i

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING MODEL TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’ INTELLIGENCE

(An Experimental Study at the Fourth Semester Students of the English

Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic

Year)

A THESIS

Submitted as a Final Fulfillment of the Requirement

for Getting the Master Degree of Education in English

By: NINA AFRIDA

S8909082013

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTEMENT

GRADUATE SCHOOL

SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY

2010

ii

ABSTRACT

Nina Afrida, S890908013. 2010. The Effectiveness of Reciprocal Teaching to

Teach Reading Viewed from Students’ Intelligence (An Experimental Study at the

Fourth Semester Students of the English Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala

Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic Year). Thesis. Surakarta. English Education Department, Graduate School. Sebelas Maret University.

This research is aimed at finding out whether: (1) reciprocal teaching

model is more effective than direct instructional model to teach reading; (2)

students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than those who have

low intelligence; (3) there is an interaction effect between teaching models and students’ intelligence on the students’ reading skill.

This research is an experimental research. The population is the fourth

semester of the English Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa in the

2009/2010 academic year. It consists of 166 students. Cluster random sampling is

used to get the sample. The sample used in this research is 40 students of the English Department 3 as the experimental class and 40 students of the English

Department 1 as the control class. The techniques of collecting data in this

research are tests (reading test and intelligence test). Before the reading test is

used, a tryout is done to know the validity and reliability. The techniques of

analyzing the data are descriptive statistics in looking for mean, standard deviation, mode, median, and inferential analysis. The researcher uses normality

test adopting Lilliefors and homogeneity testing adopting chi-square (X) test. The

data are analyzed using ANOVA 2x2 or F-test. To know which teaching model is

more effective and which group is better, the Tukey’s test is used. The critical

value used in this test is α=0.05. Based on the result of this research, the findings are: (1) reciprocal

teaching model is more effective than direct Instructional model to teach reading;

(2) the students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than those

who have low intelligence; (3) there is an interaction effect between teaching

models and students’ intelligence in terms of the students’ reading skill.

Referring to the findings above, it can be concluded that reciprocal

teaching model is a very effective model for teaching reading to the fourth

semester students of the English Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala

Langsa. Therefore, it is suggested that: (1) it is better for teacher to apply

reciprocal teaching model in instructional process; (2) the students must be aware of the importance of active involvement in teaching learning process; and (3) for

the other researchers who would like to conduct future research of the same kind

with different sample and different students’ condition, this result of study can

become reference.

iii

APPROVAL

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING

MODEL TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’

INTELLIGENCE (An Experimental Study at the Fourth Semester Students of the English

Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic

Year)

By:

Nina Afrida

S8909082013

This thesis has been approved to be examined by the Board of Thesis examiners

of the English Department, Graduate School of Sebelas Maret University,

Surakarta on: 26 July 2010

Consultant I Consultant II

Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd. Dr. Abdul Asib, M.Pd.

NIP. 196 212311988031009 NIP. 195203071980031005

Approved by

The Head of the English Education Department of Graduate School

Sebelas Maret University Surakarta

Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd NIP. 196 212311988031009

iv

THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING

MODEL TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’

INTELLIGENCE (An Experimental Study at the Fourth Semester Students of the English

Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic

Year)

This thesis has been examined by the board of thesis examiners on: July 26th,

2010

The Board of Thesis Examiners:

Name Signature Date

The Chairman Dr. Sujoko, M. A July 26th

, 2010

NIP 195109121980031002

Secretary Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M. Pd. July 26th

, 2010

NIP 196101241987021001

Member 1 Dr. Ngadiso, M.Pd July 26th, 2010

NIP 196212311988031009

Member 2 Dr. Abdul Asib, M.Pd. July 26th, 2010

NIP 195203071980031005

The Director of Graduate Program The Head of English Education

Graduate School

Prof. Dr. Suranto, M. Sc. Ph. D Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd

NIP. 195708201985031004 NIP. 196 212311988031009

v

PRONOUNCEMENT

I write this thesis by myself, entitled “The Effectiveness of Reciprocal

Teaching Model to Teach Reading Viewed from Students’ Intelligence (An

Experimental Study at the Fourth Semester Students of the English Department of

STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic Year). It is not

plagiarism. In this thesis, the others’ works and opinions have been listed on the

bibliography.

I will accept the academic punishment, if this pronouncement is proven

wrong.

Surakarta, 2010

Nina Afrida

S8909082013

vi

ACKNOWLEDMENT

First, the writer says thank is to Allah who has provided health and ability so

that she can finish this thesis well. This thesis entitled “THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING MODEL TO TEACH

READING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’ INTELLIGENCE (An Experimental

Study at the Fourth Semester Students of the English Department of STAIN

Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa in the 2009/2010 Academic Year)” is written to fulfill

one of the requirement for getting Master Degree of Education in English.

Writing this thesis is not easy; the writer has encountered many problems and

obstacles to overcome it, and she exactly needs many helps from other people.

Therefore, she tries to do her best.

1. Thank is due to the Director of Graduate School of Sebelas Maret University.

2. The writer is fully indebted to the Head of the English Department and all of

the staffs who have served her.

3. Thank is also due to Dr. Ngadiso, M.Pd as consultant I and Dr. Abdul Asib,

M.Pd as consultant II who have given guidance and suggestion from the

beginning up to the end.

4. Thank is to the Head of STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa and his staffs who

have given her permission to conduct research at the college.

5. Her special thank is to all of her boarding house friends at Putri Ayu (PA), and

her earnest thank is to Dyah, Destia, Septi, Endah, and Dian. And thank is to

her friends in the English Department A and B, especially Muzam, mbak

Hani, Umi, Angel. And she doesn’t forget to express a lot of thank is to Dini,

Evy, and Khaidir.

6. At last, the writer wishes to express the greatest appreciation to her beloved

parents, Rusli Rus and Alm. Siti Zulaiha, and to her sisters, Rusmayani and

Mauli Husna. And is also to Hj. Rosmidah as her mother in law. They always

give support and motivation.

7. She expresses sincere gratitude to someone special (Farid Wajidi) who is

always willing to assist the writer in all activities.

vii

Finally, the researcher realizes that this thesis is not perfect yet, so she always

expects criticism from any readers to make this thesis perfect. Then, the

researcher hopes that this research can give contributions to the development of

education in Indonesia.

