THE EFFECT OF READING STRATEGIES AND STUDENTS COGNITIVE STYLE ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN READING COMPREHENSION.

(1)

THE EFFECT OF READING STRATEGIES AND STUDENTS’

COGNITIVE STYLE ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN

READING COMPREHENSION

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

NURUL FADHILLAH Registration Number: 81061111025

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN 2013

(2)

THE EFFECT OF READING STRATEGIES AND STUDENTS’

COGNITIVE STYLE ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN

READING COMPREHENSION

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

NURUL FADHILLAH Registration Number: 81061111025

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN 2013

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, the writer would like to express her great gratitude to Allah SWT, the Almighty God, for His Blessing and Permission so that she can complete her thesis to finish postgraduate school in Applied Linguistics Study program, State University of Medan. Shalawat and Salam are presented to the prophet Muhammad SAW, his family, and companions.

Second, the writer would like to express her gratefully acknowledge to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd as the Head of English Applied Linguistics, Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S as the Secretary of English Applied Linguistics in UNIMED of the writer who has kindly assisted her in guiding, direction, revising and correcting the systematic or the concept of this thesis. And she sincerely would like to express her high appreciation to Prof. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., her first adviser, and Dr. Didik Santoso, M.Pd., her second adviser, for their assistance, patience, guidance, advice, comment, encouragement, and constructive criticism. A big thanks to them, because their assistance, patience, guidance, and outstanding knowledge in writing ability really gave great contribution to the writer’s thesis writing.

Third, great gratitude is also expressed to reviewers and examiners; Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, Prof. Dian Armanto, M.Pd., M.A., M.Sc., Ph.D., and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., thank for their constructive criticism, right from Proposal Seminar up to Thesis Examination. God bless them.

(7)

Fourth, high appreciation is addressed to all lectures in Applied Lingustics Study Program, Postgraduate School State University of Medan, who have provided invaluable knowledge, especially in language teaching. And for all of her classmates LTBI A1, thanks for their support and sincere friendship.

Fifth, high appreciation is also addressed to Mr. Sofyan Arianto, S.Ag. M.Pd., the Head of Tarbiyah Faculty STAIN Malikussaleh who gave the opportunity to allow the writer conducting research in the faculty. And also sincere gratitude is expressed to Mrs. Nurlaila M.Pd, as the Head of English Study Program and as the lecturer, who provided the time to help the writer in teaching the classes for the writer’s research, thanks for your kindness and patience.

Sixth, the writer would like to express her sincerest appreciation and thanks to: her husband, Syamsul Bahri S.Ag., M.M., for his great love and patience, his support and motivation to continue and finish the writers’ study; her lovely daughters, Nayla Nurul Izzah and Raysa Nurussyifa for their understanding; her mother Zulaidar, S.Pd., and her sisters, Sari Dina Amalia and Nurul Laila Mutia, Erlinawati, for their encouragement and prayers.

The last, the writer would like to express her thanks to all her buddies: Rama, Mulya, Erin, Fatmi, Mai and others, who always give a support and motivated the writer in finishing this thesis. Special thanks to my brother Khairun Nasir, S.Pd.I., and my lovely roommate Irma Dewi Isda, S.Pd. M.Hum., May Allah the Almighty bless them all!

Medan, 28th Pebruari 2013 The writer,

(8)

ABSTRACT

Nurul Fadhillah, Registration Number: 8106111025. The Effect of Reading

Strategies and Student’s Cognitive Style on Students’ Achievement in Reading

Comprehension. A Thesis. English Aplied Linguistics Study Program, State University of Medan. 2013.

The objectives of this study are to find out if: (1) students’ achievement in reading comprehension that taught by using ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy is higher than those that taught by using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy, (2) students’ achievement in reading comprehension with field independent style is hihger than those with field dependent style, (3) there is interaction of reading strategies and students’ cognitive style in reading comprehension.

An experimental research with factorial designed 2x2 was used in this study. There were 69 students from fifth semester of English department, Islamic State University (STAIN) of Malikussaleh Lhokseumawe in the 2012/2013 academic year as sample of this study. The students were from two classes that was assigned, and the classes randomly defined; one class used as experiment class that taught by using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY strategy and another class used as control class that taught by using guided reciprocal peer questioning strategy. Students’ cognitive style was measured by Embedded Figure Test to classify the students with field independent style and with field dependent style. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension was measured by given multiple choice test of reading text that covers the requirements of reading comprehension meaning.

