THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING METHOD IN TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION.

(1)

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING

METHOD IN TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION

(Classroom Action Research in a Private Vocational School in Subang) A Research Paper

Submitted to The English Education Department of FPBS UPI in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for SarjanaPendidikan Degree

Submitted By: RifkiHadyan

0703973

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING

METHOD IN TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION

Oleh RifkiHadyan

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas PendidikanBahasadanKesenian

(3)

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian, dengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa ijin dari penulis.

(4)

Approval Page

The Implementation of Cooperative Learning Methods in Teaching Reading Comprehension

By Rifki Hadyan

0703973

First Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Fuad Abdul Hamied, MA NIP. 195008211974121001

Second Supervisor

Lulu LaelaAmalia, S.S., M.Pd. NIP. 197504092007102001

Head of EnglishEducation Department

Prof. Dr. DidiSuherdi, M.Ed. NIP. 196211011987121000

(5)

Abstract

This paper investigated the use of cooperative learning methods in improving students’ reading comprehension. The research was conducted to find out whether or not cooperative learning methods improve students’ reading comprehension, and to find out students’ responses toward the implementation of cooperative learning methods. The research design employed in this research was Classroom Action Research which consisted of four main steps: planning, acting, observing, and reflecting (Kemmis and Mc Taggart, 1988) which conducted in two cycles. The study was conducted at XI Grade of Culinary Class which involve thirty one students. Observation checklists, students’ questionnaire, evaluation sheet and students’ reading score were implemented as instruments to collect the data. The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning methods (STAD and Jigsaw) improve the students’ reading comprehension in descriptive text. On the first cycle, there were 13 students (42%) who passed the reading posttest, while in cycle 2, the students who passed the reading posttest were 25 students (86%). The studentswere considered pass the tests when theyreach Minimum Mastering Criteria (MMC). The findings also showed that the students gave positive responses since they stated that Cooperative Learning Methods were fun and helped them in understanding descriptive text and they wanted to know more about Cooperative Learning Methods.

(6)

PREFACE ... i

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... ii

ABSTRACT ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... iv

LIST OF TABLES& FIGURES ... v

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ...1

1.2 Statement of Problems ... 4

1.3 Scope of Study ...5

1.4 Aims of the Study ...5

1.5 Significance of Study ... 5

1.6 Clarification of related Terms ...6

1.7 Organization of Paper ...7

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FOUNDATION 2.1 Reading ... 8

2.1.1 The Nature of Reading ... 8

2.1.2 The Importance of Teaching Reading ...9

2.1.3 Characteristics of a Good Reader ... 11

2.1.4 The Role of Teachers in Teaching Reading ... 12

(7)

2.2 Descriptive Text ... 15

2.2.1 Definition of Descriptive Text ... 15

2.2.2 The Characteristics of Descriptive Text ... 16

2.3 Cooperative Learning ... 16

2.3.1 Definition of Cooperative Learning ... 16

2.3.2 Elements of Cooperative Learning ... 17

2.3.3 Cooperative Learning in The Classroom ...19

2.3.4 Cooperative Learning in Teaching Reading Comprehension ... 21

2.4 Related Studies ... 22

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design ... 25

3.2 Participants ... 28

3.3 Data Collection ... 28

3.3.1 Site and Responden ... 28

3.3.2 Research Instrument ...29

3.3.2.1 Observation Sheet ...30

3.3.2.2 Interview ...31

3.3.2.3 Student’s Questionaire ... 32

3.3.2.4 Reading Tests ... 32

3.3.2.5 Evaluation Sheet... 33

3.4Research Procedures ... 34

3.4.1 Preparation ... 34

(8)

3.4.2.1 Planning ... 34

3.4.2.2 Action and Observation ... 35

3.4.2.3 Reflecting ... 36

3.4.3 Research Procedure in Cycle two ... 36

3.4.3.1 Planning ... 36

3.4.3.2 Action and Observation ... 36

3.4.3.3 Reflecting ... 37

3.5 Data Analysis ...37

3.5.1 Data Analysis of Student’s Reading Test 3.5.1.1 Scoring Technique ... 38

3.5.2 Descriptive Technique ... 38

3.5.2.1 Analysis of Instructional Process ... 38

3.5.2.2 Analysis of Interview ... 39

3.5.2.3 Analysis of Student’s Questionaire ...40

3.5.2.4 Analysis of Evaluation Sheet ...41

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Preparation Stage ...42

4.2 The Classroom Action Research Activities ... 45

4.2.1 Classroom Action Research Cycle one ... 46

4.2.1.1 Planning ... 46

4.2.1.2 Action and Observation ... 47

4.2.1.3 Reflection ... 48

(9)