Surakarta, 2010

Nina Afrida

viii

MOTTO

Science without Religion is Lame

Religion without Science is Blind

(Albert Einstein)

ix

LIST OF CONTENTS

TITLE…………………………………………………………………………… i

ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………... ii

APPROVAL……………………………………………………………………... iii

BOARD OF EXAMINERS……………………………………………………… iv

PRONOUNCEMENT…………………………………………………………… v

MOTTO……………………………………………………………..…………… vi

ACKNOWLEDMENT…………………………………………………………... vii

LIST OF CONTENTS…….……………………………………………….…….. ix

LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………….. xi

LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………… xii

LIST OF APPENDICES………………………………………………………… xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION………..…..………………………………… 1

A. Background of the Study…..………………………………... 1

B. Identification of the Problem….…………………………….. 4

C. Problem Limitation………………………………………….. 5

D. Problem Statement…………………………………………... 5

E. Objective of the Study……………………………………..... 6

F. Benefit of the Study………………………………..………… 6

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 8

A. Reading..…………………………………………………….. 8

1. Definition of Reading……………………………………. 8

2. Skill for Reading Comprehension….................................. 9

3. Reading Purpose………………………………………… 14

4. Type of Classroom Reading Performance..……………... 15

Pages

x

5. Model of Reading………………………………………... 17

B. Reciprocal Teaching Model...……………………………….. 18

1. Basic Strategy of Reciprocal Teaching…………………..

2. Stage of Reciprocal Teaching…………………………….

19

20

3. Reciprocal Teaching Guidelines…...……………………..

4. Benefit of Reciprocal Teaching………………………….

23

24

C. Direct Instructional Model…………………………………... 25

D. Intelligence…………………………………………………... 28

1. Definition of Intelligence….……………………………... 28

2. Factor of Intelligence…………………………………….. 29

3. Theory and Type of Intelligence…………………………. 30

E. Rationale …………………………………………………….. 36

F. Hypothesis…………………………………………………… 40

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 41

A. Place and Time of the Study...………………………………. 41

B. Research Method…….....……………………………………. 41

C. Population, Sample, and Sampling………………………….. 43

D. Technique of Collecting Data……………………………….. 44

E. Technique of Analyzing Data………………………………... 47

CHAPTER IV THE RESULT OF STUDY

A. Description of Study…………………………………………. 51

B. Normality and Homogeneity………………………………… 63

C. Data Analyzing………………………………………………. 67

D. Discussion……………………………………………………. 72

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion................................................................................ 77

B. Implication................................................................................ 77

C. Suggestion................................................................................ 78

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………… 80

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………….. 83

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Factorial Design.………………………………………………………... 43

Table 2. Factorial Design 2x2……………………………………………………. 47

Table 3. Frequency Distribution of Data A1B1…………………………………... 52

Table 4. Frequency Distribution of Data A2B1…………………………………... 54

Table 5. Frequency Distribution of Data A1B2….……………………………….. 55

Table 6. Frequency Distribution of Data A2B2……………………….………….. 56

Table 7. Frequency Distribution of Data A1………….………………………….. 57

Table 8. Frequency Distribution of Data A2…….……………………………….. 58

Table 9. Frequency Distribution of Data B1…………….……………………….. 61

Table 10. Frequency Distribution of Data B2……………………...…………….. 62

Table 11. The Normality Test………………………………..………………….. 66

Table 12. The Homogeneity Test...……………………………………………… 66

Table 13. Multifactor Analysis of Variance…………………………...………… 67

Table 14. Tukey Test …………………………….………………..…………….. 69

Pages

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Types of Classroom Reading Performance…………………………… 16

Figure 2. Reading Style and Reason for Reading……………………………….. 16

Figure 3. Stages of Reciprocal Teaching Model………………………………… 22

Figure 4. Histogram and Polygon of Data A1B1………………………………… 53

Figure 5. Histogram and Polygon of Data A2B1………………………………… 54

Figure 6. Histogram and Polygon of Data A1B2………………………………… 55

Figure 7. Histogram and Polygon of Data A2B2………………………………… 56

Figure 8. Histogram and Polygon of Data A1…………………………………… 57

Figure 9. Histogram and Polygon of Data A2…………………………………… 58

Figure 10. Histogram and Polygon of Data B1………..………………………… 61

Figure 11. Histogram and Polygon of Data B2…………………..……………… 63

Pages

xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Lesson Plan………………………………………………………… 83

Appendix 2. Blue Print of Reading Test (tryout test)……...…………………..… 143

Appendix 3. Instrument of Reading Test (tryout test)…………………………… 144

Appendix 4. The Validity Test……………...…………………………………… 161

Appendix 5. The Reliability Test………………………………………………... 183

Appendix 6. Blue Print of Reading Test……………………….………………... 184

Appendix 7. Instrument of Reading Test……………….……………………….. 185

Appendix 8. Scores of Reading Test……………………………………………. 197

Appendix 9. Scores of Intelligence Test …...…………………………………… 198

Appendix 10. Descriptive Statistics…………………………...………………… 202

Appendix 11. Normality Test…………………………………………………… 210

Appendix 12. Homogeneity Test……………………………………………….. 216

Appendix 13. Two Ways Analysis of Variance…………………………………. 218

Appendix 14. Tukey HSD Test………..………………………………………... 221

Pages

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Language is systematic. Language is a set of arbitrary symbol.

Language is used for communication (Brown, 2000: 5). Think about the

importance of language in our everyday life. Language is needed to speak

to others, listen to others, read, and write. Our language enables us to

describe past event in detail and plan for the future. Language lets us pass

down information for one generation to the next. One of the languages that

is acceptable and spread in the world is English language. English is called

as International language or Lingua Franca. It is used to help people to

communicate in doing their daily activities such as education, politic,

trading, etc.

English is regarded as a foreign language in Indonesia. It is a

compulsory subject taught from junior high school up to university. There

are four major skills which are important to be learnt in learning English,

they are: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Reading and listening

are said to be passive or receptive skills, while writing and speaking are

said to be active and productive skills.

In university, reading skill is very important . Reading remains the most

accessible for the satisfaction of the varied needs of many people

(Robinson, 1975: 10). It will give much information that is useful for life.

2

Harmer (1998: 68) says that many of the students want to be able to read

texts in English either for their careers, for study purposes or for simply

pleasure. By reading the students can get and become familiar with the

new grammar and can widen their vocabularies. Nunan (2003: 69) says

that for most of these learners it is the most important skill to master in

order to ensure success not only in learning English, but also in learning

any content subject where reading is required. In short, with the

strengthened reading skill, learners will make greater progress and

development in all order areas of learning.

Based on preliminary study, many students of university have

difficulties to know the words in the text and they have low understanding

of the message from the text. Probably the students know the words but

they don’t know the meaning of the text . Some students know the meaning

of the words or vocabularies of the text but they cannot get the message of

the text. And there are some students who don’t know the meaning of the

text at all. It can be seen from their mistakes when the teacher/lecturer asks

them to read, to translate, and to comprehend the texts. And it also can be

seen from the result of tests, their result is still low.