The data were analyzed by applying Two-Way ANOVA, comparing �_� _� and � _� at the level of significance � = 0.05_{, the result reveals that (1) students} achievement in reading comprehension that taught by using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY strategy � = 66.59 _{is higher than those that taught by using guided} reciprocal peer questioning strategy � = 59.4 _with �� _� = 11.56 > � � = 3.99, it means ASK to THINK TEL-WHY strategy affects reading comprehension better than guided reciprocal peer questioning strategy (2) students’ achievement in reading comprehension with field independent style � = 63.97 _{is higher than those with field dependent style} � = 61.75 _with �� = 51.66 >� � = 3.99, it means field independent style affects reading comprehension better than field dependent style (3) there is no interaction of reading strategies and students’ cognitive style, based on �� = 0.52 < � � = 3.99, it can be concluded that both of strategies are equally well to be aplicated to the students field independent style; field independent style affects better in reading comprehension no matter what strategy is used. Nevertheless, ASK to THINK TEL-WHY strategy is superior, which is suitable to be taught to any cognitive style of students.

(9)

ABSTRAK

Nurul Fadhillah, Nomor Induk Mahasiswa: 8106111025. Pengaruh Strategi Reading dan Gaya Kognitif Siswa pada Prestasi Siswa dalam Reading Comprehension. Tesis untuk menyelesaian Gelar Magister pada Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan. 2013.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi ASK to THINK TEL-WHY lebih tinggi daripada yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning, (2) prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension dengan gaya kognitif independen lebih baik daripada siswa dengan gaya kognitif dependen, (3) terdapat interaksi strategi mmembaca dan gaya kognitif siswa dalam Reading Comprehension.

Ini adalah sebuah penelitian eksperimental dengan desain factorial 2x2. Sampelnya adalah mahasiswa semester lima jurusan Bahasa Inggris, Sekolah Tinggi Islam Negeri (STAIN) Malikussaleh Lhokseumawe 2012/2013, sebanyak 69 orang. Para siswa merupakan siswa dari dua kelas yang telah ditentukan secara acak; satu kelas digunakan sebagai kelas eksperimen yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi ASK to THINK TEL-WHY dan kelas lainnya digunakan sebagai kelas kontrol yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning. Untuk menentukan gaya kognitif siswa independen dan dependen, digunakan Embedded Figure Test. Prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension diukur dengan tes pilihan ganda berdasarkan teks bacaan yang memenuhi persyaratan reading comprehension.

Hasil dari penelitian ini, didapat dengan menggunakan analisis Two-Way ANOVA, perbandingan �_{ℎ� ��} dan � _�� pada taraf signifikansi �= 0.05_{, yaitu: (1) prestasi} siswa dalam reading comprehension yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan strategi ASK to THINK TEL-WHY � = 66.59 _{lebih tinggi daripada yang diajarkan dengan}

menggunakan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning � = 59.4 _dengan�ℎ� �� = 11.56 >� _�� = 3.99_{, ini berarti strategi ASK to THINK TEL-WHY mempengaruhi}

reading comprehension lebih baik dibanding dengan strategi Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning (2) prestasi siswa dalam reading comprehension dengan gaya kognitif independen � = 63.97 _{lebih tinggi dibandingkan dengan gaya kognitif dependen}

� = 61.75 _dengan�_{ℎ� ��} = 51.6 >� _�� = 3.99_{, ini berarti gaya kognitif independen}

mempengaruhi reading comprehension lebih baik dibanding dengan gaya kognitif dependen (3) tidak ada interaksi terhadap reading strategi dan gaya kognitif siswa, berdasarkan hasil analisis yang didapat �_{ℎ� ��} = 0.52 <� _�� = 3.99_{, dengan demikian}

maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa kedua strategi sama baiknya untuk diaplikasikan terhadap siswa dengan gaya kognitif independent; gaya kognitif independen mempengaruhi reading comprehension lebih baik, apapun strategi yang digunakan. Namun demikian, strategi ASK to THINK TEL-WHY tetap lebih unggul dan cocok untuk diajarkan kepada setiap siswa, apapun gaya kognitifnya.