4.2.2.2 Action and Observation ...50

4.2.2.3 Reflection ...51

4.2.3 Student’s Reading Test ...52

4.2.4 Observation Sheet ...57

4.2.4.1 Teacher’s Observation Sheet ... 57

4.2.4.2 Group Observation Sheet ...60

4.2.5 Student’s Questionaire ... 64

4.2.6 Evaluation Sheet ... 65

4.2.7 Post Interview ... 66

4.3 Discussion ... 66

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion ... 69

5.2 Suggestion ...71

BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES

(10)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter sets out the background of the study, the research questions, and the purposes of the study as well as the significance of it. The clarification of key terms and the outline for the organization of this paper is also highlighted.

1.1Background

As one of the four skills in English, reading plays an important role in enhancing students’ English ability. More importantly, reading has a function as a tool to access information worldwide. Reading widely is a highly effective means of extending our command of language, so it plays an important role in classrooms where language learning is the central purpose (Nuttall,2000). However, according to McLaughlin (in Celce-Murcia, 1991) reading is the most complex and difficult skill students should master at school. Infact, the students do complex interactive processes in reading.

The purpose of teaching reading in the context of English learning is comprehension. As stated by Kirby (2007:1) “reading comprehension is the process by which we understand the text we read. it is the purpose of reading, why we teach it, and why we care about it”. The purpose is in

(11)

line with the objectives of teaching reading in high school. Rukmayadi (2011) said that in high school, the process of teaching reading has some specific objectives, they are: 1) to enable students to develop basic comprehension skill so that they can read and understand texts of general nature; 2) to use reading to increase their general knowledge; 3) to decide about reading purposes; 4) to adapt their strategies of reading; and, 5) to develop the ability to read critically.

As stated by Rukmayadi (2011), one of the objective in teaching reading that should be developed is basic comprehension skills. Therefore, students who have good comprehension skills can read and understand the text easily. Those comprehension skills, according to Brown and Palinscar (in Resnick&Resnick, 1992), consist of the use of the background knowledge in processing information, evaluating content skill critically, predicting, interpreting, and concluding skills. It is important to bring those skills to the students through designing appropriate methods and strategies in teaching reading comprehension. According to Brown (2001), reading comprehension is primarily a matter of developing appropriate efficient comprehension strategies for the majority second language learners who are already literate in their native language. It means that reading strategies is important to help the student comprehend the text well.

(12)

The study conducted by Sunandar (2006) also shows that many teachers in some Indonesian schools only employ conventional method covering activities of making list of difficult words, translating their meaning into the students’ mother tongue language, asking students to read loudly and/or silently, and having students answer the questions related to the text. Whereas this kind of method may cause negative effect on the students’ reading skill (Rukmayadi,2011). In addition (Schwerdt&Wuppermann,2009) said that conventional teaching method connected with many disadvantages: students’ attention wanes quickly during the learning process and information tends to be forgotten quickly when students are passive. Moreover, teachers emphasize learning by listening, which is a disadvantage for students who prefer other learning styles.

According to explanations above, it is important to find out the solution to solve the reading learning problems and to develop the students’ motivation in comprehending the text.

Furthermore, a pre interview which was conducted, indicatesthe lack of understanding of the Vocational School Students in Subang about learning reading, especially reading descriptive text.

Many efforts have been done in teaching reading for the students. Thus the researcher proposed an alternative learning strategy called

(13)

Cooperative Learning Methods to make learning reading easier because Cooperative Learning can make the students help each other.

Slavin (1995:20) states that “Cooperative Learning is a variety of teaching methods in which students work in a small groups to help each other learn academic content”. He further elaborated that in cooperative learning, students are expected to help each other, discuss, and argue with one another, asess each other’s current knowledge and fill in gaps in each other’s understanding.

