Abstract: This research study aims at investigating whether
there is significant difference on the students’ reading
comprehension ability before and after being taught using STAD. The
research design of this study was experimental research. The
researcher applied quasi-experimental, non randomized pre test and
post test design, the variables examined in this research were
independent variable teaching English using STAD and dependent
variable students’ reading comprehension. In the end of the
research, the researcher concluded that the effect of STAD on
students’ reading comprehension ability by comparing the test
result between the pre-test and post test in two classes. The
findings of the research showed that the students which are
taught using STAD have higher score than taught without STAD. It is
proved by the calculation of mean score on experimental class was
21.31 and control class was 14.25. In percentage of the average
achievement in reading comprehension, the control class had 14.25 %
and the experimental class had 21.31%. So, we can say that there was
7.06 % difference. It can be concluded that the difference is
statistically significant. It could be said that
teaching reading comprehension using STAD is more effective than
using conventional teaching.
Key Words: STAD, Reading process, Reading comprehension
Ability
INTRODUCTION
Since
English in Indonesia is a foreign language, most students at any
levels of education have difficulty reading English texts. According
to Hamra, Many research results (Syatriana, 1998; Hamra, 1993 and
1996; Mardiana, 1993; Kweldju, 2001) indicated that the ability of
Indonesian students to read English texts was very low. Most
university graduates are not able to read English with complete
comprehension. The Indonesian students need help with their reading
comprehension. For students, reading is a key to improving learning
outcome in many fields of study. Reading is an inseparable part of
any English course.
According
to Hamra (1993), in Indonesia, learning to read English starts at the
fourth grade of elementary schools, and continues to junior and
senior high schools up to the higher education. Learning to read is a
process that involves a number of different skills and experience. It
depends on learning to decode individual words and to comprehend the
meaning of a text. The school curriculum in Indonesia states that by
the end of the third grade of junior high school students are
expected to recognize and understand about 1000 English words and
about 2500 English words for senior high schools (Depdiknas, 2002).
The English students at higher education are expected to read or
comprehend English text books of different fields of study.
In
the junior high school level, skills for comprehending English texts
have been considered very important. For instance, as Cahyono and
Widiati (2006) state prior to the implementation of the 2004 English
curriculum, the objective of teaching was the development of
communicative ability in English embracing four language skills, with
reading skill being given a first priority. The 2004 English
curriculum places reading is equal to other English language skills,
those are, listening, speaking, and writing. According to the 2004
English curriculum, the objectives of English instruction at the two
levels of secondary school (junior and senior high) are as follows
(Translated from Depdiknas, 2004: 9 and Depdiknas, 2003: 7,
originally written in slightly different Indonesian wordings):
- “Developing communicative competence in spoken and written English language which comprises listening, speaking, reading, and writing”. 2) “Raising awareness regarding the nature and importance of English as a foreign language and as a major means for learning”. 3) “Developing understanding of the interrelation of language and culture, as well as cross-cultural understanding”.
As
we know that most of learners told the students’ problem in
learning reading such as they do not have enough vocabulary, are lazy
to and not used to reading printed materials. Based on those
problems, most of learner has difficulty in reading the text.
According to Gabb (2000) in Alyousef, poses a very important question
why learners face difficulties in moving into fluency stage although
they have had basic decoding skills. She identifies a number of
“barriers” for the reader was limited vocabulary and lack of
background knowledge (schematic knowledge).
Teaching
reading comprehension in junior high school needs such kind of
communicative system. In order to make the learner understand the
text well, the teacher should have good method to teach the learner.
It is because when the students are taught using conventional method,
the teaching learning processes only focus on the teacher and the
learners do not pay attention to the teacher. Based on Hamra in his
journal, using an interactive model for teaching reading
comprehension is another effort to improve the reading comprehension
of EFL students, especially the Indonesian students.
According
to Slavin (1995:12) Student teams achievement division (STAD) has
been used in a wide variety of subjects, from mathematics to language
arts to social studies, and has been used from second grade through
college. The STAD method is most appropriate for teaching
well-defined objectives with single right answers, such as
mathematical computations and applications, language usage and
mechanics, geography and map skills, and science facts and concepts.
However, it can easily be adapted for use with less well-defined
objectives by incorporating more open-ended assessments, such as
essays or performances. Based on Anto, et al (2013) Student Team
Achievement Division (STAD) Method is more effective than
conventional method to teach reading.