(10)

LIST OF TABLES

4.9 Mean Score of Students’ Reading Comprehension in STAIN

Malikussaleh year of 2011-2012 ... 3

2.1 Cognitive Style Characteristics of Field Independence and Field Dependence ...52

3.1 Factorial Design ...61

3.2 Taxonomy of Reading Comprehension ...67

3.3 Question Distribution of Reading Comprehension Test ...69

3.4 The Summary of Variance Analysis of Two-way ANOVA ...75

4.1 Summary of Data Description ...77

4.2 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...78

4.3 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by Using Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ..79

4.4 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Independent Style ...81

4.5 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent Style...82

4.6 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension of Field Independent Style and Taught by Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...84

4.7 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent Style and Taught by Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...85

4.8 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Independent Style and Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...86

4.9 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent Style and Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy ...88

4.10 Summary on the Result of Normality Test ...90

4.11 Summary on the Result of Homogeneity Test ...91

4.12 Summary on the Result of Homogeneity Variance on Students’ Cognitive Style...92

(11)

4.14 Result of Homogeneity Variance among Groups ...93 4.15 Two-way ANOVA ...94 4.16 Summary on Calculation Result of Two-way ANOVA ...95

(12)

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Generic Comprehension and Thinking Questions Used in the Guided Peer Questioning Strategy ...29 2.2 TEL-WHY Explanation Procedure Component of ASK to THINK–TEL

WHY ...30 2.3 THINK component of ASK to THINK–TEL WHY

Showing (bottom to top) ...39 4.1 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by Using ASK to THINK-TEL WHY Strategy ...79 4.2 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...80 4.3 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Independent Style...82 4.4 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent style ...83 4.5 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Independent Style and Taught by Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...85 4.6 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent Style and Taught by Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...86 4.7 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Independent Style and Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...88 4.8 Histogram of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension with Field Dependent Style and Taught by Using Guided Reciprocal Peer

Questioning Strategy ...89 4.9 The Interaction of Reading Strategies and Students’ Cognitive Style 98

(13)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A : Reading Comprehension Test ...116

Appendix B : Embedded Figure Test ...128

Appendix C : Instrument Validation ...131

Appendix D : Description of Students’ Scores ...136

Appendix E : Students’ Scores on each Groups ...137

Appendix F : Normality Test of the Data ...138

Appendix G : Description of Basic Statistic Calculation ...147

Appendix H : Homogeneity Test of Variance ...163

Appendix I : Testing Hypothesis ...167

Appendix J : Lesson Plan of Using ASK to THINK TEL-WHY Strategy ...171

Appendix K : Lesson Plan of UsingGuided Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy ...173

(14)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Background of the Study

Reading is the foundation of all knowledge and the foundation for a proper education. Good reading can be helpful to obtain the current information as it is necessary. However, if people can read, yet is not really able to interpret what is read into usable information, they have not gained much, until they have a good reading comprehension skill. Because comprehension is a part of the communication process of getting the thoughts that were in the author’s mind into

the reader’s mind. Without comprehension, reading is simply following words on

a page from left to right while sounding them out; the words on the page have no meaning. Thus, Reading comprehension has involved understanding what is being read, since the main objective of reading comprehension is to gain some understanding of what the writer is trying to convey and can utilize that information.

Reading comprehension is one of essential tool that guides education, it is a crucial instrument for communication and information gathering. Reading well and being able to understand what have been read is the basis ability in to the

students’ future academic learning, not only in reading and writing but also in math, science, social studies, and other subjects as well. It will help students to increase their vocabulary knowledge which is strongly needed in reading comprehension thus, making them more confident in speaking and writing. It will

(15)

also help them read effortlessly or more naturally. It will help them connect what they are reading to their life experiences and/or to their previous knowledge. Therefore it is necessary to possess and master a good reading comprehension for all students.

Reading comprehension plays important role to help students develop their knowledge, reading in foreign language in this case English language, is important skill that should be mastered by university students in Indonesia. California Task Force (2002) informed that the ability to read is crucial to the success of all students, and it essential succeed in society. In addition, Trelease (2001) stated that reading is a fundamental task that must be mastered by every student, in order to be able to functionally compete in society.

However reading comprehension is not yet achieved. For some readers, comprehension is always challenging. They may understand each word

separately, but linking them together into meaningful ideas often doesn’t happen

as it should. These readers can decode the words, but have not developed sufficient skills to comprehend the underlying, deeper meaning of the sentences, the paragraphs, and the entire text. Reading can be challenging, particularly when the material is unfamiliar, technical, or complex, moreover, for them who have severe reading problems that included inability to pronounce words, limited academic vocabulary, and difficulty applying literal and critical comprehension skills when processing text.