The explanation above shows that Cooperative Learning involves small groups so that individuals work together to maximize their own and each others’ achievement. Considering the background above, the researcher is concern in a research entitled “The Implementation of Cooperative Learning Methods in Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension”

1.2Statementof The Problems

The research is specifically incorporated into methodological teaching investigation, because this research deals with particular phenomena of teaching English. For this inquiry, the researcher formulates the problems in the following questions :

(14)

1. To what extent doesthe Implementation ofcooperative learning methodimprove students’reading comprehension?

2. What are the students’ responses toward the cooperative learning methods in teaching reading?

1.3The Scope of Study

The study focuses on the application of Cooperative Learning Methods in improving students’ reading comprehension. To be exact, the reading text used in this study is descriptive text. The study was conductedat class XI Tata Boga (Culinary Class) in one Vocational School in Subang, West Java.

1.4The Aims of the Study

This study is aimed at achieving the following objectives :

1. To find out the students’ reading comprehension improvement by the implementation of cooperative learning methods.

2. To find out the students’ response towards the implementation of Cooperative Learning Methods in teaching reading.

(15)

1.5The Significance of the Study

It is important to formulate what becomes the benefit of the research and how far it would contribute to the development of science. This research is conducted in order to give theoretical and practical benefits.

The theoretical benefit of the research finding is it can be used to enrich the theory and methodology in teching reading especially in descriptive text using cooperative learning. On the other hand, the practical benefit of the research finding is it can be used by the students, the teachers, school administrators and the researchers who are interested in analyzing the reading teaching learning process.

1.6Clarification of Related Terms

In order to avoid unnecessary missunderstanding, some terms used in this research are clarified as follows :

1. Cooperative learning refers to teaching method that is used for improving ability in reading. Slavin (1995) stated that cooperative learning refers to a variety of teaching methods in which students work in small groups to help one another learn academic content. 2. Reading comprehension refers to the level of understanding of

(16)

simultanously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with writen language” (Ervin 2006:8). 3. Comprehension improvement refers to the scores of the students in

comprehending the descriptive text using cooperative learning model. The indicator in improvement of students’ reading comprehension uses Minimum Mastering Criteria (MMC) or Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM); student who achieve the MMC is considered to be successful (Government Document,2006).

4. Mastering Criteria (MMC) or Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) is the minimum criteria to declare learners achievement of the lessons. KKM value is determined by the subject teachers with the approval of the school (Government Document,2006).

1.7Organization of Paper

To communicate this study with ease to the audience, this report is writen relatively consistent with the writing organization suggested by Paltridge & Stairfield (2007 cited in Emilia,2008). Chapter one describes the background of the study, the statement of problems, the scope, the purposes, the significances of the study and the clarification of the key terms followed by the organization of the paper. Chapter two discusses some theoretical concepts about the nature of reading, Cooperative

(17)

Learning, Descriptive Text and some previous findings underlying the context that may influence the results of this study. Chapter three presents the methodology of this study, the design, brief environment where this study is conducted, the instrument used and how to analyze the collected data to answer the research questions. Chapter four is devoted to describe the two cycle treatments which is directly followed by the analysis the data, under the first and second research questions. Chapter five contains the summary of the report from the research problems, treatments, and results. Finally, the conclusion in relation to the study, the suggestions for the study are presented.

(18)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the methodology of this study that incorporates the research approach, model of the study, procedure of the study, location and subjects, time allocation of the study, research instruments and data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

Every research needs a method to make it easier to draw the conclusion and to have a satisfied result. Therefore, in order to achieve the objectives of the research, the researcher uses Classroom Action Research (CAR). The research consists of two cycles. Kemmis and Mc Taggart (1988) stated that there are four basic steps in the action research. They are planning, acting, observing and reflecting. The planning step consists of problem identification, while in acting and observing step the researcher gathers data, interprets data, and acts on evidence of the research. After that, the result of the research is evaluated and it is continued to the next cycle.

Figure 3.1 shows how the classroom action research works. The researcher conducts classroom action research to acquire information of an instructional activity by evaluating and reflecting instructional practice.

(19)

Classroom Action Research emphasizes the involvement of teachers problems in their own classrooms and has its primary goal the in-service training and development of the teacher rather than acquisition of general knowledge in the field of education.(Borg, 1981).

Figure 3.1 Actio n

Research Cycle

Furthermore, Action Research is a process in which participants examine their own educational practice systematically and carefully, using the techniques of research. It involves the teacher and researcher with a method for solving everyday problems in school, in order to

improve both students and teachers’ learning effectiveness. The teacher

has opportunity as model for students, not only the skill needed for effective learning but also curiosity and excitement about gaining new knowledge (Kitchen & Stevens, 2008).