The teacher models to teach reading is one of factors in this case. The

teacher of reading must have a variety of approaches. There are many

approaches and models to teach reading, one of them is reciprocal

teaching. Reciprocal teaching has two major features: (1) instruction and

practice of the four comprehension strategies—predicting, question

3

generating, clarifying, and summarizing; and (2) a special kind of

cognitive apprenticeship where students gradually learn to assume the role

of teacher in helping their peers construct meaning from text, it is said by

Alverman and Phelps (http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/612/

reading/Reading%20strategies/reciprocal%20teaching.htm). It is designed

as a discussion technique and built on the cooperative nature of learning

that causes the student’s reading comprehension of the text to be deeper

through social interaction.

But, many teachers still use ―Direct Instructional Model‖ to teach

reading. In this model, the activity is teacher-centered and the students

lack of opportunities in the class. They just become the followers and

depend on the teacher during the teaching and learning process. Usually,

the teacher asks the students to read the text, asks the difficult word, and

then asks the students to translate the text.

Methods that are used by the teacher in teaching material have

important role to improve the students’ ability in learning the material,

especially in teaching reading.

The other things that can influence the students’ reading skill come

from other factor besides teacher’s model. It is the students’ intelligence.

Deboer (1966: 131) says that background experience, interest, and native

intelligence may also play a part in determining how many and which

individual words a reader may miss and still have high comprehension.

The students’ intelligence has the crucial thing to improve the students’

4

reading skill. Deboer (1966: 132) states there is a substantial correlation

between intelligence and reading ability. It is true that a child who is

intelligent enough to go to school is intelligent enough to learn to read

simple materials. It means that the students who have high intelligence

will have high ability in understanding a text, while the students’ who

have low level of intelligence will have low ability in understanding a text.

To solve the problem above, the researcher uses the reciprocal

teaching in teaching reading on the consideration that it can facilitate the

teacher to arouse the students’ attention and improve the students’ reading

skill. She considers students’ intelligence (high or low) to know whether

reciprocal teaching model is suitable for students who have high

intelligence or low intelligence, and to know whether direct instructional

model is suitable for students who have high intelligence or low

intelligence.

In this study, the researcher is interested in conducting an

experimental research entitled: ―The Effectiveness of Reciprocal Teaching

Model to Teach Reading Viewed from the Students’ Intelligence‖

B. Identification of the Problem

The problems can be identified as follows:

1. Why do the students have difficulties to understand the text?

2. What factors cause low understanding of texts?

3. Is reciprocal teaching effective to teach reading?

5

4. Does the students’ intelligence influence their reading skill?

5. Is there any interaction between intelligence and teaching model to

teach reading?

C. Problem Limitation

It is impossible for the writer to investigate all identified problems

above, therefore, the writer limits the problems of the research which are

supposed to influence the students’ reading skill, namely: the models used

by the teacher (reciprocal teaching and direct instructional model) and the

students’ intelligence

D. Problem Statement

This research focuses on the problems formulated as follows:

1. Is reciprocal teaching model more effective than direct instructional

model to teach reading?

2. Do students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than

those who have low intelligence?

3. Is there any interaction effect between teaching model and students’

intelligence on the students’ reading skill?

6

E. Objective of the Study

This research is aimed at finding out the influences of the teaching

model and the students’ intelligence on the students’ reading skill. In

detail, this research has the objectives to find out whether:

1. Reciprocal teaching model is more effective than direct instruction

model to teach reading.

2. Students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than

those who have low intelligence.

3. There is an interaction effect between teaching model and students’

intelligence on the students’ reading skill.

F. Benefit of the Study

1. For the teachers/lecturers

The writer expects that this study will give contribution to other

teacher/lecturer to use an alternative model and strategy in teaching

and learning process. Reciprocal teaching is the technique to

comprehend the text. This model can improve the students’ reading

skill.

2. For the students

By applying reciprocal teaching model to teach reading, it can

motivate students to improve their reading skill. If intelligence plays

extremely important role for the students’ reading comprehension, it is

the urgent thing in the teaching learning process to support the

7

students’ reading skill. The results of the research can also the

interaction between teaching model and students’ intelligence in terms

of reading comprehension. If there is an interaction, it necessary to

contemplate the use of reciprocal teaching model, which is acceptable

for the students who have high intelligence or those who have low

intelligence.

3. For researchers

For the other researchers who would like to conduct further research at

the same subject, the result of this research can help them and can be

reference.

8

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the writer describes theoretical description

underlying the research, rationale, and hypothesis.

A. Reading

1. Definition of Reading

Reading is the most important activity in the language class. It is

not only as the source of information but also as a means of extending

knowledge of the language. William (1984: 2) says reading has received

increasing attention in recent year.

There are many definitions of reading, William (1996: 2) defines

reading as a process whereby one looks and understands what has been

written. It is meant that reading is process of obtaining meaning from

written text.

According to Adams (1990: 1974) reading is acquisition of the

multiple acts, skills, and knowledge that enable individuals to

comprehend the meaning of text. Nunan (1989: 32) states that reading is

a process of decoding written symbol, working from smaller units

(individual letter) to larger ones (words, clauses and sentences). In other

word, it is process of understanding the meaning of written forms.

Other definition come from Schoenbach, et al.

(http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/380/WhatisReadinge

9

xcerpt.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d) reading is a simple process of decoding (figure

out how to pronounce) each word in a text and then comprehends the

meaning of the words. It is said by Silberstain (1994: 12) that reading is

a complex information processing skill in which the reader interacts with

text in order to create meaningful discourse. According to Richards

(1997: 15) reading is what occurs when people look at a text and select

message of the written symbols in that text.

2. Skills for Reading Comprehension

According to Brown (2004: 187-188) there are two skills in

reading, micro- and macro-skills.

a. Micro-skills

1) Discriminating among the distinctive graphemes and

orthographic patterns of English.

2) Retaining chunks of language of different lengths in short-term

memory.

3) Processing writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit the

purpose.

4) Recognizing a core of words, and interpret word order patterns

and their significance.

5) Recognizing grammatical word classes (noun, verbs, etc.)

systems (tense, agreement, and pluralisation) patterns, rules, and

elliptical forms.

10

6) Recognizing that a particular meaning may be expressed in

different grammatical forms.

7) Recognizing cohesive devices in written discourse and their role

in signalling the relationship between and among clauses.

b. Macro-skills

1) Recognizing the rhetorical forms of written discourse and their

significance for interpretation.

2) Recognizing the communicative functions of written texts,

according to form and purpose.