According
to the statement above, the researcher purposes the Student Teams
Achievement Division (STAD) as the method of teaching reading. We
know that reading is one of important skills in the school; the exams
of English usually use text to measure of students’ understanding
about the text. The student should have good comprehension in the
process of reading in order to understand the text and also pass the
exam. According to 2004 curriculum state that at the national exam of
the school in 2004/2005, the form of a junior high English test form
of a written test with multiple choice questions for listening
comprehension and reading comprehension.
Students
Teams Achievement Division (STAD) is one of the cooperative learning
that ask the learner to work in group. The learner should work in a
group and solve the problem together with their group. Based on
Slavin (1995) STAD is one of cooperative learning which have five
phases those are teach, study team, individual quiz, scoring, and
recognition. In STAD, each group consists of four to five students
with different characteristic, intelligent, and gender. So, teaching
learning process in the STAD is focus on the learners/students. STAD
is a cooperative teaching method which was developed by Slavin (1978)
as part of a student learning approach program along with other
cooperative methods such as Teams-Games-Tournaments, Jigsaw II
(Slavin 1980), and Team Assisted Individualization (Slavin et al.
1981). In STAD, students are assigned to four- or five-member
learning teams. The teams are composed of high, average, and low
achiever, and of boys and girls of different racial or ethnic
backgrounds. Thus, each team is a microcosm of the entire class.
Cooperative
learning using STAD type consists of four steps cycle: teach, team
study, test, and recognition. The teaching phase begins with
presentation of materials, students should be told what it is they
are going to learn and why it is important. In the team study, group
members work cooperatively with teacher providing worksheet and
answer sheet. Next, each student individually takes a quiz. Use a
scoring system that ranges from 0 to 30 points and reflect degree of
individual improvement over previous quiz. The criterion can be seen
in improvement point table.
According
to Slavin (1995: 72) each team receives one of three recognition
awards, depending on the average number of points earned by them.
From the description above, we know that STAD is a good technique for
the teachers who are new to the cooperative approach. And it uses
individual quizzes at the end of class.
METHOD
The
researcher used quantitative research in
the form of quasi-experiment as research design.
Based on Ary (2010:265), the
experiment is
a scientific investigation in which the researcher manipulates one or
more independent variables, controls any other relevant variables,
and observes the effect of the manipulations on the dependent
variable(s).
In
this research, the researcher used quasi experimental design in which
there were experimental and control groups. According
to Wiersma, W (1991: 135) quasi-experimental research involves the
use of intact groups of subjects in an experiment, rather than
assigning subject at random to experiment treatment. The researcher
uses the quasi-experimental research because in this study the
researcher uses all of subject in group to get a treatment.
In
this research, there were two groups: experimental and control
groups. The researcher gave different treatments to experimental and
control groups. In experimental group, the researcher gave treatment
using STAD, but in control group conventional teaching was used.
The
population of this research was all students of first year students
of MTs Negeri Batu. There are 249 students of first year students and
divided into eight classes A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H classes; each
class consists of at least 32 students but in class H only 25
students.
In
this research, the researcher took two classes from the eight classes
as the sample in this research which consists of 64 students. The
sample was non-randomized design. Class E was control group and class
F was experimental group.
In
this research, the researcher used a set of test as instrument
research to collect the data. The reading test items were taken from
the students’ handbook. The researcher chose that test under the
consideration of the level of students in MTs Negeri Batu.
In
order to measure the capability of the students, the researcher used
the score of pre-test and post-test as research instrument for both
the experimental and control groups. Pre-test is the test that is
conducted before giving the treatment in both experimental and
control group in the research. The result of this test was the first
data to be analyzed in this research.
After
that, the researcher conducted the post test for both experimental
and control group. Post-test is the test that is administered after
giving treatment for both experimental and control groups. The scores
of pre-test and post-test are the most consideration whether the
treatment of the experimental group gives positive effect or not to
the first year students in reading comprehension.
The researcher made a test as pre-test and pos-test to be given to
the students in experimental research. The test was based on the
materials given in the class. The test items were concerned with
reading. The material was taken from
students’ handbook and internet. The test items are valid because
they are taken from an expert of test designer.
