Abstract
This study was aimed to investigate how
Co-op technique
can be implemented to improve reading comprehension of the ninth grade students
of SMP Ma’arif Ngawi who faced the problems in reading. The students did not
comprehend the text and the score was low. The average score of reading test in
preliminary study was 65.17 whereas the average score of student’ success based
on the minimum standard of students’ score is seventy (70). The design of this
study was classroom action research. The technique applied in the research was
Co-op technique.
The result showed that the students reading average score significantly
improved. From the two cycle study, in the first test the students reading average
score was 69.31, in the second test the students reading score was 72.41. It
could be concluded that predetermined criteria of success had been
achieved.
Keywords: co-op co-op technique and reading comprehension
Currently, the researcher knows that people start to learn English since
English as an accepted international
language. Across the world, many people use one or other forms of English in their daily working
and personal lives. There are some
reasons why many people learn English. Harmer (1992, pp. 1-2) gives a number of different reasons for language study such as: (1)
School Curriculum, (2) Advancement, (3) Target Language Community, (4) English for Specific Purposes, (5) Culture, (6) Miscellaneous.
|
Reading
comprehension is a dominant
aspect before we learn to connect
ideas and meanings with words through speaking or writing, we must learn to
identify them through reading first. Many definitions of reading have been
proposed. The followings are the definitions of reading proposed by some
experts. According to Harmer (1992,
p. 190) reading is an exercise
dominated by the eyes and the brain. The eyes receive messages and the brain then
has to work out the significance of these messages.
Alderson (2000, p. 3) states that reading is the interaction between a reader and the text. During that
process it would appear that many things are happening. The reader is looking at print, deciphering the symbols
on the page, deciding what they
“mean” and how they relate to each other.
Tarigan
(1990, pp. 9-10) explains the purposes of reading as follows: 1) Reading for details of facts, 2) Reading
for main ideas, 3) Reading for sequence or organization, 4) Reading for
inference, 5) Reading to classify, 6) Reading to evaluate, 7) Reading to
compare or contrast.
The problem found by many teachers
in Indonesia is how the best way to teach students to read in English as well
as in their own language. It is understood that the reading population is made
up of people who are not only proficient readers in their native language, but
who have also mastered the fundamentals of vocabulary, grammar rules, and
syntax of the foreign language. Of course, it is well known that many readers
have difficulties with comprehension, even if the reading material is written
in their native language.
From a short conversation with some of the students who had done the test,
it was found and can be
assumed that they were not interested in reading English text. They felt that
reading was boring. It spent a lot of time to read its sentences and they had
to understand or, at least, predict the meanings of unfamiliar words put in
text.
According
to Johnson and Pearson in Darmiyati (2007, p. 16) there are two causes of low
learning English reading achievement. They come from external and internal factors.
Motivation
is one of the internal factors that is very important in teaching and learning
process. External factors which cause low learning of English reading can be classified into
two groups: social and non-social factors.
Based
on the theory above the researcher found some problems with both factors above.
The students’ motivation to read is very low; it can show from the students’
interest on reading. They almost never go to the library to read. Besides the students’
motivation, the other problems are social factors that almost all students come
from the society with low reading interest; another problem is the input of the
students when they enter this school. The most serious problem, almost the students’
score in the preliminary study are average low compared with KKM. The average
score for preliminary study is 65.17. In this cases the researcher interest to
give problem solving.
The
teacher is supposed to be imaginative and creative on developing the teaching
technique to create good atmosphere, improve the students’ reading competence
and make English lesson more exciting. The teacher has right in using technique in teaching process as long
as it can achieve instructional goal. The teacher should be aware of choosing the teaching technique in
order to make progress in students learning and to teach reading effectively.
Moreover,
there are many choices of teaching strategy that can be used by the teacher. While some teachers make
themselves as major information providers such as expository teaching strategy
which is focused on providing verbal explanation by the teacher to large group
of students to understand the lesson, others try to use students-centered
strategy in which students are more
active in learning process such as in cooperative learning.