(20)

The goal of a teacher is to be a profesional problem solver who is committed toimprove both their own practices and students outcomes. It provides a powerful reason to practice action research (Gay et al., 2006:499). Classroom Action Research is a study focused on specific problem that occurs in a class. It also focusses on the process not only the result.

Doing Classroom Action Research means observing the process of the treatment. It is strongly recommended that an observer watches the process ofthe Classroom Action Research.This is doneso thatthe teachercan be helpedin evaluatingand formulating the lesson plan for the every cycle.

The teacher usualy used Classroom Action Research because it deals with their own problems, it can start whenever they are ready and providing immediate results. Action research provides them with opportunities to better understand, and improve their educational practices. Action research can create a stonger relationships among staff. More Importantly, action research provides educators with alternative ways of viewing and approaching educational questions providing a new way of examining their own practices. (Mertler, C.A. & Charles C.M.,2008).

(21)

3.2 Participants

The researcher took one class as a sample, the objectwas the students of XI Culinary Class of a Vocational School in Subang. The researcher conducted the research collaboratively with one on-site English Teacher. Her engagements were aimed at obtaining the data needed as objective as possible. However, before the one on-site teacher took part in the research, she was given an explanation about the research procedure.

3.3 Data Collection

3.3.1 Site and Respondents

The study was conducted in a vocational school, to the XI Culinary Class. This setting was chosen because the researcher works here as an English Teacher and a pre-interview that have been conducted by the researcher showed that most students in the XI Culinary Class have difficulties in reading. This research was conducted on 25th of October to 28th of November 2012 it was divided into two steps; preparation step and actionstep. Every cycle has several activities; planning, acting, observing and reflecting.

(22)

Table 3.3.1 Schedule of the Research

No Activities

Time

(October – November) Week

1 2 3 4 5

1. Preparation

Arranging concept of the research X Pre-test and Problem

Identification

Arranging concept of the cycles X 2. Action Research

Cycle 1 X

Cycle 2 X

3. Conducting Post Interview X

4. Writing Report X

3.3.2 Research Instruments

The research utilized some instruments to gather the data. The instruments of this research are observation sheet for the teacher and the students, interview, questionaire, evaluation sheet, and reading comprehension test.

(23)

3.3.2.1 Observation Sheet

Observation was conducted to obtain the data about teacher and students activity. The observation form is adapted from Brown (2001); Teacher Observation form A: Observing other teacher. The researcher considers that this form is suitable to enclose the whole observation aspects in this research. It was divided into five categories. The first category was preparation step. It has three indicators that specify teacher’s preparation in teaching such as how to plan the lesson and worksheet. The second category was Presentation. It has ten indicators which monitor

teacher’s activity in the begining of the teaching instruction. The third category was execution method, this category has twelve indicators which shows how the teacher organize the class and deliver the material of the lesson. The fourth category was personal characteristic, it has five

indicators which monitors teacher’s personality and action in the class. The last category was the teacher-students’ interactions,this category has ten indicators which indicate how teacher and students work together in an instuctional activities. (see Appendix B)

Meanwhile, the students’ observation sheet wasimplemented to measure the activity of the students during the instructional processes. The observation sheet was used to know the students’ responses toward

(24)

the Cooperative Learning Methods in teaching reading. It consists three categories; interest, attention, and participation. (see Appendix B)

3.3.2.2 Interview

One-on-one Interview was conducted to gather the detail information from the respondent. It was divided into two parts; pre-interview and post-pre-interview. Interviews were particularly useful for

getting the story behind a participant’s experiences. The interviewer can

pursue in-depth information around the topic. Interviews may be useful as follow-up to certain respondents to further investigate their responses. (McNamara,1999)

The pre interview was conducted in preparation step; it was carried out before the cycle began. It has ten questions related to students’ difficulties in reading and also about their opinion toward Cooperative Learning Methods (see appendix B for detail). The result of the interview is used to plans the first cycle.

The post interview was conducted after all of the cycles ended. It was implemented to get the students’ perception toward learningreading through Cooperative Learning Methods. The interview has four questions

about students’ perception toward the implementation of cooperative learning, advantages and motivation perceived during learning reading through cooperative learning method (see appendix B for detail).

(25)

3.3.2.3 Questionaire

Questionaire in combination form (close-ended and open ended) wasimplemented to identify the students responses toward cooperative learning.The questionaire was given to the students after each cycle to get

students’ opinion and suggestion about the learning activities. This

students’ questionaire helps the teacher to improve the instructional learning activities.