3) Inferring context that is not explicit by using background

knowledge

4) From events, ideas, etc. infer links, and connections between

events, deduce causes and effects, and detect such relations as

main idea, supporting idea, new information, given

information, generalization, and exemplification.

5) Distinguishing between literal and implied meaning.

6) Detecting culturally specific references and interpret them in a

context of the appropriate cultural schemata.

7) Developing and using a battery of reading strategies, such as

scanning and skimming, detecting discourse markers, guessing

the meaning from context, and activating schemata for the

interpretation of texts.

11

Davis in Charles (2000: 9) defines eight skills in reading, they are:

1) Recalling word meanings

2) Drawing inferences about the meaning of a word from context

3) Finding answer to questions answered explicitly or in

paraphrase

4) Weaving together ideas in the content

5) Drawing inferences from the content

6) Recognizing a writer’s purpose, attitude, tone and mood

7) Identifying a writer’s technique

8) Following the structure of a passage

Munby in Charles (2000: 10) distinguishes the following reading

―micro-skills‖:

1) Recognizing the script of a language

2) Deducing the meaning and use of unfamiliar lexical items

3) Understanding explicitly stated information

4) Understanding information when is not explicitly stated

5) Understanding conceptual meaning

6) Understanding the communicative value of sentences

7) Understanding relations within sentence

8) Understanding relations between parts of the text through

lexical cohesion devices

9) Understanding cohesion between parts of the text through

grammatical cohesion devices

12

10) Interpreting by going outside it

11) Recognizing indicators in discourse

12) Identifying the main point or important information in

discourse

13) Distinguishing the main point from supporting details

14) Extracting salient details to summarize (the text, an idea)

15) Extracting relevant points from a text selectively

16) Using basic reference skills

17) Skimming

18) Scanning to locate specifically required information

19) Transcoding information to diagrammatic display

In general there are two kinds of reading skill (Tarigan, 1990: 11-

12) as follows:

a. Mechanical skill, ketrampilan yang bersifat mekanis, yaitu:

1) Pengenalan bentuk huruf

2) Pengenalan unsur-unsur Linguistics (fonem, frase, kata,

kalimat,dll)

3) Pengenalan hubungan ejaan dan bunyi

4) Kecapatan membaca bertaraf lambat

b. Comprehension skill, keterampilan yang bersifat pemahaman

1) Memahami leksikal sederhana (leksikal, gramatikal, retorikal)

13

2) Memahami signifikansi atau makna (maksud dan tujuan

pengarang, reaksi pembaca, dll)

3) Evaluasi atau penilaian (isi, bentuk)

4) Kecepatan membaca yang flexible, mudah disesuaikan dengan

keadaan.

According to Anderson in Aebersold and Field (1997: 16) the

followings are skills for reading:

a. Recognizing word quickly

b. Using text features (subheadings, transitions, etc).

c. Using title (s) to infer what information might follow

d. Using word knowledge

e. Analyzing unfamiliar words

f. Identifying the grammatical functions of words

g. Reading for meaning, concentrating on constructing meaning

h. Guessing about the meaning of the text

i. Evaluating guesses and trying guesses if necessary

j. Monitoring comprehension

k. Keeping the purpose for reading the text in mind

l. Adjusting strategies to the purpose for reading

m. Identifying or inferring main ideas

n. Understanding the relationships between the parts of text

o. Distinguishing main ideas and minor ideas

14

p. Tolerating ambiguity in a text

q. Paraphrasing

r. Using context to build meaning and aid comprehension

s. Continuing reading even when unsuccessful, at least for a while.

3. Reading Purposes

Reading is a variant skill in which there are different types of

reading skills that correspond to the many different purposes we have for

reading. Rivers and Temperley in Nunan (1989: 33) suggest that the

second language learners will want to read for the following purposes:

a. To obtain information for some purpose or because we are curious

about some topic

b. To obtain instruction on how to perform some task for the work or

daily life.

c. To act in a play, play a game, do a puzzle.

d. To keep in touch with friends by correspondence or to understand

business letter.

e. To know where on when something will take a place or what is

available.

f. To know what is happening or has happened.

g. For enjoyment or excitement.

15

4. Type of Classroom Reading Performance

According to Brown (2001: 312) there are some kinds of reading

performance, as follows:

a. Oral and silent reading.

The teacher can ask the students to read orally, at the

beginning and intermediate levels. Oral reading can serve as an

evaluative check on bottom-up processing skills, check the

students’ pronunciation, and serve to add some extra student

participation if the teacher wants to highlight a certain short

segment of reading passage.

For advance levels, oral reading has some disadvantages,

they are: oral reading is not very authentic language activity, while

one student is reading, others can easily lose attention, and it may

have the outward appearance of students participation when in

reality is mere recitation.

b. Intensive and extensive reading

Silent reading may be subcategorized into intensive and

extensive reading. Intensive reading calls students’ attention to

grammatical forms, discourse makers, and other surface structure

details for the purpose of understanding literal meaning,

implications, rhetorical relationship, and the like.

Extensive reading is carried out to achieve a general

understanding of a usually somewhat longer text such as book,

16

long article, or essay, etc. Most extensive reading is performed

outside class time and for pleasure.

Classroom reading performance

Oral S ilent

Intensive Extensive

Linguistics Content Skimming Scanning Global

Figure 1. Type of classroom reading performance

William (1996: 12) shows the diagram of reason for reading and

style of reading:

Reading

(Involuntary) Rapid Intensive Extensive

Skimming Scanning

General information Information Pleasure or interest

Figure 2. Reading style and reason for reading

In reading, there is reason for reading and there is style of reading.

Reasons for reading involve to get general information, to gain the

17

information from the text, and perhaps just for pleasure. And styles of

reading are involuntary, rapid, intensive and extensive reading. Both them

have relationship. The foreign language students’ lack knowledge of the

language often results in slow and intensive reading. In order to become an

effective reader, the students need to have appropriate texts and

appropriate tasks that allow them not only to develop their language, but

also to develop purposeful reading style.

5. Model of Reading

There are three main models of reading.

a. Bottom-up theory

It means the reader constructs the text from the smallest unit, from

letters to words to phrases to sentences, etc. and then become

automatic, readers are not aware of how it operates. Decoding is

earlier term in this process.

b. Top-down theory

It argues that the reader brings a great deal of knowledge,

expectations, assumptions, and questions to the text, and given a

basic understanding of vocabulary, they continue to read as long as

the text confirms their expectations.

c. The interactive school of theorist.

It describes a process that combines bottom-up and top-down,

depending on the type of the text as well as on the reader’s

18

background knowledge, language proficiency level, motivation,

strategy use and culturally shaped beliefs about reading.

Based on the theories above, reading skill is the ability to obtain

meaning and select the massage from written text by finding reference,

identifying main ideas, finding detail information, comprehending the

meaning based on the context, identifying lexical meaning, and

understanding communicative function.

B. Reciprocal Teaching

Reciprocal teaching is strategy in learning process to improve reading

comprehension. According to Alverman and Phelps

(http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/612/reading/Reading%20Stra

tegies/reciprocal%20teaching.htm) reciprocal teaching has two major

features: (1) instruction and practice of the four comprehension

strategies—predicting, question generating, clarifying, and summarizing;

and (2) a special kind of cognitive apprenticeship where students gradually

learn to assume the role of teacher in help ing their peers construct meaning

from text. This model has four foundations, the foundations involve: think-

aloud, cooperative learning, scaffolding, and metacognition (Oszkus,

2005: 6)

Reciprocal teaching involves a high degree of social interaction and

collaboration, as students gradually learn to assume the role of teacher in

helping their peers construct meaning from text. In essence, reciprocal

19

teaching is an authentic activity because learning, both inside and outside

school, advances through collaborative social interaction and the social

construction of knowledge

Pallinscar and Brown in Ruddell (1994: 765-767) identify four basic

strategies that help students recognize and react to signs of comprehension

breakdown: clarifying, predicting, questioning, and summarizing.

In the beginning, reciprocal teaching is demonstrated to the students

by the teacher. The teacher's role in this instructional procedure changes as

the strategies are taught to the students. The teacher starts the instruction

of each strategy as ―the sage on the stage‖ and ends up as ―the guide on the

side.‖ The teacher has to be proficient in modeling these strategies to the

students and then gradually fade away and let the students take over the

control of their learning

And then the teacher introduces the four steps: predicting,

questioning, clarifying, and summarizing. In this model, students will

work as a team. Reciprocal teaching provides chances to explore the

content to be learnt via classroom dialogue. At the centre of reciprocal

teaching are group discussions in which the teacher and the students take

turn as leader in discussing the text.

1. Basic Strategy of Reciprocal Teaching

Pallinscar and Brown in Borich (1996: 397-398) describe four basic

strategies in reciprocal teaching, as follows:

20

a. Predicting, discussion begins by generating prediction about the

content to be learned from the text, based on: its title or subheading

in the text, the group prior knowledge or information pertaining to

the topic, and experience with similar kind of information. Following

the group’s prediction about what they expect to learn from the text,

the group reads and listens to the portion of it.

b. Questioning, one individual is chosen to leads a discussion of each

portion of the text that is read. Afterward, the discussion leader asks

questions about the information. Students respond the question and

raise additional question.

c. Summarizing, the discussion leader then summarizes the text and

other students are invited to comment or elaborate on the summary.

d. Clarifying, if points in the text are unclear (e.g. concept or

vocabulary) the students are discussed until clarity is achieved. In

this case more predictions may be made and portions of the text are

reread for the text clarity.

2. Stages of Reciprocal Teaching

The following are the steps to use the reciprocal teaching model

(www.education.vic.gov.au/studentlearning/teachingresources/esl/):

a. At the beginning, teachers may want to hand out a poem or short

piece of fiction or nonfiction that he/she has annotated that models

all four strategies.

21

b. One suggestion is to start with very short pieces of literature or short

sections of a larger work (a chapter or section of a novel, biography,

etc.). This allows students to practice and hone their skills before

moving on to longer readings.

c. It is important that the role of "teacher" is rotated on a regular basis,

so that all students have a chance to be the leader of the group; this

kind of validation is an important part of the process.

Pelinscar and Brown (1984: 175) state that the teacher hands out a

passage of text to each student in the group. Each student reads the

passage and writes summarizing, clarifying, predicting questions related

to what they have read. The ―teacher‖ of the group asks one of the

questions. The ―teacher‖ is leader of the group who starts off the

questioning. One group member responds, using the text to support their

answer. The student, who answers the question, then asks a question and

the process repeats.

22

Figure 3. Stages of reciprocal teaching

Adapted from: http://condor.admin.ccny.cuny.edu/~ yq6048/*

Teacher

modeling

Teacher models and explains the four

strategies: summarizing,

question generating,

clarifying, and predicting.

Students’

practice

Students practice

the four strategies and receive

feedback from the teacher.

Teacher-Student

Groups

Students’

group

Teacher leads

discussion with students in small

groups. Students take turns leading

and practicing the

strategies while getting teacher

feedback.

Students take turns leading the discussion

by using the four

strategies in small groups. The teacher

observes progress and

offers feedback.

23

3. Reciprocal Teaching Guidelines

To prepare for class discussion, the teacher will read the text and

compose questions in each of the four areas.

a. Summarizing

1) What happened?

2) What is essential to tell?

3) What is the outcome?

4) Who is involved?

5) Why does this happen?

6) What is the main point?

7) What does the author want me to remember or learn from the

passage?

b. Clarifying

1) What was confusing?

2) What words or phrases did you need more information on?

3) What strategies can you use to clarify your understanding?

c. Generating questions, write three kinds of questions:

1) Questions of fact

• Focus on details from the text.

• Ask about people, places, and things.

• Choose surface questions for others to answer.

2) Questions of interpretation

• Focus on meanings that the text communicates.

24

• Ask about symbols, themes, and underlying messages.

• Choose deeper questions for others to answer.

3) Questions that are open ended

• Focus on moving beyond the text.

• Ask about future effects and implications.

• Choose open-ended questions for others to answer.

d. Predicting

1) What will happen next?

2) Why do you think what you do?

3) What effect will events in what you have read have on the story

or the characters?

4. Benefits of Reciprocal Teaching Model

The following are benefits of reciprocal teaching model:

(www.education. vic.gov.au/studentlearning/teachingresources/esl/)

By reciprocal teaching, learners can gain an improved

understanding of complex text in content areas. This leads to:

1. Greater knowledge of the topic

2. Improved skills

3. More positive attitudes when extracting, organizing, and recording

information

4. More self-confidence and motivation to read

5. Improved leadership skills

6. Increased co-operation and greater initiative.

25

C. Direct Instructional Model

The direct instruction strategy is highly teacher-directed and is

among the most commonly used. This strategy includes methods such as

lecture, didactic questioning, explicit teaching, practice and drill, and

demonstrations.

The direct instruction strategy is effective for providing

information or developing step-by-step skills. This strategy also works

well for introducing other teaching methods, or actively involving students

in knowledge construction.

Direct instruction is usually deductive. That is, the rule or

generalization is presented and then illustrated with examples. While this

strategy may be considered among the easier to plan and to use, it is clear

that effective direct instruction is often more complex than it would first

appear.