Cooperative
learning is claimed as a successful teaching strategy in which small
teams, each with students of different levels of ability, uses a variety of learning activities to
improve their understanding of a subject (Centennial College Cooperative
Education and Employment Resources:2009). Each member of a team is
responsible not only for learning what is taught but also for helping teammates
learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement. Students work through the
assignment until all group members successfully understand and complete
it. Cooperative efforts result in participants striving for mutual
benefit. Children learn a foreign
language by being exposed to it, by making associations between words and
sentence patterns, putting them into clear context, exploring, experimenting,
making mistakes, checking their understanding, observing, copying, watching,
doing things, listening, repeating. There is poor learning if the child is
feeling uncomfortable, under pressure, confused by abstract concepts of grammar
rules and their application which he/she cannot understand, distracted or
bored, or finds it hard to concentrate while doing some longer activities
(Shipton, et al., 2006, p. 5).
In line with this, ccooperative learning is
viewed as one of effective
learning strategyies for
language classrooms. It helps learners actively participate in every task at
the same time and learners can compare, share, and discuss their answers.
Individualised and competitive learning situations
are common in children’s school experiences; co-operative learning is less about
that. Research shows that co-operative learning has
significant advantages for both intellectual and social development over
individualised and competitive learning environments (Hill & Hill, 1996,
p. 1).
Olsen & Kagan (1992, p. 8) in Richard (2001, p. 192) define cooperative learning as group learning
activity organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured
exchange of information between learners in groups and in which each learner is
held anccoutable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the
learning of others.
Co-op Co-op is intented to provide a collaborative
experience that completely lacks the element of competition. Slavin (1995,
p. 119) states that Co-op Co-op
allows students to work together in small groups, first to advance their
understanding of themselves and the world, and then to provide them with
oportunity to share that new understanding with their peers.
Co-op co-op provides for students to cooperate in
teams and to share the products of this collaboration with their classmates. Students
work in groups to produce a particular group product to share with the whole
class; each student makes a particular contribution to the group. The students
take either their own time, or class time to research, discuss, and learn the material. They create a
presentation for their classmates to teach the assigned aspect of the topic to their classmates. The teacher has a right to include
additional information or clarify at
the end of the presentation. All students in the class will be held accountable
for key information given in the
presentations. Co-op Co-op places
faith in the curiosity, intelligence, and expressiveness of students rather
than in extrinsic points and competitive motives.
It provides for students to cooperate in teams and
to share the products of this collaboration with their classmates. Students
work in groups to produce a particular group product to share with the whole
class; each student makes a particular contribution to the group. Beside
that, co-op co-op is very interesting strategy. Research has shown that
cooperative learning techniques: (1) Promote student learning and academic
achievement, (2) Increase student retention, (3) Enhance student satisfaction
with their learning experience, (4) Help students develop skills in oral
communication, (5) Develop students' social skills, (6) Promote student
self-esteem. The other reason is Co-op Co-op gives the students experience on
their study so they can understand the material deeply (http://www.kaganonline.com/).
The advantages of Co-op Co-op,
Kagan (1995, p. 450) Co-op Co-op can provide an
environment in which personal development, social development, and academic
learning are mutually supportive. By respecting the intelligence, the
interests, and the expressive capacities of students, Co-op Co-op allows
students to “enjoy a sharing and community effort” and, in the process, to
“become aware of the facilities within themselves.
The disadvantages of Co-op
Co-op, Kagan (1995, p. 440) says that Co-op Co-op will not be
successful for students who are not actively interested in a topic related to
the unit and who are not motivated to learn more about the subtopic they are to
research on.
The leadership issue arises if
one group member attempts to be too dominant. This situation can lead to an
important although painful learning experience for the student who is not aware
of the adverse effects of his or her dominance, the Co-op Co-op groups provide
a very real experience of democracy.
Many
students are turned off by the traditional educational experience to such an
extent that they are not motivated to learn or to participate in a group
learning project (Kagan, 1995, p. 450).
Method
The purpose of this research is to improve the
reading comprehension of the ninth grade students through Co-op Co-op
technique. Base on this purpose, the design was chosen for this research is
classroom action research. This classroom action research was begun from the
preliminary study. The researcher designed planning, implementing, observing,
and reflecting.
Planning
|
Preparing Lesson Plan
The researcher designed lesson plan with the purpose
of equipping the teacher with a guideline of the teaching and learning
activities. In designing the lesson plan, the researcher had considered the
following items: (a) standard competence, (b) basic competence, (c) learning
indicator, (d) learning objective, (e) teaching and learning instruction, (f)
material and media, (g) worksheets, (h) evaluation.