Students’ questionaire consists of four questions. The first

question asks student’s opinion on the instructional learning in one meeting. The second question, the students is asked about their view toward cooperative learning method, the next question concern to the

teacher’s teaching performance in conveying the material, andon the last question students are asked to give their suggestion for the next meeting (see Appendix B for detail).

3.3.2.4Reading Test

The Reading test consist of three tests, there are pre-test, post-test in cycle 1 and post-test in cycle 2. For the pre-test, it is conducted before the cycles began. It isimplemented to measure the prior knowledge of

students’ reading comprehension before the classroom action research conducted. Whereas, post-tests in cycle 1 and cycle 2is conducted after

(26)

each cycle is complete.The tests are about the learning material which is delivered by the teacher. The tests are implemented to see whether or not Cooperative Learning Methods give an improvement to the students’ readingcomprehension by comparing theaveragevalueofeachtest.

The post-test is conducted to see how far students’ comprehend the lesson material, especially for descriptive text. The students are considered to be successful if they got 75 in accordance with Minimum Mastering Criteria (MMC). Minimum Mastering Criteria is the minimum criteria to declare learners’ achievement of the lessons. MMC value is determined by the subject teachers with the approval of the school. (see appendix A for details) .

The following indicators was made to measure student’s score improvement by the teacher.

Table 3.3.2.4 Improvement Score

No Scale Description

1. 90≤A≤100 Excellent

2. 80≤B≤89 Satisfactory

3. 70≤C≤79 Average

4. 60≤D≤69 Unsatisfactory

(27)

3.4 Research Procedure

The researcherimplementedthe ClassroomAction Research that comprises some processes which were divided into two cycles. Each cycle consisted of some steps; planning, acting, observation, and reflecting. (Kemmis and Mc Taggart, 1988)

The researcher was helped by one on-site English teacher whose role as the observer. This collaborationwas aimed at obtaining the data needed as objective as possible.

3.4.1 Preparation

The first step of this research was preparation. The researcher looked for the detail information about the site and respondentsof the research, in this case was to the XI culinary classat a Vocational School in Subang. The researcher conducted this step before practicing the first cycle. Then, he prepared the administration letter and arranged the concept of the cycles.

3.4.2 Research Procedures in Cycle One

(28)

In this step, the researcher arranged the plan of action in the cycle. He preparedthe lesson material which would be delivered in the first meeting. This step was conducted after finding out the detail information about the site and respondents of the research.

3.4.2.2 Action and Observation

In this step, the researcher implementedthe plan of the research and observed by the observer. The observer observed how the researcher implements his lesson plan by ticking the observation sheet. In this step, the researcher must organize the time and use the method effectively. This observation was important to analyze everything that happened in the class during the implementation of the lesson plan in each cycle. While

the researcher used students observation sheet to know the students’

interest, attention, and participation during the Implementation of Cooperative Learning Method. The observation sheet was adapted from Brown (2001).

The teacher observation sheetwas divided into five categories. They were preparation step,Presentation, method execution, personal characteristic and the teacher-students’ interactions. Each categorywas assessed bytheobserver. The range of valuesfor eachcategorywere1-4,the greater value given by theobservermeaningthe betterperformanceof the researcher. The average score for the researcher performance in this cycle was 3,2. The researcher did not tell the method to the students very well.

(29)

The students observation sheet shows the students’ interest, attention, and participation in learning. Thestudentswere excitedto learnalthoughthere were still somestudents whowere less motivated.

3.4.2.3 Reflecting

In reflecting step, the researcher and the observer discussedtheresults of observation sheets, student’s questionaire, evaluation sheet,and also worksheets of the students to find out the weaknessesand solve the problems that were found in the implementation of Cooperative earning Method in the class.In reflecting step, the researcher tried to find out a better teaching strategies that would be implemented in the next cycle.

3.4.3 Research Procedures in Cycle Two

3.4.3.1 Planning

In this step, the researcher arranged the concept of the cycle. He preparedthe lesson material which would be delivered in the second meeting. This step was conducted after he found the deficiency of the first cycle.

3.4.3.2 Action and Observation

In this step, the researcher implementedthe plan of the research and observed by a partner teacher. The observer observed how the

(30)

researcher improves hisperformance during the teaching and learning process.In this cycle, the teacher organized the time and used the methodeffectively.The average score for the researcher performance in this cycle was 3,6. The researcher implemented the Cooperative Learning Method well.