The
pre-test was given to know students’ reading comprehension
prior the treatment and give in the beginning of the research.
Pre-test used to know the background knowledge of the samples in both
experimental and control group. This test administered before giving
the treatment.
The
items in the pre-test are about descriptive text. The items number
are 30 items of objective test. The validation of this test guarantee
because the test already consulted to the lecturer and teacher. The
question sources were taken from students’ guidance book. Besides,
the researcher was consulting the item of test to the related English
teacher.
The
reliability of this test constructed by taking more items (30 items)
on a test, not giving too much freedom for students by using closed
test (multiple choice), providing clear instruction, specifying and
striking the test time, ensuring the test are well laid out and
perfectly legible.
After
the pre-test, the researcher gives the treatment. The treatment is
given to both experimental and control groups. In experimental group,
the researcher applies Student Teams Achievement Division (STAD)
method. While in control group, the students was taught by using
conventional method.
The
treatment given in three meetings for each experimental and control
groups, so there will be six meetings of treatment for both groups.
The duration for each meeting is 2 X 40 minutes.
In
this research, since the samples are first year students, the
researcher was teach about descriptive text for both experimental and
control groups. During the treatment for both experimental and
control groups, the researcher uses the same guidance English book as
the related teacher used (i.e. English in focus). The
researcher also use another related sources.
After
the treatment has already been given to the students, the researcher
conducted the post-test. The purpose of the post-test was to know
whether the treatment of using STAD method in learning could be
effective or not for students’ reading comprehension in MTs N BATU.
Post
test had the same number as the pre-test but different items. In post
test, the items were about materials given, that is descriptive text.
The validity of post-test can be seen from the content of the test.
The content of the test was relevant with the material given during
experiment or treatment.
The
questions of post test were taken from English book during the
treatment (i.e. English in focus). Besides, the
researcher was consulting the item of test to the related English
teacher and the lecturer.
The
data analysis was used to determine the
effect of using STAD (Student Teams
Achievement Division) method implemented to the experimental group to
get better English reading comprehension. It could
be indicated by pre-test
and post-test scores. The scores
from both the pre-test and the post-test collect was analysis by
using Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA).
FINDINGS
AND DISCUSSIONS
This
section focused on pre-test
and post-test
scores analysis of both experimental group and control group and the
hypothesis testing. The result of pre-test scores of the experimental
and control groups were presented in Appendix 1 and 2. After
analyzing the data, the researcher found that the average scores
group was different. The pre-test
score of experimental group was 21.31 and control group was 14.25.
The post test
score of experimental was
23.59; whereas, the control group was
23.53.
Table
2: The summary of computation for Quasi-experimental design
|
No
|
Experimental group
|
Control group
|
Total
|
|
1 |
n1
= 32 |
n2
= 32 |
N = 32 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
1=
23.59 |
2 =
23.53 |
= 23.56 |
|
8 |
1=
21.31 |
2=
14.25 |
= 17.78 |
The
data analyzed by ANCOVA. Then, the researcher tested the null
hypothesis (Ho) and the alternative hypothesis (H1)
whether the score is rejected or accepted. The observed F- value that
got from data analysis is compared with F critical from the table of
critical F-values at level of significant 0.01. The critical value of
“F” with the degree of freedom (df) = N-2, whereas 64-2=62, with
level of significant 0.01 is 7.08, the observed in this study is
95.37, and F critical with df 1/62 at 0.01 level of
significant was 7.08. It means that F value was
higher than the F critical. It means that there are significant
difference students’ score in reading comprehension of experimental
(STAD) and control (Conventional) groups. The sum of score shown that
reading comprehension test in experimental (STAD) group is higher
than the sum of score in control (conventional) group.
Table
3: Summary of ANCOVA with Pre-test as
Covariate
|
Source of Variance
|
SS’
|
Df
|
MS’
|
F
|
Level of Significance
|
|
Between Group
|
796.31
|
1
|
796.31
|
95.37
|
0.01
|
|
Within Group
|
509.11
|
62
|
8.35
|
|
|
|
Total
|
1305.42
|
|
|
|
|
In
this research, the researcher found that
the experimental group used
student-centered approach and the Control group focused on the
researcher-centered approach, all the students had the same ability
and the same competence but they had different enthusiasm and
motivation. In the teaching process, the researcher found that the
students in the experimental group were enthusiastic to study more
about reading. During teaching learning process, students were asked
in group. The group was consists of four to five students. Students
should read the text together with their partner in a group. After
the students finish reading the text, students were take individual
quiz related to the text that already discussed with their partner.