Determining the Criteria of Success
The criteria of success are vital to know whether the
implementation of Co-op Co-op technique is successfully conducted or not. In
line with the problems in the preliminary study, the criteria of success was
determined as follow:
a) Based
on the minimum criteria of students’ success (KKM), the average reading score
of learning success is seventy (70). It means that the individual student is
regarded to reach the criteria of learning success if their reading score are
70 for each students.
b) Suppose
the targeted minimal score of reading comprehension does not reach seventy
(70), the next action became important to conduct in the following cycle.
Action
In this research the researcher applied Co-op Co-op
technique. Based on this technique there are ten steps that must be done. From
the planning, the researcher applied all the steps in the classroom. In doing
the research the researcher was assisted by collaborator who observed the
teaching and learning process by filled the checklist.
Observation
In this research, the researcher used instrument of
reading test for getting the data by collecting the students score in every
test. The students done the test individually then they submit their work for
correcting. To monitor the process of teaching learning, the researcher made
checklist in every meetings that would fill out by collaborator for teacher
activities and for student’s activities, the checklist would fill out by the
researcher.
Reflection
In this research, the researcher used data analysis
and observation. The data analysis was gotten from the sum of students score
divided by the number of students. The data of observation was gotten from the
report of teaching learning process in the form of checklist. During teaching learning
process, the researcher found some problems. From all the steps in that
technique, the problem of the first step was the students did not have much
attention to the teacher’s explanation about the material. This problem gave
impact to the next step especially in the fifth, sixth, seventh step, because
in the fifth and sixth step the each member of the group must choose one topic
and done their own work which had contribution to their group. If the students
did not understand the materials, they could not do their work well so the
group would find some difficulties or problem. The next problem that researcher
found was in the seventh step. The problem was actually impact from the first
step too. Because of they did not have much attention to the teacher’s
explanation, they had their own perception about the material so it made debate
in the group. In this problem the researcher gave solution by explained again
the material to the group that they debated. For the problems in the fifth
until seventh step, the researcher solved the problem by guided and gave
direction how to do the work. In the second meeting, the researcher found the
same problem as in the first meeting. But in the second meeting the main
problem was the students still confused about the different between main idea
and main sentence. In this problem the researcher solved it by gave simple
explanation and example. At the last meeting, the researcher gave test to the
students for evaluating. The result of the first test the mean score was 69.31
it means that, the mean score is still lower than KKM. So the researcher
continued to the next cycle and revised the step in that technique.
Result
This is the presentation of research findings
obtained from the classroom action research at the ninth grade of SMP Ma’arif
Kabupaten Ngawi. The preparation for implementing Co-op Co-op technique in
reading was done to choose the theme to be studied based on the reading
curriculum and the duration of the action. The theme was about Narrative
reading text. The subject chosen were the ninth grade students of SMP Ma’arif
Kabupaten Ngawi which consist of twenty nine students. They all did preliminary
study before the technique was done.
Finding of the Cycle
There were two cycles consist of four meetings. Co-op
Co-op technique would be implemented in every meeting and the students would do
the test after they had finished implementing Co-op Co-op technique. These
findings presented the description of activities during the research in each
meeting.
Findings in the Cycle One
The cycle one was consist of two meetings. The first
meeting was held on Wednesday, February 5th 2014 and the second
meeting was held on Wednesday, February 12th 2014. In these meetings
the researcher applied ten steps in the Co-op Co-op technique. The teacher
explained about narrative text related with text which would be discussed. Then
the teacher engaged students by asking some questions to
discover and express their own interests in the topic and subtopics to be
studied. In the first meeting discussed about structure of the narrative
text and the second meeting the researcher discussed how to find main idea, word meaning based
on the context, explicitly stated information, and implicitly stated
information. From the teaching learning process in the first meeting and
second meeting, it can be observed that the students had not much attention to
the explanation. Some of them was talking each other. The discussion was not
good enough, There were some students did not active in the group and did not
provide a beneficial atmosphere that supported the improvement of students
reading comprehension achievement. In the first and second meeting the result
of the observation was discussed as followed:
- The students had not much attention to the teacher when the teacher explained about narrative text
- Not all of the students, for about 40% or 10 students showed their enthusiasm when the discussion in the first and second meeting was conducted
- There were almost half of students in that class who didn’t bring the dictionary so they got difficulties in cooperate with their group to find the difficult words
- The smart students dominated the discussion whether the low students were not active enough;
- There were some students who confused with the material so it made debate in the group discussion
- Some students (9 students) were false in answering the question because they didn’t understand the text.