The students observation sheet showed some improvements of the

students’ interest, attention, and participation in learning. All students were more focus in learning.

3.4.3.3 Reflecting

In reflecting step, the teacher and the observer discussedtheresults of observation sheets, student’s questionaire, evaluation sheet,and also worksheets of the students to find out the weaknessesand solve the problems that were found in the implementation of Cooperative Learning Method in the class.

3.5 Data Analysis

The research used both quantitative and qualitative data analyses. The quantitative method was used to analyze the data from the students reading tests (pre-test and post tests) which implementthe analysis of descriptive statistic. Meanwhile, the qualitative method was used to analyze the data from observation, student questionaire, and interview.

(31)

The data from quantitative and qualitative method then compared and matched to give the final conclusion of the research.

The process of data analysis began from preparation step to last cycle. The process of cycle was described in this process. It consisted of planning, acting, observation, and reflecting. The data were collected

from observation sheet, interviews, student’s questionaire, and students’ reading tests.

3.5.1 Analysis Data of Student’s reading Test

3.5.1.1 Scoring Technique

This technique was described quantitatively. This scoring system was used to dive very specific range and criteria in each aspect of reading so that it makes the teacher easier to give the scores. The mean scores of pre-test, post-test in cycle 1 and post-test in cycle 2 were compared, and

analyzed to identify students’ comprehension improvement. 3.5.2 Descriptive Technique

Some data in this research needed deeper analysis that may be difficult to convey in scoring technique. Gay (1987) stated that descriptive data are regularly gathered through interview, and observation. Therefore, descriptive study is utilized for the following instruments.

(32)

This process was carried out to analyze the observation sheet. This form described the teacher and students’ activities in the classroom. The data were obtained from the teacher observation sheet then analyzed to obtain deep information of the instructional process in every cycles. The teaching learning program was conducted from 5 November 2012- until 25 November 2012- (2 weeks). The observation was conducted infour meetings. In this case the researcher was fully participated in the activities of teaching and learning (Goetz and LeCompte, 1984). Since, the researcher had a role as the teacher during the implementation of Cooperative Learning model. The on-site English teacher as an observer kept to observe the teacher in the classroom by using the observation sheet.

The researcher conductedtwo steps to gather the data from the observation sheet:

1. Record complete events happened in the classroom into notes which

recorded teacher’s preparation, the presentation and the method of instructional process, students and teachers’ interaction.

2. Analyzing and interpreting the information about the teacher and

students’ activities such as students’ behavior in doing tasks and the teacher’s roles during the teaching learning process.

(33)

There were two sections of interviews, pre-interview and post-interview. The pre-interview was conducted to find out the students’ difficulties in reading and their perception toward group work activity. The post interview was conducted to find out students perceptions on learning reading through cooperative learning. To analyze the result of the interview, the researcher conducted some steps:

1. Transcribing the data from interview into written text,

2. Analyzing the data froman interview into students’ progress in reading during the implementation of cooperative learning method

and student’s response toward the teaching learning process.

3. Interpreting the data to address the research question.

3.5.2.3 Analysis of Students’ Questionaire

The questionaire (close ended and open ended) was given to the students after each cycle. The questionaires helped the teacher to improve his instructional activities through their views toward the instructional

activity and material. It covered students’ opinion, suggestion, and impression. This instrument was only additional data to complete the research findings (see AppendixB for detail).

To analyze the result from student’s questionaire, the researcher conducedthree steps:

(34)

1. Collecting the data from students’ questionaire,

2. Analyzing the data from students’ questionaire into students’ progress in reading during the implementation of cooperative learning method and

student’s response toward the teaching learning process.

3. Interpreting the data to address the research question.

3.5.2.4 Analysis of Evaluation Sheet

Evaluation sheet provided some information related to the responses of the students toward cooperative learning method. It measured how far cooperative learning method help them to improve their ability in reading, especially for descriptive text.To analyze the data from evaluation sheet, the researcher gathered the data, then they were analyzed and interpreted to address the research question.

(35)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter involves two main parts; conclusion and recommendation. In conclusion, all previous findings and discussion are drawn together to get the summary of the study. Besides, practical implication of the implementation of Cooperative Learning Methods is presented in the recommendation.

5.1Conclusions

This research investigated the use of cooperative learning method in improving students’ reading ability. The main problem that have been investigated was to what extent the Cooperative Learning Methods can improve student’ reading comprehension and the students’ responses toward the implementation of this method.

The population that involved in this research was the second grader students of SMK Tunas Bangsa in Culinary Major. The research design employed in this research was Classroom Action Research, which consisted of four main steps; planning, acting, observing, and reflecting, conducted in two cycles.

Since the aim of this study was to find out to what extent does the Implementation of Cooperative Learning Methods improve students’ reading comprehension, especially in reading descriptive text, therefore, the researcher needs the data to analyze the improvement of the students’

(36)

reading ability. The researcher gathered the data from students’ reading test. Moreover, there were other instruments to gather the data, they were observation for students and teacher, students’ questionnaire, evaluation sheet, and interview. The instruments were implemented to find out students’ responses toward the implementation of Cooperative Learning Method in their classroom.

The findings of the research showed that Cooperative Learning Method could improve the students’ reading ability, especially in understanding descriptive text. The result of the last reading test showed that most of students’ reading scores achieved the Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) which was used as indicator of students’ success. Cooperative Learning Method could help students to understand descriptive text since they were able to shared the difficulties to their friends in a group. In addition, the students also had more motivation to do the best because they had to competed with the other groups.

The improvement of students’ reading comprehension could be seen from the comparison betweenthe mean score in both cycle one and cycle two. The research findings also describedsome responses of the students toward Cooperative Learning Model in learning reading especially descriptive text. It showed that the students gave positive responses since they stated that Cooperative Learning Model was fun and helped them in understanding descriptive text and they wanted to know more about Cooperative Learning.

(37)

Beside that, the students also gave positive responses toward the implementation of this learning model. They had interest to do activities in groups and also it was very important to let the students get involved in various activities that were relevant to learning teaching reading, especially descriptive text.

Hopefully, the research gave benefit and contribution to the enchancement of teaching and learning in English, especially in learning reading.

5.2Suggestions

The researcher would like to put forward some suggestion that may be useful for the further research. Cooperative Learning is a model of learning that consist of many methods. Every methods in cooperative learning aimed to help students obtain a better understanding of a subject. The next research is expected to explore the methods and prove that Cooperative Learning is a real effective way to create a favorable learning situation in the class. During teaching and learning process, the teacher should be a good model as well as a good motivator.

Moreover, the next research can use this Cooperative Learning Methodson the other skills such as listening, speaking, and writing to reveal more information about this learning model. This research is kind of Classroom Action Research which needs a lot of time. So, it is better for other researchers to manage the time as efficiently as possible.

(38)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Borg, W. 1981. Applying Educational Research : A Practical Guide for Teachers. New York : Longman.

Brown, H.D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. San Francisco State University : Longman.

Byrne, K. 2004. Using Authentic literary Text With Advanced Learners, Retrieved October 11th 2012.

From:www.developingteachers.com/ariclestchtraining/aulitlp1_Kathy.htm .

Celce-Murcia M. 1991. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. 2nd edition. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Cole, M. J. 1981."Selecting Extension Teaching Methods".Journal of Extension, 27-32.

Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2006. Penetapan Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal. Jakarta: Depdiknas

Donald, M. 1991. The Origins of The Modern Mind: Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition. Cambridge MA: Harvard university Press.

Duke, N.K. & Pearson, P. 2005. Effective Practice for Developing Reading Comprehension. Retrieved October October 11th 2012.

From : www.acoe.org/ACOE_DOCS_DandI/RL_arts/Chapter_10.pdf. Ellis, A., Standal, T. & Rummel, M.K. 1989. Elementary Language Arts

Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Emilia, E. 2008. Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta

Ervin,Jane.(2006). Early Reading Comprehension in Varied Subject Matter,Book3. Washington D.C:School Specialty Intervension.

Gay, L. R. (1987). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airaisian, P.W. (2006). Educational Research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

(39)

Goetz, J.P. & Lecompte, M.D.(1984). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research.New York: Academic Press.

Grabe, W. 1991. Teaching and Researching Reading. New York: Longman. Harris, D.D. & Sipay, L. 1980. Teaching reading Vocabulary. New York :

Holt,Rinehart.

Hedge, Tricia. 2003. Teaching & learning in the language classroom. UK: OUP Hedges, L.E. 1991. Helping Students Develop Thinking Skills Through the

Problem Solving Approach to

Teaching. The Ohio State University, Dr. Lowell Hedges.

Holloway, I & Wheeler, S.1996.Qualitative Research for nurses. London: Blackwell Science.