Students were not permitted to help one another during quizzes. Thus,
every student is individually responsible for knowing the material.
Students who have high score got additional point from the
researcher.
In
contrast, the procedures in the control
group were assumed as boring activities. Some of the students were
sleepy and lazy in the middle of teaching learning process because
the main attention was directed on the researcher’s explanation.
Unfortunately, the students could not increase their reading
comprehension ability.
As
matter of fact, the researcher concludes that teaching reading
comprehension using STAD was effective for increasing students’
reading comprehension. According to (Slavin,
1995:17) in Rusman (2012: 214) there are some advantages of STAD. The
first, Students work together in achieving its objectives by
upholding the norms of the group. It means that if their groups want
to get point, each group should help the member to learn more about
the lesson but not in quiz. In quiz, the students should work
individually. The next, actively assist and motivate students to
succeed shared passion. It means that students can motivate and
shared each other in order to solve the problem.
Another
advantage is Active role as a peer tutor to further enhance the
success of the group. Here, the student who was smarter than others
in a group should help the other member to explain about the lesson.
The last is interaction among students with increasing their ability
to argue. As we know that having class in group make the students
interact to each other, if they did not understand some lesson, they
can ask to their member in group.
Finally,
the finding showed that the both groups had significant difference.
It could be said that experimental group was better than control
group. The fact was known from the materials and activities used in
experimental group support students to learn more about English.
Meanwhile, it was really different from the activities of control
group that not fulfill their need, as most of the attention was
mainly organized to the teacher’s model. To conclude, teaching
reading comprehension using STAD was better than using conventional
method.
CONCLUSIONS
AND SUGGESTIONS
The
analysis shows that there are significant difference students’
score in reading comprehension both experimental and control group.
From the result of analysis in chapter IV, overall, the researcher
conclude that there was a significant
difference on students’ reading comprehension taught by using STAD
and those taught by using conventional teaching. It means that the
null hypothesis is rejected and the research hypothesis is accepted.
From the explanation above, it could be said that teaching English
using STAD is more effective than using conventional teaching.
The
suggestion for the English teacher should think about using STAD in
order to get better comprehension as proven from the result of this
study. Then the teacher should choose the appropriate materials
related to the topic to improve the students’ interest and active
in the learning process. In making variation of the activities, the
teacher can improve from the original one combine with the new one
that is STAD method.
The
next suggestion is directed to future researchers. First, the future
researchers are expected to take longer time to conduct such study in
order to enlarge the treatment and to be able to improve reading
comprehension, besides that she or he should do the research
intensively so that the result can be reliable and valid. Then, for
the future researchers who use STAD should enlarge his or her
understanding about STAD and change the supplementary materials
correlated to its classroom activities.
REFERENCES
Alyousef, Hesham Suleiman, 2005. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners. The Reading Matrix, (Online), Vol. 5, No. 2, September 2005. Retrieved on April 15, 2013
Aprianti, Rini, et, al. 2013. The Use of STAD Strategy to Improve
Reading Ability of the Second Year Students of SMPN 21 Pekanbaru in
Comprehending Recount Text. Academic Journal. (Online) May 2013.
Retrieved on July 27, 2013
Ary, Donal, et al. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education
(8th edition). New York: Printed in the
United State of America.
Depdiknas. 2005. Panduan Materi Ujian Sekolah Tahun Pelajaran
2004/2005, SMP/MTS - Kurikulum 2004. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan
Nasional Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pusat Penilaian
Pendidikan.
Harmer,
Jeremy. 2007. How to Teach English (New
edition). England: Longman
Isjoni.
2012. Cooperative Learning. Bandung:
Alfabeta
Rusman, 2012. Model-Model
Pembelajaran: Mengembangkan Profesionalisme Guru.
Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Slavin, RE. 1995. Cooperative
Learning: theory, research, and practice.
Terjemahan oleh Narulita Yusron. 2005. Bandung: Nusa Media.
Wierma, Wiliam. 1991. Research
Method in Education: An Introduction (5th
edition). USA: The University of Toledo
Tidak ada komentar: