, or in other words, the hypothesis is accepted.
Key Words : Students’ Achievement, Reading Comprehension, Descriptive Text,
STAD Method.
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The writer’s first gratitude absolutely goes to the Almight Lord Jesus
Christ for providing the countless blessing, never ending love and guidance to the
writer. It is just another blessing from God to the writer so the writer can finish
this final project, as the requirements to obtain the S1 Degree of Sarjana
Pendidikan at English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan.
In the process of doing this thesis, many people have given their
participation such as their support, motivation and pray. Therefore, the writer
would like to express his gratitude and special thanks to :
Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom. M.Pd., as the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Languages and
Arts.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English and Literture
Department.
Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English Department..
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.S., M.Hum., as the Head of English Education
Study Program.
Dra Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed as his Academic Advisor
Drs Willem Saragih Dipl;Appl, M.Hum as his Thesis Consultant
Indra Hartoyo ,S.Pd., M.Hum., as his Thesis Consultant
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning M.Pd., Rita Suswati, S.Pd, M.Hum, as his
Thesis Reviewer.
Euis Sriwahyuningsih, M.Pd., the academic staff and adminitrative staff.
Sir Pantes, the staff of English Education and Literature Department.
Berti Tumangger S.Pd as the Head Master of SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo,
for his supports to the writer so the writer could do the research.
ii
His beloved parents, M. Tambunan and H Siallagan for giving the
bestest from the very best of them, their love, time, prayers and all the
advices especially in the time of completing this thesis, the writer’s special
gratitude also goes to his dearest brothers Denra Tambunan.
His beloved uncle and aunt Dr. Haposan Siallagan, SH, MH and Lusia
Butarbutar, SE. for giving support and many advices during study period
in the university. And also his cousin Mahendra, Mahendro, and Mitcel,
thanks for your help.
His best friends from Regular C 2011 especially Partners In Crime (
Nancy, Ade, Connie, Christanti,
Dicky,
Renol,
Sartika)
for
unforgettable and amazing 4 years with them. And also with another
members of Regular C 2011, thanks for your support to me.
Medan, September 2015
The Writer,
Putra Pangihutan Tua Tambunan
Reg. No. 2113121056
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ....................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Study ............................................................................1
B. The Problem of Study ..................................................................................3
C. The Object of Study .....................................................................................4
D. The Scope of Study ......................................................................................4
E. The Significant of the Study .........................................................................4
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Framework ................................................................................5
1. Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension ................................5
2. Reading and Reading Comprehension .....................................................6
a. Reading ...............................................................................................6
b. The Purpose of Reading ......................................................................7
c. Reading Comprehension .....................................................................8
d. Level of Comprehension ...................................................................10
1) Literal Comprehension .................................................................10
2) Interpretive Comprehension .........................................................11
3) Critical Comprehension ...............................................................11
4) Creative Comprehension ..............................................................11
e. Assesment of Reading Comprehension................................................ 12
3. Narrative .................................................................................................13
4. Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) ......................................14
a. Definition of STAD ................................................................................ 14
b. Process of Using STAD ......................................................................... 16
iv
c. The Advantages and Weaknesses of STAD ........................................ 17
5. Questioning-Answer Method .................................................................18
B. Relevant Studies.. .......................................................................................19
C. Conceptual Framework.. ............................................................................20
D. Hypothesis ..................................................................................................22
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Design .........................................................................................23
B. Population and Sample ...............................................................................23
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data .............................................................24
D. Scoring the Test .........................................................................................25
E. The Procedure of Research .........................................................................25
F. The Validity and Reliability of the Test .....................................................29
1. The Validity of the Test .........................................................................29
2. The Reliability of the Test ......................................................................30
G. The Analysis of Data ..................................................................................31
H. Statistical Hypothesis .................................................................................31
CHAPTERIV : DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. The Data .....................................................................................................33
B. Data Analysis .............................................................................................34
C. Testing of Hypothesis .................................................................................37
D. Research Findings ......................................................................................38
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions ................................................................................................40
B. Suggestions.................................................................................................40
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................41
APPENDIX ...........................................................................................................43
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.1 The Students’ Score In Reading.............................................................23
Table 3.2 Specification of the Test ........................................................................25
Table 3.3 Teaching Procedure for Experimental Group ........................................26
Table 3.4 Teaching Procedure for Control Group ........................................................... 28
vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Score of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Experimental Group ...........43
Appendix B The Score of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Control Group ....................44
Appendix C The Score of Reliability of The Test .................................................45
Appendix D The Calculation of T-Test ................................................................47
AppendixE T-Table Distribution ................................................................................. 48
Appendix F Reading Test ......................................................................................50
Appendix G Lesson Plan for Experimental Group ................................................61
Appendix H Lesson Plan for Control Group .............................................................. 81
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of Study
Language mastery is divided into four skills namely listening, speaking,
reading, and writing. Reading is one of skills is very important in learning
English. According to Grabe and Stoller (2002:4) reading can be taught as a way
to draw information from the text and to form an interpretation of that
information. It brings reading as one of many ways to recognize everything that
happened in the world. They also explain that without reading, the opportunities
for improving one’s life is limited. So, people are expected to increase their
interest in reading information and try to develop their reading ability. Reading
ability can be developed as much as the reading interest is increased too. People
are possible to use some reading strategies to make them fluent and interested in
reading. According to Grabe and Stoller (2002:15) strategies are often defined as a
set of abilities under conscious control of the reader.
Reading is one of the skills which is important in developing students’
knowledge. Moreover, reading is one skill that is tested in the National
Examination. In the latest Indonesia’s Curriculum (KTSP), students are expected
to be able to comprehend the meaning of both interpersonal and transactional
written text formally and informally in the forms of recount, narrative, procedure,
descriptive and report in daily life context. Even in the national examination
which was conducted for the third level of senior high school in year 2014, we can
foind there was about 75% of the test is about reading.
1
2
Based on the researcher’ observation in SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo, he
observed that the process of reading a text was still a serious problem for the
students. Students’ ability to relate or to connect their experiences with the ideas
presented in the text. However, they were actually able to read English words and
sentences. The difficulties made them unmotivated to read, since they
preconceived that the theme or topic of reading was not interesting for them. The
students also felt bored while reading due to being unmotivated. Some of the
students just read the text without trying to connect the presented ideas of text
with their thinking patterns. The problem to contextualize the difficult words that
they found also led them to achieve what actually they should have
comprehended. These problems finally arose and they were unable to achieve the
desired reading comprehension.
In addition, based on the observation in that school, the score of minimum
competence (KKM) of English subject in SMA Negeri 1 Simanindo is 70. The
English teacher usually uses Questioning-Answer Method to teach reading. Here
are the recapitulations of students’ scores in reading by using Questioning-Answer
Method.
Table 1.1
Students’ Scores of Reading Comprehension Tests in Two Semester
(2014 – 2015)
Semester
Score
Students
Percentage
Mean
< 70
16 Students
45.7%
1st Semester 2014/ 2015
51.9
≥ 70
19 Students
54.3%
< 70
17 Students
48.5%
2nd Semester 2014/ 2015
50.9
≥ 70
18 Students
42.5%
Source: Students’ accumulated score of Grade X1 students at SMA Negeri 1
Simanindo academic year 2014/2015
3
Based on the description above, we found that many students did not have
the passing grade because they had difficulties to comprehend the text. Especially
in narrative text, students face difficulties because of reluctance to question or less
motivation, difficult to build and develop their ideas, difficult to get the main idea
from the text, and confused in determining the generic structure of the text. The
Questioning-Answer Method was not effective. This situation made the students’
motivation in reading decrease. Sharon (2003:39) says that the learning of
language depends not so much on the number of years it is studied, but on the
motivation of the students, the type of teachers, method of teaching adopted, and
instructional material designed.
From the problems mentioned above, the researcher chooses to conduct
this study by using Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method.
Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method the researcher believe that
all of the students in the class will be more active in teaching and learning
process. It can also increase their motivation and achievement in Reading. From
the explanation above, the writer is interested in conducting a study under the title
“The effect of Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method on Students’
Reading Comprehension Achievement.”
B. The Problem of The Study
Based on the background of the study, the research problem is formulated
as follows: “Is student achievement in reading comprehension taught by Student
Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method higher than that taught by using
Questioning-Answer Method?”
4
C. The Objective of the Study
In relation to the problem above, the objective of the study is to find out
the student achievement in reading comprehension taught by Student Team
Achievement Division (STAD) Method is higher than that taught by using
questioning-answer Method
D. The Scope of the Study
Reading text has several types of texts, such as narrative, descriptive,
procedure, etc. In this study,the researcher focuses on Student Team Achievement
Division Method to improve students’ reading comprehension in narrative text.
E. The Significance of the Study.
The result of this study is expected to be useful and meaningful for:
1. The teachers. To apply this teaching strategy to improve their students’
reading comprehension.
2. The students. To improve and increase their reading comprehension by
adapting with this Student Team Achievement Division.
3. The readers. To broaden and update their knowledge and understanding
about how to improve reading skill and as the reference for those who are
interested to conduct a further research
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis and discussion, the researcher
concludes that use of STAD Method affects the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension, since the score of the students who were taught by STAD Method
is higher than using Questioning-answer Method. Therefore, the formulated
hypothesis as “The students’ achievement taught by using STAD Method in
Reading comprehension is higher than those taught by Questioning-answer
Method” is accepted. This is approved by the data analysis results in which the tobserved (3.27) is higher than the t-table (2.00) at the significant level of 0.05.
B. Suggestions
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher gives some suggestions for
those who are interested in teaching reading as follows:
1. English teachers are suggested to use STAD Method in their teaching
learning process in order to improve their students’ achievement in reading
comprehension.
2. Students follow the steps on STAD Method to improve their achievement
in reading comprehension particularly.
3. Other researchers., who want to study more about STAD Method, this
research could be advisable reference in conducting similar language skills
reading, with different genre
40
41
REFERENCES
Arikunto, S. 1999. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta
:Rineka Cipta.
Ary. Donald et al 1979. Introduction to Research Education.Second Edition. New
York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles :An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 2nd Edition. New Jersey: Longman.
Burns, Paul. C. et al. Teaching Reading in Todays Elementary Schools. Third
Edition. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company Boston
Day, R and Bamford , J. 2002. Top ten Principles for Teaching Extensive
Reading.
Available
at
http://nlfrc.hawaii.edu/rlf/october2002/day/day.html.(Accessed on May
09th 2015).
Elizabeth. S, Angaluki, Michael. L. 2003. Teaching Reading. UNESCO:
International Bureau of Education.
Grabe, William and Stoller.L Fredericka. 2002. Teaching and Researching
Reading. England: Pearson Education.
Http.//hutura.hubpages.com/hub/Literal-Inferential-and-Critical-ComprehensiveReading (Accessed on 7th May 2015).
Henniger, M. 2004. The Teaching Experience: An Introduction To Reflective
Practice. Upper Sadle River,NJ: Pearson Education.
Jacobsen, D.A.,Eggen, P. & Kauchak,D. 2002. Methods for Teaching( 6th
Edition).Upper Side River NJ: Merril-Prentice Hall
McNeil, J.D. 1992.Reading Comprehension New Directions for Classroom
Practice (3rd Edition). Los Angeles: U. of California.
Mella, Cuna. Dwi. 2013. The Effect of Applying Student Achievement Divison on
Students Writing Descriptive Text. Medan: State University of Medan.
Paradiyono. 2007. PastiBisa! Teaching Genre-Based Writing, Metode Mengajar
Writing Berbasis Genre Secara Efektif. Yogyakarta: ANDI.
Singh, Y.K. 2006.Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistics. New
Delhi: New Age.
42
Slavin, R.E. 2005. Cooperative Learning: Theory,Research and Practice.
London: Allymand Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. 1991. Student Team Learning. Third Edition.Washington, D.C.
National Education Association.
Slavin, R. E. 1990.Using Student Team Learning. Baltimore: John Hopkins
University.
Taylor, B. M. and Pearson,P.D. 2009. Teaching Reading, Effective Schools,
Accomplished Teacher. New Jersey: Hill Higher Education.