- The average score of test one was better than preliminary study. It was 69.31 compared with preliminary study score was 65.17.
From the observation above the
researcher concluded that the main problem was actually placed in the first
step. Because the students did not have much attention to the teacher’s
explanation so it impact to the fifth, sixth and seventh step. To solved this
problem the researcher explained again the material to each group when guided
the discussion. For another problem, the researcher solved by giving motivation
to the students in order to followed the discussion seriously.
At the last, because the average
score is still lower than criteria of students’ success, so the researcher
continued to the next cycle and revised the step of the technique.
Findings in the Cycle two
This cycle consist of two meetings. The first meeting
was held on Wednesday, February 19th 2014 and the second meeting was
held on Wednesday, February 26th 2014. The researcher wanted to
improve the students score better than first cycle. The researcher done the
steps of the technique but he changed the first step to the third step. This
action was taken because the researcher thought that before explain the
material, it better that the students had gathered in a group because the
friend in the teammate could help the students who got difficulties in
understanding the material. The steps run well in the first and second meeting.
In the second cycle the result of observation was discussed as followed:
1. All
of the students paid attention to the teacher’s explanation;
2. They
felt enjoy to cooperate with their group;
3. They
got enthusiasm to give point for their group in discussion;
4. There
was no students who confused in understanding material and there was no debate
in the group;
5. The
students felt happy and they could do the work faster than before because they
had good cooperation to their teammate;
6. The
average score of test two was increased than test one and only five students
could not pass the minimum standard of students’ score.
|
Analysis of Students’ Paper Works
From the result of test one in the first cycle, there
were 20 students or 68.97 % students could pass the test well while 9 students
or 31.03 % failed. They got score under 70 as the minimum standard of students’
score. The average score was 69.31. In the preliminary study, there were only
10 or 34.5 % students who could success and 19 students or 65.5 % were failed.
The average score was 65.17. By comparing with the result in the preliminary
study, it could be seen that there was improvement of average score 4.14.
From the result of test two,
there were 24 students or 82.76 % could pass the test successfully. They got
score same or more than 70 as the minimum standard of students’ score.
The average score was 72.41. In test one, there were 20 students or
68.97 % could success and 9 or 34.03 % students failed. The average
score was 69.31. By comparing with the result of test one, it could be
seen that there was improvement of average score 3.1.
Reflected to the result of
students’ score from the first test until the second test, it could be known
that the Co-op Co-op technique success be implemented to improve the reading
comprehension of the ninth grade students of SMP Ma’arif Kabupaten gawi. There
was improvement of average score in every test. When the technique completed to
be implemented, the result of test in the second test showed that 24 of ninth
grade students could pass the minimum criteria of students’ score and 5
students still failed. It could be concluded that predetermined criteria of
success had been achieved. The study would be stopped in cycle two.
Discussion
This part will discuss about the summary of the
finding from the study and discussion of the finding.
The Improvement of Students’ Reading Comprehension
By observing the students reading skill from
preliminary study, improving their reading skill in three meeting study of one
cycle, there was a significance development in the students’ reading score. In
the preliminary study there were 10 or 34.5 % students who could success and 19
students or 65.5 % were failed. It means that only 34.5 % students were able to
comprehend the test. After implementing Co-op Co-op technique which in two
cycles were divided in four meetings, there was improvement of students’ score
in every test given. The average score of preliminary study was 65.17 rise up
to 69.31 in the test one. The students who success in doing test also raised up
from 10 students or 34.5 % to be 20 students or 68.97 %. In the second
cycle, the result of study showed there were 24 students success in doing test
while 5 students were failed. The average score raised up from 69.31 in test
one to be 72.41 in test two. It means that after implementing Co-op Co-op
technique, the students’ score was raised up in every test.
Discussion of the Research Findings
Based on the result of the test in every test, the researcher assumed
that development of students’ score because the students could accept and
comprehend Co-op Co-op technique in teaching and learning process. In the first
test there was improvement of average score from 65.17 became 69.31. However in
implementing Co-op Co-op in the first cycle, the students still faced some
problems. They had not much attention to the teacher’s explanation about the
materials. So it impact to the discussion at the group. Because the students
did not understand the material completely, it made some debates in the group.