These deficiencies are in Indonesian students that cause the lack of ability in reading comprehension. It is proved by the data that has been observed and

(16)

showed in International Student Achievement in Reading; the reading score of Indonesian students as reported by PIRL (Progress in International Reading Literacy, 2006) is low, Indonesia got the fourth lowest ranked from 45 countries, that it indirectly reveals that Indonesian students have a problem in reading.

This lack of reading comprehension ability is also found in Aceh university students, especially university students in Lhokseumawe, researcher finds that students have low score in reading comprehension achievement and they still find much difficulty in reading items that requires cognitive process; it is based on their score of reading comprehension examination for the last three semesters (STAIN Malikussaleh 2011-2012). The data is shown in the following table.

Table 1.1 Mean score of students’ Reading comprehension in STAIN

Malikussaleh year of 2011-2012

Unit Semester II Semester III Semester IV

students R.C students R.C students R.C

1 43 53.56 40 54.93 37 55.95

2 40 53.60 37 53.93 32 56.44

3 38 54.55 36 55.08 34 56.59

4 38 54.68 35 56.06 35 56.49

To overcome these problems of reading comprehension, a lot of researchers and teachers have tried hard to find out possible ways to help students read successfully, but there are many factors affect the reading proficiency, they are external and internal factors. The external factors are; text types, school and social environments, teaching methods including reading strategies. While the internal factors are; learning motivation, students’ intelligence, including students’

(17)

cognitive style. One of the most important factors is learning strategy. From the previous studies, it demonstrates that reading performance relates to the use of reading strategies. A successful reader implements deliberate, conscious, effortful, time-consuming strategies to repair or circumvent a reading component that is not intact. Reading teachers and programs explicitly teach such reading strategies to handle the challenges of reading obstacles.

There are many strategies can improve reading comprehension that has been suggested by researchers, such as; peer-assisted learning strategies (PALS), which entails pairing children from preschool through the intermediate elementary grades to engage in reading activities including repeated reading, paragraph summaries, and making predictions. Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction (CORI), a broad strategy intervention for elementary school children that includes an emphasis on motivational practices for encouraging conceptual goal setting and affording student choice and collaboration. Including the strategy ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy describes readers learn how to ask deep level questions while reading.

Many readers have an illusion of comprehension when they read text because they settle for literal levels of analysis as a criterion for adequate comprehension (Kintsch & Rawson, 2005). Literal readers believe they have adequately comprehended text if they can recognize the content words and can understand most of the sentences. However, deep comprehension requires inferences, linking ideas coherently, investigating the validity of claims with a critical stance, and sometimes understanding the motives of authors. Acquisition

(18)

of better reading strategies is apparently needed to crack the illusion of comprehension in readers who are settling for low standards of comprehension. They need to acquire and implement strategies to facilitate deeper levels of comprehension. Therefore ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy appropriately to apply to the students in order to promote the deeper comprehension of text through critical reading, thoughtful analysis, and complex inference generation. Thus, this particular comprehension strategy emphasizes thinking critically about text meanings and intentionally making connections between text and relevant knowledge of the world beyond that text.

In addition, reading comprehension is the result of effective reading. Effective reading is grounded in strong cognitive skills such as attention, auditory analysis, sound blending, sound segmenting, memory, processing speed, and visualization. Students’ learning to read use a cognitive style that will enable them to reason, think, and solve problems they encounter in their daily reading instruction as well as in their independent reading. Researchers have devoted considerable attention to defining and categorizing students’ cognitive styles and interpreting how they relate to reading instruction.

Subsequently, cognitive styles are also related to the reading comprehension proficiency (Witkin, 1977). They are described as how the individual acquires knowledge (cognition) and processes information (conceptualization). Cognitive styles are related to mental behaviors which individuals apply habitually when they are solving problems. In general, they affect the way in which information is obtained, sorted, and utilized. It is

(19)

classified individuals according to their preferred mode of information intake (sensing or intuiting), and their preferred mode of information processing and subsequent decision-making (thinking or feeling) (Myers & McCaulley, 1985).