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. 2000. Methods of Cooperative Learning: What can we proveworks cooperative method: A Meta-Analysis. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota (online) accesed October 12th 2012. From : www.clcrc.com

Johnston, K. & Morrow, K. 1981. Communication in the Classroom. London: Longman

Jones, A. 2003.The Feminism and Visual Culture Reader. London: Routledge Joyce, B., Weil, M. and Calhoun, E. (2000). Models of Teaching, Boston:

Allyn and Bacon

KangGuru in the Classroom. 2005. Teacher’s Guide SMA Package. Bali: IALF Kemmis, S., & Mc.Taggart, R. (1988). The Action Research Planner (3rd

ed.).Victoria, Australia : Deakin University Press.

Kirby, J. R. (2007). Reading comprehension: Its nature and development. Encyclopedia of Language and Literacy Development (pp. 1-8). London, ON: Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network.

Retrieved: http://www.literacyencyclopedia.ca/pdfs/topic.php?topId=227 Kitchen, J. &Stevens, D. 2008. “Action Research in Teacher Education”. Journal

of Action Research 6(1), 7-28.

Kunandar. 2007. Guru profesional: implementasi kurikulum tingkat satuan pendidikan (KTSP) dan persiapan menghadapi sertifikasi guru. Divisi Buku Perguruan Tinggi : RajaGrafindo Persada.

(40)

McNamara, Carter. 1999.General Guidelines for Conducting Interviews. Minnesota

Mertler, C.A. & Charles, C.M., (2008) Introduction to education research, 6th Edition, Allyn &Bacon, Boston, Mass.

Mickulecky, B.S. 1990. A Short Course inTeaching Reading Skills. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc.

Mulyadin, T. 2009. Using Contextualization in Improving Reading Comprehension In Descriptive Text. UPI Bandung: Unpublished.

Nutall, Christine. 2000. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language . Oxford: Macmillan Publisher Limited

Resnick,L.B., & Resnick, D.P. (1992). Assessing the Thinking Curriculum : New Tools for Educational Reform. Boston : Kluwer

Rukmayadi, Y. (2011). THE APPLICATION OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING: THINK PAIR

SHARE (TPS) IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION. UPI

Bandung: Unpublished.

Schwerdt G. & Wuppermann A.C. 2009. Is traditional teaching really all that bad? A within-student between-subject approach. Munich: Poschingerstr. Scott, N. 2001. Helping ESL Students Become Better Reader: Schema Theraphy

Application and Limitation. Retrieved October 11th 2012. From : www.iteslj.org/articles/Scott_Schema.html.

Slavin,R.E. (1995). Cooperative Learning; Theory,Research,and Practice (2nd Ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Smalley, R.L., Ruetten, M.K., & Kozyrev, J.R. 2001. Refining Composition Skills: Rhetoric and Grammar. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle

Stahl, R.J. 1994. Cooperative Learning in Social Study. A Handbook for Teachers. USA: Addison-Wessley Publishing Company.

Stanley, L. 1988. Ways to Writing. New York: Macmillan

Sahu, S. & Kar, A. 1994. “Reading comprehension and information processing strategies”. Journal of Research in Reading 17, 3-18

Sunandar, Sunsun. (2006). Students' Difficulty in Learning Reading as a Foreign Language. Makalah Guru Bahasa Inggris. Bandung : Unpublished

Sutardi, A. & Sukhrian, Y. 2004. Bahasa Inggris Program Paket B Setara SMP. Jakarta: Direktorat Pendidikan Masyarakat.

(41)

Trianto. 2009. Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Progresif: Konsep, Landasan, dan Implementasinya Pada Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Kencana

Troyka, L.Q. 1987. Simon & Schuster Handbook for Writers. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Wardiman, et. al. 2008. English in Focus for Grade VII Junior High School. Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

Wiryodijoyo, S. 1989. Membaca: Strategi Pengantar dan tekniknya. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

(1)

reading ability. The researcher gathered the data from students’ reading test. Moreover, there were other instruments to gather the data, they were

observation for students and teacher, students’ questionnaire, evaluation sheet, and interview. The instruments were implemented to find out

students’ responses toward the implementation of Cooperative Learning Method in their classroom.

that most of students’ reading scores achieved the Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) which was used as indicator of students’ success. Cooperative Learning Method could help students to understand descriptive text since they were able to shared the difficulties to their friends in a group. In addition, the students also had more motivation to do the best because they had to competed with the other groups.