Students
in English Department must have good ability in the four language skills that
are reading, speaking, writing, and listening. Those four skills are elated to
each other. By reading they can have materials and information to speak, and
then they can write it down by using their own words. Afterwards, they can
share it to others by listening to others’ opinion. The standard competence of
Reading class materials for second year students of English Department is to
comprehend the meaning of short functional text and simple essay in the form of
genre texts in daily context and to access science. Based on the curriculum of
Reading 4 of English Department in STKIP PGRI Blitar, as the continuation of Reading 3, the course in Reading 4 is designed to develop the student’s
reading proficiency to pre-advanced English level. Here, the students will be
exposed to various
descriptive and expository passages from popular scientific source. In addition
to the reading skill dealt with in the previous reading courses, the exercises
will be focussed on more advanced aspects of reading and rhetoric, including facts and opinions, inference,
synthesis, and other organizational aspects. Language exercise will include
more difficult words and idioms and more complicated grammatical structures.
The evaluation will be based on student’s performance in mid-term and final
tests.
The purpose of learning is the
students can identify both the word meaning and topic of the genre texts,
especially for analytical exposition text. Unfortunately, there are some
students who often get difficulties in comprehending this analytical exposition
text given by their lecturers since this kind of text requires them to
understand what to analyze, what the core of thesis statement, the argumentations
of the writer, understanding of structure meaning; understanding
coherence, cohesion; understanding topic boundary markers; understanding
sentence structure and understanding reference. They are especially second year students who had the lowest achievement
in reading skills. Their average score was 63. Based on the questionnaire
conducted, they got low score in Reading class since they did not apply
the appropriate reading strategies in comprehending the texts given by the
lecturer. Some of them were not
interested in studying reading for the lecturer only asked them to translate
each words all of the time, to read the texts, and then to answer the questions
below those text. It seemed that the lecturing of reading in previous class
could not train the students to read the texts effectively, so that the
researcher as the lecturer of Reading 4 class applied SQ5R to train the
students.
The lecturers must be able to consider the good
technique used in learning process in order to create an active class in which
the students not only can read the texts but also comprehend about the
information in it. There are some good techniques in teaching reading. One of
them is Survey, Question, Read, Record, Recite, Reflect, and Review (SQ5R),
that is by doing survey, question, read, record, recite, review, and reflect the
material. The researcher chose this reading technique since it is easy
and quick to learn so that it can strengthen the students’ ability in reading
without having their brain melted.
Methods
The research
design was Classroom Action Research (CAR). The researcher used Classroom
Action Research spiral based on Kemmis and Taggart theory (1982). It is called
Classroom Action Research because the study is based on the following reasons:
1) This study was done in natural ways; 2) The data collected consist of words
and sentences or soft data;
3) This study concerns to improve quality of human action and practice.
Mc. Niff (1992, p. 6) defined action
research as a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants
(teachers, students, or principals, for example) in social (including
educational) situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of (1)
their own social or educational practices, (2) their understanding of these
practices, and (3) the situations (and institutions) in which the practices are
carried out.
Cohen and Manion (in Richards,1990, pp. 63-64)
draw a distinction between applied research and action research. They suggest
that applied research is more rigorous and does not claim to contribute
directly to the solution of problems. Action research, on the other hand, is
less interested in obtaining generally scientific knowledge than knowledge for
a particular situation or purpose. Action research is situational, or
context-based, collaborative, participatory, and self-evaluative. They go on to
suggest, that action research can be utilized toward five general ends.
Firstly, as a means of remedying problems diagnosed in specific situation or of
improving in some way a given set of circumstances. Secondly, as a means of
in-service training, providing teachers with new skills and methods and
heightening self-awareness. Third, as a means of injecting additional or
innovative approaches to teaching and learning into a system which normally
inhibits innovation and change. Fourth, as a means of improving the normally
poor communications between the practicing teacher and academic researcher.
Fifth, as a means of providing an alternative to the more subjective
impressionistic approach to problem solving in the classroom, (although lacking
the rigor of true scientific research).
According
to Latief (2003, p. 2), classrooms
action research is an approach to English teachers’ professional development
and to improve students’ learning in which, English teachers systematically
collect data and reflect on their works and make changes in their English
classroom practices.
Furthermore,
the implementation of classroom action research should follow certain
procedures. Kemmis and Taggart (in Nunan, 1990) stated that the procedures for
carrying out research consist of four developmental phases, namely planning,
implementing, observing the effects of action, and reflecting. These four
phases are meant to form part of an ongoing process.