A review of the literature indicated that students have different processing styles—that they synthesize and express the information learned in different ways (Riding, 1997). Researchers indicated that cognitive styles exist and affect the way individuals assimilate and process information and express what they know. Furthermore, cognitive psychologists have studied the cognitive/information processing styles and divided the cognitive styles of dependence and field-independence. Witkin et al. (1986) described individuals who tended to rely on external cues and were less able to identify an embedded figure in an organized field as being field dependent and those who tended to rely on internal cues and were more able to identify an embedded figure in an organized field as being field independent.

A study had been conducted by King (2007), that investigate the reading strategies to promote deep understanding of the text, it is inspring researcher to conduct the same research, and in relation of some problems that students have in reading comprehension, the researcher is interested to conduct a research about findings the effect of reading strategies as possible way to overcome the reading comprehension challenging and investigates their relationship to the students’ cognitive style which has found as one of internal factor that influence reading comprehension.

(20)

1.2 The Problems of the Study

In line with the background has been explained, the research problem will be formulated as following questions.

1. is students’ achievement in reading comprehension that taught by using ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy higher than those that taught by using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy?

2. is students’ achievement in reading comprehension with field independent style higher than those with field dependent style?

3. Is there any interaction of reading strategies and students’ cognitive style in reading comprehension?

1.3 The Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this research are:

1. to know whether students’ achievement in reading comprehension that taught by using the ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy is higher than those that taught by using Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy. 2. to know whether students’ achievement in reading comprehensions with

field independent style is higher than those with field dependent style. 3. to know whether there is interaction of reading strategies and students’

cognitive style in reading comprehension.

1.4The Significance of the Study

Reading is an extraordinary achievement when one considers the number of levels and components that must be mastered. The role of strategies in

(21)

improving reading at deeper levels is likely to receive increased attention in the future. This is particularly true in societies that demand more expertise in science, engineering, and technology—areas where world knowledge is modest and the need for comprehension strategies is enormous. Related to the cognitive style, readers are expected to pursue the deep explanations, causes, and implications underlying the knowledge presented, which would enable them to organize the

knowledge and to comprehend the text’s deeper meanings, its message, or point

effectively.

These research findings are expected to be useful for the theoretical and practical development. Theoretically, this study is expected to provide information, which may have as well as practical values for English Language Teacher to promote deeper comprehension on reading, by using the various type of reading strategies. Practically, these research finding is expected to increase students reading comprehension proficiency, especially in the focus on improving

the students’ reading comprehension level on mastering reading material that

(22)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

1.1Conclusions

Based on the data analysis and hypothesis testing, it is concluded:

1. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by ASK

to THINK-TEL WHY strategy is significantly higher than those that taught by Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy. It means, ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy affects reading comprehension better than Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning strategy.

2. Students’ achievement in reading comprehension with field independent style is higher than those with field dependent style. It means, field independent style affects reading comprehension better than field dependent style.

3. There is no interaction between reading strategies and students’ cognitive style in reading comprehension. Both strategies equally well affect students’ achievement in reading comprehension with field independent style. It means field independent style affects better in reading comprehension no matter what strategy is used. And it can be concluded too that nevertheless ASK to THINK-TEL WHY strategy is superior, which is suitable to be taught to any cognitive style of students.

(23)

1.2Suggestions

In connection with the conclusion, some suggested stated as follow:

1. English teachers are recommended to use ASK to THINK TEL-WHY and guided reciprocal questioning strategy in reading comprehension, since both of these strategies can increase students’ reading comprehension achievement.

2. English teachers should identify strong style patterns in their classes and devise lesson plans which accommodate individual learning style preferences. To improve learners reading comprehension, they need to be aware of the beliefs learners hold; cognitive styles. Because by knowing cognitive styles: (1) Learners who are conscious of their style make better use of their learning opportunities. (2) Learners learn better when they are provided with learning opportunities that enhance and extend their learning preferences. (3) Learners work better with new learning styles when they are given guided opportunities to practice them. These principles suggest that learning is enhanced and enriched when cognitive styles are properly addressed both before and during instruction.

3. From the finding of this research, it is proved that reading strategies can improve students’ achievement in reading comprehension. Thus, by determining Students’ cognitive style, teachers can give appropriate treatment to guide students based on their style, and give special attention

(24)

to the field dependent students, to make them better and can be equally well with field independent students in reading comprehension.

4. Teachers can develop further study in the area of reading strategies that expected to improve students reading comprehension achievement. It is believed that with the advent of learner-centered approaches, future teachers have the responsibility of training students to be capable of deciding what their best learning path is. They should be ready to assist and guide students through the process of reflecting on how they learn best.