Direct instruction methods are widely used by teachers, particularly

in the higher grades. The predominant use of direct instruction methods

needs to be evaluated, and educators need to recognize the limitation of

these methods for developing the abilities, processes, and attitudes

required for critical thinking, and for interpersonal or group learning.

Students’ understanding of affective and higher level cognitive objectives

may require the use of instructional methods associated with other

strategies.

26

In this model the teacher becomes the decision maker. Person,

Hinson, and Brown (2001: 11) say the teacher will be engaged in many

planning decisions, such as deciding what he/she would like to teach,

he/she wishes to teach, about and how he/she will go about the reading

process. It is highly structured and teacher directed. The teacher control

occurs when the teacher selects and directs the learning tasks.

According to Joyce and Weil (1986: 326) the teacher also provides

feedback and correction for the students’ mistake. Direct instructional

model is one of the highest priorities on the assignment and complexion of

academic tasks in the classroom

Direct instructional model is similar to traditional teaching.

Generally speaking traditional teaching is directed toward teaching

academic content. It is also characterized by teacher-centered and teacher-

dominated classroom (Peterson, 1999: 231)

The disadvantages of direct instructional teaching model

(http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/mcvittiej/methods/direct.html)

are that:

1. We must learn simple tasks before complex ones, and that only

measurable learning is worthwhile.

2. Students do not have a sense of the overall purpose of the simple steps.

However, if the teacher/lecturer tells them the purpose, by using

advance organizers, this disadvantage is overcome.

27

3. Teachers/lecturers cannot assess what the students’ prior knowledge is,

so will be unaware of why particular students cannot learn.

4. Retention of how to solve the problems is low, because the students

have not struggled with the problem themselves. This disadvantage can

be overcome by having the students do many complex problems on

their own. However, this means that one of the advantages (time

efficiency) is lost.

5. Direct instruction as an instructional method works for only a small

percentage of students, not for a great variety. The students who have

other than verbal intelligence, or who come from different cultural

world views will fail.

The advantages of direct instructional model are that:

1. The teacher/lecturer has control of the timing of the lesson.

2. Students are physically easy to monitor.

3. The teacher/lecturer has control over what will be learned, and who

will learn. If the teacher/lecturer wants to reward the middle class

students, this is the kind of teaching method to use.

4. The curriculum can be covered, so the teacher/lecturer can say that

she/he taught the material.

5. Some material should be taught this way. Any information for which

there is one right answer, and for which that answer is relatively

simple, can be taught efficiently and honestly by using direct

instruction.

28

D. Intelligence

1. Definition of Intelligence

Thordike in Djaali (2007: 64) defines intelligence as demonstrable

in ability of individual to make good responses from the stand point of truth

or fact. According to Terman in Djaali (2007: 64) intelligence is the ability

to carry on abstract thinking. Binet in Aiken (1997: 136) defines intelligence

as the ability to think abstractly, the ability to learn, and the ability to adapt

to environment. Another definition comes from wordnetweb (www.

wordnetweb.princenton.edu/perl/webwn) states that intelligence is the ability

to comprehend, understand, and profit from experience.

Santrock (1990: 115) states intelligence is problem-solving skills,

the ability to adapt and to learn from life’s everyday experience. Vygotsky

in Santrock (1990: 115) says that intelligence is the ability to use the tools

of the culture with help for more- skilled individual.

It is said by Super and Cites in Soemanto (1990: 178) intelligence

is the ability to adjust to the environment or to learn from experience.

According to Garret in Soemanto (1990: 179) intelligence is the abilities

demanded in the solution of problem which require the comprehension and

use of symbol. Another definition comes from Biscrof (1990: 179), he says

that intelligence is the ability to solve the problem of all kinds. Intelligence

is the ability to think abstractly and to learn readily from experience

(Flynn in Christensen, 2000: 114).

29

2. Factors of Intelligence

Djaali (2007:74-75) states there are some factors that influence

intelligence:

a. Faktor pembawaan, factor ini ditentukan oleh sifat yang dibawa sejak

lahir

b. Faktor minat dan pembawaan yang khas, dimana minat mengarahkan

perbuatan kepada suatu tujuan dan menjadi pendorong perbuatan

tersebut

c. Faktor pembentukan, pembentukan adalah segala keadan diluar diri

seseorang yang mempengaruhi perkembangan kecerdasannya

d. Faktor kematangan, tiap organ dalam tubuh manusia mengalami

pertumbuhan dan perkembangan

e. Faktor kebebasan, berarti manusia dapat memilih metode tertentu

dalam memecahkan masalah yang dihadapi.

There seem to be three main factors that influence intelligence:

(http://www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/intronotes5.html)

a. Genetics

b. Biology and Biochemistry, there are a wide range of biological factors

that can impact intelligence.

c. Environment, there are a number of environmental factors that impact

child cognitive development: demographics, poverty, bird order,

childhood trauma, environmental stress, and parenting.

30

3. Theories and types of Intelligence

Wagner (http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/

intelligence.htm) states that the following are some of the major theories

of intelligence:

a. Charles Spearman - General Intelligence:

British Psychologist, Charles Spearman, (1863-1945) describes a

concept he referred to as general intelligence, or the g factor. After using

a technique known as factor analysis to examine a number of mental

aptitude tests, Spearman concludes that scores on these tests were

remarkably similar. People who performed well on one cognitive test

tended to perform well on other tests, while those who scored badly on

one test tended to score badly on other. He concluded that intelligence is

general cognitive ability that could be measured and numerically

expressed (Spearman, 1904).

b. Louis L. Thurstone - Primary Mental Abilities:

Psychologist, Louis L. Thurstone, (1887-1955) offers a differing

theory of intelligence. Instead of viewing intelligence as a single, general

ability, Thurstone's theory focuses on seven different "primary mental

abilities". The abilities that he described were: verbal comprehension,

reasoning, perceptual speed, numerical ability, word fluency, associative

memory, and spatial visualization

31

c. Howard Gardner - Multiple Intelligences:

One of the more recent ideas to emerge is Howard Gardner's theory

of multiple intelligences. Instead of focusing on the analysis of test

scores, Gardner proposed that numerical expressions of human

intelligence are not a full and accurate depiction of people's abilities. His

theory describes eight distinct intelligences that are based on skills and

abilities that are valued within different cultures. The eight intelligences

Gardner described are: visual-spatial intelligence, verbal-linguistic

intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, logical-mathematical

intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, musical intelligence, intra

personal intelligence, and naturalistic intelligence

4) Robert Sternberg - Triarchic Theory of Intelligence:

Psychologist Robert Sternberg defined intelligence as "mental

activity directed toward purposive adaptation to, selection and shaping

of, real-world environments relevant to one’s life" (Sternberg, 1985: 45).

While he agreed with Gardner that intelligence is much broader than a

single, general ability, he instead suggested some of Gardner's

intelligences are better viewed as individual talents. Sternberg proposed

what he refers to as 'successful intelligence, which is comprised of three

different factors:

1) Analytical intelligence: This component refers to problem-

solving abilities.

32

2) Creative intelligence: this aspect of intelligence involves the

ability to deal with new situations using past experiences and

current skills.

3) Practical intelligence: this element refers to the ability to adapt to

a changing environment.

Good and Brophy (1990: 596) say that Gardner’s work has resulted

in a list of nine types of intelligence, the list includes:

a. Naturalist Intelligence (Nature Smart)

It designates the human ability to discriminate among living things

(plants, animals) as well as sensitivity to other features of the natural world

(clouds, rock configurations). This ability was clearly of value in our

evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers; it continues to be

central in such roles as botanist or chef. It is also speculated that much of

our consumer society exploits the naturalist intelligences, which can be

mobilized in the discrimination among cars, sneakers, kinds of makeup,

and the like.

b. Musical Intelligence (M usical Smart)

Musical intelligence is the capacity to discern pitch, rhythm,

timbre, and tone. This intelligence enables us to recognize, create,

reproduce, and reflect on music, as demonstrated by composers,

conductors, musicians, vocalist, and sensitive listeners. Interestingly, there

is often an affective connection between music and the emotions; and

mathematical and musical intelligences may share common thinking

33

processes. Young adults with this kind of intelligence are usually singing

or drumming to themselves. They are usually quite aware of sounds others

may miss.

c. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (Number/Reasoning Smart)

Logical-mathematical intelligence is the ability to calculate,

quantify, consider propositions and hypotheses, and carry out complete

mathematical operations. It enables us to perceive relationships and

connections and to use abstract, symbolic thought; sequential reasoning

skills; and inductive and deductive thinking patterns. Logical intelligence

is usually well developed in mathematicians, scientists, and detectives.

Young adults with lots of logical intelligence are interested in patterns,

categories, and relationships. They are drawn to arithmetic problems,

strategy games and experiments.

d. Existential Intelligence

Sensitivity and capacity to tackle deep questions about human

existence, such as the meaning of life, why do we die, and how did we get

here.

e. Interpersonal Intelligence (People Smart)

Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand and interact

effectively with others. It involves effective verbal and nonverbal

communication, the ability to note distinctions among others, sensitivity to

the moods and temperaments of others, and the ability to entertain multiple

perspectives. Teachers, social workers, actors, and politicians are all

34

exhibit interpersonal intelligence. Young adults with this kind of

intelligence are leaders among their peers, are good at communicating, and

seem to understand others’ feelings and motives.

f. Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence (Body Smart)

Bodily kinesthetic intelligence is the capacity to manipulate objects

and use a variety of physical skills. This intelligence also involves a sense

of timing and the perfection of skills through mind–body union. Athletes,

dancers, surgeons, and craftspeople exhibit well-developed bodily

kinesthetic intelligence.

g. Linguistic Intelligence (Word Smart)

Linguistic intelligence is the ability to think in words and to use

language to express and appreciate complex meanings. Linguistic

intelligence allows us to understand the order and meaning of words and to

apply meta-linguistic skills to reflect on our use of language. Linguistic

intelligence is the most widely shared human competence and is evident in

poets, novelists, journalists, and effective public speakers. Young adults

with this kind of intelligence enjoy writing, reading, telling stories or

doing crossword puzzles.

h. Intra-personal Intelligence (Self Smart)

Intra-personal intelligence is the capacity to understand oneself and

one’s thoughts and feelings, and to use such knowledge in planning and

direction one’s life. Intra-personal intelligence involves not only an

appreciation of the self, but also of the human condition. It is evident in

35

psychologist, spiritual leaders, and philosophers. These young adults may

be shy. They are very aware of their own feelings and are self-motivated.

i. Spatial Intelligence (Picture Smart)

Spatial intelligence is the ability to think in three dimensions. Core

capacities include mental imagery, spatial reasoning, image manipulation,

graphic and artistic skills, and an active imagination. Sailors, pilots,

sculptors, painters, and architects all exhibit spatial intelligence. Young

adults with this kind of intelligence may be fascinated with mazes or

jigsaw puzzles, or spend free time drawing or daydreaming.

To measure person’s intelligence, Binet in Santrock (1990: 115)

uses Intelligence Quotient (IQ). Djaali (2007: 72) states that Binet’s test

result can be seen in the following classification:

Genius > 140

Gifted > 130

Superior > 120

Normal 90 – 110

Debil 60 – 79

Imbesil 40 – 55

Idiot > 30

Based on the quotations above intelligence is the ability to think

abstractly, the ability to learn, and the ability to adapt to environment that

is influenced by some factors. There are three categories of intelligence

36

that are usually tested to the people. They are: visual-spatial intelligence,

verbal-linguistic Intelligence, and logical-mathematical intelligence.

E. Rationale

1. The differences between Reciprocal Teaching Model and Direct

Instructional Model

In the direct instructional model the teacher becomes the decision

maker, the teacher will be engaged in many planning decisions, such as

deciding what he/she would like to teach, and he/she wishes to teach. The

activity is teacher centered. The students have lack of opportunities in the

classroom. The students just become the follower and depend on the

teacher during the teaching and learning process and usually work

individually. Student activity can be mainly passive and the attention span

of students may be limited.

On the contrary, reciprocal teaching model requires different way

in teaching learning process especially in reading process. It makes

students work cooperatively which will develop their ability in their social

and human relation. Reciprocal teaching must be carefully scaffold to

ensure success for the students, reciprocal teaching is a routine for

scaffolding reading comprehension, where students work as active

members of a cooperative and collaborative group and are taught to use

the strategies of predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing to

comprehend text.

37

The process of this model is the discussion leader (a teacher or

student) leads the group in making predictions about the text based on the

information from the text (often the title, heading or subtitle and perhaps

browsing through the text). The leader can then ask the group if they need

clarification of words or ideas (clarification may be discussed throughout

the dialogue). Firstly a review of the main points is covered so far. The

text is usually read silently and notes may be individually written about

points to clarify or questions to ask.

The leader generates questions and the group responds. Other members

of the group are invited by the leader to ask additional questions and seek

clarification of any words, phrases or sentences of which they are unsure.

The leader then summarizes what that particular section of the text is

about, and asks other members if they would like to elaborate upon, or

revise the summary. Finally, in preparation for moving on to the next

portion of text, the group repeats the process beginning with predictions.