In this study, the researcher was the classroom lecturer so she herself
intended to improve the instruction in her own class. It meant that the
researcher also acted as the lecturer. But, the lecturer used collaborative
approach with another lecturer of the reading 4 class to support the
successfulness of the classroom action research. When the collaborative
approach implemented in this classroom action research, the researcher together
with the collaborator made a plan of action, implemented the action, and
reflected on the action.
The research was
carried out in STKIP PGRI Blitar. It is located at 111 Kalimantan Street,
Blitar town. The Classroom Action Research was done from March up to May 2013.
The research subjects were the students in class 2B of English Department of
STKIP PGRI Blitar in the academic year of 2012/2013 and the lecturer. They were
32 students. The researcher was the lecturer at class 2B. The research object
was teaching and learning process, analytical exposition, SQ5R technique, and
the result of the implementation.
This research is
conducted in three cycles then it is observed and evaluated to identify all
facts including the success and the failure of each actions. It means that the
action should be stopped or continued and revised to the next cycles based on
the selected criteria of success. The selected main criterion of success is
that 80% of the students must have got the minimum score of 75.
The data of the research
is qualitative data,
which is in the form of sentences and quantitative
data in the form of numerical data. Sentences are
to describe all activities of teaching learning process using SQ5R technique.
Tables and charts are
to show students’ reading scores on analytical exposition text.
The
procedure of this classroom action research refers to Kemmis and Taggart Theory
(1988) which consists of cycles. Each cycle has four steps: step 1 planning,
step 2 implementing / acting, step 3 observing and step 4 reflecting.
In this classroom
action research, the researcher used the spiral model as suggested by Kemmis
and Taggart (1988) with the spiral steps.
Results
In implementing
of the SQ5R technique, the researcher describes as follows. The seven steps of
SQ5R technique are survey, question, read, record, recite, review, and reflect
step. The steps in SQ5R technique must have each dividing time used to conduct
SQ5R technique in increasing the students’ reading ability. For the class that
most of the students consist of higher achievement students, the time given
will be enough for 90 minutes of meeting to do these seven steps. But, for the
class which many of the students consist of lower achievement students, the
time given will be longer than those higher achievement students. The dividing
time will be as follows. Survey step conducted in 5 minutes to discover the
main point of reading material by reading the main headings and subheadings at
a glance to identify the relationship between the parts and subtopics. If the text
includes charts, tables, pictures, or graphics, survey step will need about 20
minutes. Next, Question step needs time about 15 minutes. Here, the students
should turn headings and subheadings into questions to ask who, what, where,
when, why, and how about the headings. They can also use the authors’ questions
at the beginning or the end of chapter, but they do not need to answer the
questions yet, just keep a list handy to use as a reference while they are
reading. Then, Read step. It
will need 25 minutes. After making questions, now the readers should read
actively with those certain questions above in mind and attempt to answer the
questions and organize the material. Afterward, Record step will need 25
minutes. Here, the students must record their comprehension; that is, make the
record of the answers they have found. This may be done by writing note in the
margin or by preparing an outline of the key information. In this step, the
students are also asked to record the difficult words they have found to get
the meaning. Here, the lecturer helps the lower achievement students to
comprehend the words, since sometime certain words will have other meaning if
it combined with other words. Next step will be Recite step that need 30
minutes time to do. Getting the meaning of those difficult words and the key
information, the students must recite the text once more to get the main ideas.
Those main ideas will be written in a good outline. Making an outline will
reinforce the information into the auditory cognition center of the brain, so
the students actually putting in the information in both a visual and auditory
manner at the same time. Finishing a good outline, the students will go to
Review step in 25 minutes to go. Here, the researcher as the lecturer will
review the textbook notes shortly to class. For the higher achievement students
who are able to translate and comprehend the text well, the lecturer will
emphasize the conclusion of the text. But, for those lower achievement
students, the lecturer will help them to deliver the core of the text into
their own words well. Finally, the last step is Reflect step. This step needs
30 minutes. In this step, the lecturer asks the students to connect the
information with the students’ knowledge, experiences, and social environment
so that this step can encourage them to identify problems or dilemmas.
Furthermore, in the future they can see themselves as problem solvers.
The graded results of Reading 4 class conducted by the
researcher as the lecturer could be visible in every cycle. In cycle I, 18
students got lower score than 75 in the first test with the average score was
only 70. Therefore, 57% students got the score more than 75. Then, in cycle II,
Of 32 students, there were 78% of the students got score more than 75. The
amount of the students who got lower score than 75 decreased into 11 students.
The average score was 81. In cycle III, there were 91% students got more
than the target score. The average score of the test was 85. There were only 3 students of 32 students in the class 2B
who got less than 75. To sum up, the target score achieved successfully. Of
this result, the researcher considered that the action of cycle III was
sufficient and the researcher ended the action as far as this cycle.
Discussion
The implementation of SQ5R technique throughout the action
research, starting from setting the instructional objectives, planning and
structuring the tasks, determining the time, evaluating their achievement on
daily practice, up to its implication in working of the analytical exposition.
Setting the instructional objectives determined what the lecturer should
prepare, what should be evaluated as well as how to do it. After the objectives
were specified, the tasks were structured. As Mc Donell (in Kesler, 1992) said,
“The learning experience that are planned and structured allow learners to have
the opportunity to build on what they already know, to have a clear sense of
direction, and have enough time to develop their understanding.”
The problem that must be solved in this research is reading
ability on analytical exposition text. As the definition of reading according
to Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
(1995, p. 871), reading is the activity or skill of understanding written
words. Reading is a means of languages acquisition of
communication, and of sharing information and ideas. Like all languages, it is
a complex interaction between the text and the reader’s
prior knowledge, experiences, attitude, and language community, which is
culturally and socially situated. The reading process requires continuous
practices, development, and refinement. While, the analytical exposition is one of argumentative texts
that presents some supporting
ideas on why certain writer’s opinion is important. The opinion should
be formulated in a thesis, which needs proves by selecting
arguments. (http://www.englishdirection.com accessed at 10 a.m. on March 5th, 2013).
From those definitions above, it is suitable that the SQ5R
technique applied in this research to increase the achievement of the students
reading ability, especially in comprehending the analytical exposition, since
the SQ5R technique is a reading technique which includes seven steps to
be taken to ensure effective reading through reliance on a variety of memory
skills. Pauk (1984) advocates that
the seven steps of the SQ5R—Survey,
Question, Read, Record, Recite, Review, Reflect—engage students in active comprehension.
Advocates of this approach to reading maintain that it improves a person’s
ability to read intelligently by requiring him or her to employ a number of
skills rather than simply reading words and trying to memorize a few pertinent
facts.
In
analytical exposition text, the writer stated his/her opinion and argumentation
in order to support his/her opinion stated in thesis part. By using SQ5R
technique, the students have done some activities to do based on the steps
required in SQ5R technique to comprehend the opinion and the argumentations
raised up in the texts. The activities are not only having simply reading and
memorizing a few pertinent facts, but the students asked to do the seven steps
that was finished by reflect step as the last step. Reflect step requires the
reader to think about the information and to decide how this information can be
helpful in the future (Pauk, 1984). So, the researcher got the students to
relate between the text
and the reader’s prior knowledge, experiences, attitude, and language
community, which is culturally and socially situated, based on the requirements
in reading.
The successful implementation of the SQ5R technique in
Reading 4 class is as follows. In cycle I, the applying of the SQ5R technique
was more beneficial to the higher achievement students than to the lower
achievement students. Those higher achievement students could comprehend the
texts well since the steps in SQ5R technique allowed them to do reciting and
reviewing to give them more clarity than only having reading the texts then
answering the questions. Reflecting step as the last step dag up their prior
knowledge, experiences, attitude as well, then related to the text that could bring them into the
applying of that information to their cultural and social environment. As the
result, 57% students got the score more than 75. However, cycle I must be
continued cycle II since the average score was only 70.
In cycle II, the lecturing focused on the increasing of the
middle achievement students and the lower achievement students’ score. Each
step was explained more clearly and an extra or additional time was given for
each step for the students to conduct them. The additional time given gave
those students expanding time to do the steps well. Actually, each step in SQ5R
had its own time to do. In cycle II, the students spend a few minutes
going over the earlier notes before beginning a new reading assignment. This
will help the readers keep the overall picture of the author’s development in
mind and will let them place the new material properly within that
arrangement(Cohen 1994 in Genesee & Upshur, 1996). So,
we have to arrange the time well so that the steps could be conducted as well.
In this cycle, the researcher could see that most of them could do the aspects
of each SQ5R step to comprehend the texts. When they went to reflect step, the
last step of SQ5R, they could share the information and ideas they have got
from the texts to the class by the lecturer’s guidance. As the result, there
were 78% of the students who got the scores over 75. The average score 81 was
gained by only 78% of the 32 students. Meanwhile, the target score that must be
achieved was that 80% students should get the score 75. So, cycle II must be
continued to cycle III.
In cycle III, the lecturing focused on the increasing of
the lower achievement students’ score. The additional time was made
proportionally to give emphasizing for the students to do the steps well. For
the lower achievement students, these steps such as read, record, recite and
review steps were emphasized to give more comprehension of the texts. In read
step, the lecturer emphasized on highlighting or making notes for the
information raising, identifying the main ideas, and then answering the
questions orally which was guided by the lecturer. As the definition of Read step,
is a critical step because students have to judge significant from insignificant information (Crafton,
1982); to negotiate
for meaning and
to respond cognitively, emotionally, and imaginatively
to imaginative writing (Greenwood, 1988); to understand the writer’s purpose
and the text structure (Williams, 1994).
In record step, the lecturer asked the students to record
the key points and main ideas even the difficult words. It is suitable with the
definition of Record step that it traps students to answer the questions in complete
sentences and make notes of the key points of text information. Making notes
helps students to clarify
thinking and remembering (Sosothikul,
2007); to increase
attention to material,
to improve the integration of previously learned
information with new information (Howe, 1974; Peper & Mayer, 1978;
Weener, 1974 in
Peck & Hannafin,
1983); to facilitate
learning (Peck & Hannafin, 1983; Rickards, 1980 in Lapp
&Flood, 1986). They then transform the notes into a summary.
Summarization helps students
to understand concepts,
process them, and
restate them in their
own words (Raimes, 1983);
to retell, clarify
the message (Silveira, 2003);
to transmit messages in an era
of free-access information
(Endres-Niggemcyer, 1998; Rau, Jacobs & Zernick, 1989 in Silveira, 2003).
Here, the lecturer also helped the students recite the
texts to put the information into their own words. It was good for them since
they have comprehended the texts to transfer to their words, and to answer the
questions of the texts by using their own words. Recite, engages students
to rehearse or speak out the questions and answer aloud to themselves or to
peers in order to learn and remember better (Pauk, 1984).
After reciting, they went to review
step. Here, the lecturer asked the students to recall their main ideas they
have made to check with the lecturer notes, and then share it to the class. It
was suitable with the review step definition. Review is the step for
giving opinions or feeling about the text information. Giving opinions glues
facts and ideas into the permanent memory and converts them into true wisdom
(Pauk, 1984). As the result of the revised action in
cycle III, there were 91% students who got the scores more than 75.
Conclusion
From the result of the data, the
researcher can conclude that the SQ5R technique showed better result than the
common technique used in previous lecturing of reading. The students felt
enthusiastic in applying SQ5R technique to increase their score of Reading 4
class. The SQ5R technique served them to not only understand the simple words
and then memorize those difficult words in the texts as like in the previous
lecturing of Reading 3. This technique engaged the students in active
comprehension, to work their working memory in comprehending the texts then
take the core of the texts to reflect in their daily life and future as well.
The graded results
of Reading 4 class conducted by the researcher as the lecturer, could be
visible in every cycle. The result of cycle I was there were 18 students who
got lower score than 75 in first test, and then in cycle II the number of
students who got lower score than 75 decreased into 11 students. In cycle III,
the students who got lower score was only 3 students of 32 students in the
class 2B. Finally, the result of the research support the experts theories as
stated in the previous chapter with the achievement was 91% of 32 students
could get the minimum score of 75. To sum up, the target score was achieved
successfully. Of this result, the researcher considered that the action of
cycle III was sufficient and the researcher ended the action as far as this
cycle.
References
Crafton, L. K. (1982). Comprehension before, during, and after reading.
The Reading Teacher.
Genesee, F. & Upshur, J.A. (1996).
Classroom-based evaluation in school
language education. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Greenwood, J. (1988). Class readers. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
http://www.englishdirection.com accessed at 10 a.m. on March 5th 2013.
Kemmis, S. (1982). Action research in retrospect and prospect,
in c. Henry, c. Cook, kemmis, r. Mc. Taggart (Ed.): The action research reader, action research and the critical analysis
of pedagogy. Geelong: Deakin University, VIC
Latief, M. A. (2003). Penelitian tindakan kelas pembelajaran
bahasa Inggris. Malang: Fakultas Sastra Universitas Negeri Malang.
Mc. Niff, J. (1992). Action research principles and practice.
Kent: Mackays of Chatnan PLC.
Pauk, W. (1984). How to study in college (3rd. Ed).
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Peck, K. L. & Hannafin, M. J. (1983).
The effects of note taking pre-training and the recording of notes on the
retention of aural instruction. Journal
of Educational Research.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Silveira, J. C. P. (2003). Summarizing techniques in the English
language classroom: An international perspective.
Sosothikul, R. (2007). How to improve your reading. Bangkok:
Chulalongkorn University Press.
Williams, E. (1994). Reading in the language classroom.
London: McMillan Publishers.
No comments:
Post a Comment