5. Teachers should make learners aware of the need of strategic, autonomous learning and should train them in the effective use of those strategies.

(25)

REFERENCES

Ary, D., Jacobs, C. Lucy, Sorensen, C. & Razavieh, A. 2010. Introduction to Reasearch and Education. Canada: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Berry, James. 2005. Levels of Reading Comprehension. Retrieved March 7, 2012 from http//www.sc4. edu/documents/studyskills/h7levelsreadingcomp.doc. Bransford, J. 1985. Schema Activation and Schema Acquisition. In H. Singer &

R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 385-397). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Cagley, C. 1983. Field-Dependence/Independence as a Predictor of Inferencing and Problem Solving Abilities in Community College Students. Boca Raton: Florida Atlantic University Dissertation.

California Task Force. 2002. Reading, Every Child A Reader. Retrieved June 15, 2012 from http://orton-gillingham.com/orton-gillingham2.asp-11k.

Dutcher, Peggy. 1990. Authentic Reading Assessment. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. Retrieved March, 6 2012 from http:// PAREonline.net/getvn. asp?v=22n=6.

Goldstein, K.M, Blackman, S. 1978. Cognitive Styles: Five Approaches and Relevant Research. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Goodman, K. 1970. Reading as a psychologistic guessing game. In H. Singer and R. B. Ruddell . (Eds). Theoretical models and Processes of Reading. Newark, N.J.: International reading Association.

Graesser, C. Arthur, 2007. An introduction to Strategic Reading Comprehension. In McNamara, S. Danielle (Ed.), Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions and Technologies (pp. 3-26). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Graesser, A. C., Singer, Wiemer-Hastings, Peter. & Wiemer-Hastings, Katja. 2001. Constructing Inferences and Relations during Text Comprehension. In Sanders, Schilperoord, Spooren (Eds), Text Representation: Linguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects (pp.1-26). Amsterdams/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. 1994. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101:371–395.

Jung, C.G. 1923. Psychological types. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 111

(26)

Katims, David S. 1997. Improving the ReadingComprehension of Middle School Students in Inclusive Classrooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 2: 116-124.

King, Alison. 2007. Beyond Literal Comprehension: A Strategy to Promote Deep Understanding of Text. In McNamara, S. Danielle (Ed.), Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions and Technologies (pp. 267-290). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

King, A. 1996. A sequenced Inquiry Model of Peer Tutoring. Unpublished Manuscript. San Marcos: California State University.

King, A. 1995. Designing the Instructional Process to Enhance Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: Inquiring Minds Really Do Want to Know: Using Questioning to Teach Critical Thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1): 13-17.

King, A. 1994. Autonomy and Question Asking: The Role of Personal Control in Guided Student-generated Questioning. Learning and Individual Differences, 6: 163–185.

King, A. 1994a. ASK to THINK–TEL WHY. Unpublished Manuscript and Materials. San Marcos: California State University.

King, A. 1994b. Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of Teaching Children How to Question and How to Explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30:338–368.

King, A., & Rosenshine B. 1993. Effects of Guided Cooperative Questioning on Children’s Knowledge Construction. Journal of Experimental Education, 61: 127–148.

King, A. 1991. Effects of Training in Strategic Questioning on Children’s Problem-solving Success. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3): 307-317.

King, A. 1990. Reciprocal Peer Questioning: A Strategy for Teaching Students How to Learn Draw Lectures. The Clearing House, 64: 131-135.

King, A. 1989. Effects of Self-questioning Training on College students’ Comprehension of Lectures. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14:1–16.

Kintsch, W. & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Comprehension. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 209-226). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

(27)

Kintsch, W. 1988. The Role of Knowledge in Discourse Comprehension: A Constructive-Integration Model. Psychological Review, 95:163–182. Luk, Suet Ching. 1998. The Influence of a Distance-learning Environment on

Students’ Field Dependence/Independence. The Journal of Experimental Education, 66: 149-160.

MacKay and A. Mountford .1979. Reading for Information in Reading in a Second Language. R.Mackay, B. Barkman and R.R. Jordon (Eds.) Rowley, Mass.: Newburg House.

Meneghetti, C., Carretti, B., De Beni, R. 2006. Components of Reading Comprehension and Scholastic Achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 1(16): 291-301.