There were some students could not discuss with their group optimally. They
were difficult to find the difficult word because they did not bring
dictionary. The smart students dominated the discussion whether the low
students were not active enough.
The problems above were the weakness that researcher
found in the first cycle. According to Slavin (1995, p. 119)
states that Co-op Co-op allows students to work together in small groups, first
to advance their understanding of themselves and the world, and then to provide
them with oportunity to share that new understanding with their peers. Co-op co-op provides
for students to cooperate in teams and to share the products of this
collaboration with their classmates.
The researcher solved the problems above by motivated
the students in order to followed the discussion seriously and explain the
material again when guided the discussion to the group.
|
There were the strength of Co-op Co-op techniques:
(1) Promote student learning and academic achievement, (2) Increase student
retention, (3) Enhance student satisfaction with their learning experience, (4)
Help students develop skills in oral communication, (5) Develop students'
social skills, (6) Promote student self-esteem. The other reason is Co-op Co-op
gives the students experience on their study so they can understand the
material deeply (http://www.kaganonline.com/).
Conclusion
and Suggestion
Conclusion
Based on the students’ score in the preliminary
study, it was known that the students’ reading comprehension needed to be
improved since their scores were low. There were only ten among twenty nine
students who passed the reading test in their preliminary study. To improve the
students’ reading comprehension and their motivation to understand the
passages, the researcher choose Co-op Co-op technique to be implemented in the
class. The study conducted in four meetings divided in two cycles. In every
meeting teacher as researcher guided the students to discuss the material in
group. There were the developments of students’ average score began from
preliminary test to the second tests during the implementation of Co-op Co-op
technique. By seeing the result of preliminary test, the average score was 65.17
then raised up to the average score of test one 69.31. It showed the positive
response of students for Co-op Co-op technique. Then, in the second cycle the
result of test two also showed the development of average score to be 72.41.
The second cycle is the last meeting which Co-op Co-op technique completed be
implemented in teaching reading. The result of test three showed that 24
students or 82.76 % who joined the test could success in passing the test while
5 students or 17.24 % failed the test. The average score was 72.41.
Below were the steps which
had been implemented by the teacher in order to improve the reading
comprehension: (1) Selection of
Student Learning Teams, (2) Team building and Cooperative skill
development, (3) Student-Centred
Class Discussion, (4) Topic
Selection, (5) Mini topic Selection, (6) Mini-topic Preparation, (7) Mini topic presentation, (8) Preparation of Team Whole-Class Presentations, (9) Team Whole-Class Presentations, and (10) Reflection and Evaluation.
The students more
enthusiastic in paid attention to the teacher’s explanation, they felt enjoy to
cooperate with their group, they got enthusiasm to give point for their group
in discussion. There were no students who confused in understanding material
and there was no debate in the group. The students felt happy and they could do
the work faster than before because they had good cooperation to their
teammate. The average score improved in every test. So, it was clearly seen
that Co-op Co-op technique success to help students in improving their ability
in reading comprehension.
Suggestion
The result of the classroom action research is
expected to give more effective technique to the teacher in teaching process
and give information dealing with strategies of reading comprehension through
Co-op Co-op technique. Due the fact that Co-op Co-op technique gives positive
impacts to the students’ ability in reading comprehension and students’
motivation and participation in the instructional process, the researcher
suggests the English teacher who has similar problem to implement Co-op Co-op
technique in the class. But one things that must be more serious attention to
implement Co-op Co-op technique, that this technique will success to help the
student’s problem if the teacher applied all the steps in the technique and
must give guidance in every step. The teacher must give motivation to the
students to follow the discussion seriously.
References
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Harmer, J. (1992). The practice of English language teaching.
London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (1992). The practice of English language teaching.
New York: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2003). How to teach English. Beijing: Foreign
Language Teaching and Research Press.
Hill, S. H. T. (1996). The collaborative classroom: A guide to
co-operative learning. Canbera: National Library of Australia.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson R.T., & Smith,
K.A. (1998). Maximizing instruction
through cooperative learning. ASEE Prism.
Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. San juan capitrasno.
CA: Resources for Teacher Inc.
Kagan, S. (1995). Co-op co-op: A flexible cooperative learning
technique
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and
practice. Massachusetts: A Simon & Schusster Company.
No comments:
Post a Comment