Messick, S. 1976. Personality Consistencies in Cognition and Creativity. In S. Messick and Associates (Eds.), Individuality in Learning (pp.4-22). San Francisco: Josey-Bass.

Morsy, L., Kieffer, M., & Snow, C. E. 2010. Measure for Measure: A critical

Consumers’ Guide to Reading Comprehension Assessment for

Adolescents. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Mullis, I.V.S., Kennedy, A.M., Martin, M.O. & Sainsbury, M. 2006. PIRLS 2006 Assessment Framework and Specifications, (2nd ed.). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.

Nussbaum, E. M., Winsor, D. L., Aqui, Y. M., & Poliquin, A. M. 2007. Putting the Pieces Together: Online Argumentation Vee Diagrams Enhance Thinking during Discussions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 479-500.

Nuttall, C. 1982. Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. 2001. The Lexical Basis of Comprehension Skill. In D. S. Gorﬁen (Ed.), The Consequences of Meaning Selection: Perspectives on Resolving Lexical Ambiguity (pp. 67–86). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

RAND Reading Study Group. 2002. Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

(28)

Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetty, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. 2001. How Psychological Science informs the Teaching of Reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2 (2): 31-68.

Rayner, S., & Riding, R. 1997. Toward a categorization of cognitive styles and learning styles. Educational Psychology, 17, 5-27.

Richard, C. Jack & Rodgers, S. Theodore. 1999. Approaches and Language Teaching. United States of America: Cambridge University Press.

Rickards, J., Fajen, B., Sullivan, J., & Gillespie, G. 1997. Signaling, Notetaking, and Field Independence-Dependence in Text Comprehension and Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89: 508-517.

Riding, R., Glass, A., Butler, S., & Pleydell-Pearce, C. 1997. Cognitive Style and Individual Differences in Eeg Alpha During Information Processing. Educational Psychology,17(1&2): 219-235.

Riding, R. 1997. On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17(1): 29-49.

Riding, R., & Pearson, F. 1994. The Relationship between Cognitive Style and Intelligence. Educational Psychology, 16: 81-106.

Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. 1996. Teaching Students to Generate Questions: A Review of the Intervention Studies. Review of Educational Research, 66: 181–221.

Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. 1994. Reciprocal Teaching: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 64: 479–530.

Rumelhart, D.E. 1980. Schemata: The Building Blocks of Cognition. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, & W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension (pp. 38-58). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sadeghi, Karim. 2007. The Key for Successful Reader-writer Interaction: Factors affecting Reading Comprehension in L2 Revisited. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 9(3): 198-220.

Singhal, Meena. 1998. The internet TESL Journal, A Comparison of L1 and L2 Reading: Cultural Differences and Schema. Retrieved March 6, 2012 from http://www.gse.uci. edu/ed168/resume.html.

Spooner, A. I. R., Baddeley, A. D., & Gathercole, S. E. 2004. Can Reading Accuracy and Comprehension be separated in the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74:167-204.

(29)

Sprenger, M. 1999. Learning and Memory: The Mind in Action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Taylor, D. S. 1985. Teaching reading for comprehension in the context of English as a second or foreign language. British Journal of Language Teaching, Vol. 23, No.1. Retrieved March 7 2012 from http://education.leeds.ac. uk/~dst/inted/ read.htm.

Tennant, M. 1988. Psychology and adult learning. London: Routledge.

Tinajero, C., & Paramo, M. 1998. Field Dependence-Independence Cognitive Style and Academic Achievement: A review of Research and Theory. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13: 227-251.

Tompkins, E. Gail, 2010. Reading Comprehension Factors. Pearson Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall. Retrieved March 7, 2012 from http://www.education.com/ partner/articles/ pearson.

Trelease, Jim. 2001. Reading for FUN is Reading for the Future. Retrieved June 15, 2012 from http://www.Trelease-on-reading.com/rah.html.

Walczyk, J. J., Kelly, K. E., Meche, S. D. & Braud, H. 1999. Time limitations enhance reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(1): 156-165.

Williams, D. 1981. Factors related to performance in reading English as a second language. Language Learning, 31(1): 31-50.

Witkin, H., Moore, C., Goodenough, D., & Cox, P. 1977. Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1): 1-64.

Witkin, H., Moore, C., Oltman, P., Goodenough, D., Friedman, F., Owen, D., & Raskin, E. 1977. Role of the Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles in Academic Evolution: A longitudinal Study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69: 197-211.