The students have to be more active in joining the learning process. In

short, reciprocal teaching model is supposed to be more effective than

direct instructional model.

2. The difference between the students who have high intelligence and

the students who have low intelligence.

The students who have high level of intelligence have better

attitudes in joining the teaching and learning process. They have high

38

interest to pay much attention to the teacher and all of the activities in the

class and always do the task well and correctly. They are not bored in

joining class because they are more active than the students who have low

intelligence.

The students who have low level of intelligence usually don’t have

any interest in joining the learning process and they have little attention to

the teacher and the material that is given. The students depend on the

teacher all the time in teaching learning process. They are passive to learn

in the class. They prefer becoming the follower and listener, and also

slower in doing any tasks which are given to them.

That is why the students who have high intelligence are supposed

to have higher reading skill than the students who have low intelligence.

3. Interaction between model of teaching and students’ intelligence.

The teaching technique which is used by the teacher in the class

gives a big influence for the success of the teaching and learning process.

In reading process, the teacher also needs to use suitable technique that

will motivate the students in joining the class. Direct instructional model

cannot motivate the students because this model just focuses on academic

content. Their intelligence cannot grow up.

Reciprocal teaching model is effective for students who have high

level of intelligence, because by using reciprocal teaching model the

teacher will try to teach reading in group and independently. The students

39

will not depend on the teacher’s translation and explanation, and they try

to find the meaning and message from the text by themselves. The students

will be more active and the teacher not only teaches academic content but

also consider making the students develop their social relation with other

students. This model is supposed to be more effective for students having

high intelligence.

Intelligence gives a big influence to the students to improve their

reading skill. If the students have high level of intelligence they will have

high ability in reading many texts. They can read anything that the teacher

gives to them. They will be active in joining the teaching learning process

especially in reading because they have high level of intelligence.

Direct instructional model seems satisfy the students having low

intelligence in joining the reading class. They depend on the teacher’s

explanation to read something. They don’t need to be more active, and just

wait for their teacher’s translation and explanation to know the message of

the text. They are passive in joining reading class, and they are slower in

doing the task. That is why direct instructional model is supposed to be

more effective for the students who have low level of intelligence toward

students’ reading skill. So, it is assumed that there is an interaction

between teaching models and students’ intelligence.

40

F. Hypothesis

Based on the theoretical description and the rationale above, the

hypotheses can be formulated as follows:

1. Reciprocal teaching model is more effective than direct instructional

model to teach reading at the forth semester students of the English

Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa.

2. The students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than

the students who have low intelligence at the forth semester students of

the English Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa.

3. There is an interaction effect between teaching models and students’

intelligence on the students’ reading skill of the forth semester students

of the English Department of STAIN Zawiyah Cotkala Langsa.

41

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Place and Time of the Study

This research has been conducted in Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam

Negeri (STAIN) Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa. This college is located on Jl.

Meurandeh - kota Langsa - Nangroe Aceh Darussalam, phone (0641)

23129 fax (0641)425129. It has 3 faculties, they are: Syari’ah Faculty,

Tarbiyah Faculty , and Da’wah Faculty. There is English Teaching

Department or Tadris Bahasa Inggris/TBI in Tarbiyah Faculty. This

Department is the biggest class and it has 3-4 classes annually, which

consist of 40 students in every class. This research has been done from

January to March 2010.

B. Research Method

Experimental study is chosen in conducting this research. The

purpose of experimental study is to determine cause-and-effect

relationship. Through experimentations, cause and effect relationship can

be identified. Because of this ability to identify caution, the experimental

approach has come to represent the prototype of scientific method for

solving problems (Johnson and Christensen, 2000: 23).

By experimental study, the researchers find out the effect of at least

one independent variable on one or more dependent variable. This study

42

involves three kinds of variables. The first is independent variable, it is

experimental or treatment variable. The independent variable is the

teaching model (X), and the term intelligence, as the second independent

variable. The second variable is reading skill as dependent variable (Y).

The writer supposes that the relationship between X and Y is changed by

the level of a third factor Z, or intelligence.

This research uses quasi-experimental research design, quasi-

experiments do not use proper random assignment, and typically they

recruit people in a way that can cause bias, such as using ―people on the

street‖. In compensation for this, other methods are used to increase the

reliability and validity of the experiment, for example by using a control

group (http://changingminds.org/explanations/research/design/ experiment

types.htm). There are a lot of quasi-experimental designs types; one of

them is factorial design.

The most appropriate experimental design of this research is

factorial design. This research design allows a researcher to study the

interaction of an independent variable with one or more variables. This

design is possible to assess the effect or interaction (Tuckman, 1978: 135).

The factorial design is illustrated as follows:

43

Table 1. Factorial Design

Main Effect

S imple Effect

A 1 A2

B 1 A 1 B 1 A2B 1

B 2 A 1 B 2 A2B 2

A 1 A2

C. Population, Sample and Sampling

Johnson and Christensen (2000: 158) say that population is the set

of all elements. The population may be all the individual of particular type

or a more restricted part of that group all public school teacher. The

population of this research is the fourth semester of TBI students in

STAIN Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa (2009-2010 academic year). It consists

of four classes (166 students).

A sample is a set of elements taken from a larger population

according to certain rules (Christensen 2000: 158). The sample used in the

research is two classes of TBI 1 (40 students) and TBI 3 (40 students). TBI

3 is experimental class and the other is control class.

According to Kelley, et al. in Rashid and Mansur (2007: 246)

―Pembagian kelompok yang paling stabil, sensitif, dan paling banyak

digunakan dengan menentukan 27% kelompok atas dan 27% kelompok

bawah”. It means the writer takes 27% from experiment class (40

44

students) and 27% from control class (40 students) for students who have

high and low level of intelligence.

The writer uses cluster random sampling to get the sample.

Arikunto (2006:133) suggests that the sample can be used if the number of

the population is too large to be observed wholly. Considering the number

of population the technique of cluster random sampling is used to take the

samples. Each class is divided into two groups, students who have high

level of intelligence and the students who have low level of intelligence.

One of the classes is taught by the reciprocal teaching model and the other

is taught by the direct instructional model. So, there are four groups: (1)

students with high intelligence who are taught by reciprocal teaching

model; (2) students with high intelligence who are taught by direct

instructional model; (3) students with low intelligence who are taught by

reciprocal teaching model; and (4) students with low intelligence who are

taught by direct instructional model.

D. Technique of Collecting Data.

The writer uses tests to obtain the data. According to Arikunto

(2002: 127) test is a set of questions, exercises of other instrument which

are used to measure skill, knowledge, intelligence, and aptitude of an

individual or group. The tests are used to obtain the data of the students’

intelligence and the students’ reading skill. The form of test is objective

test.

45

The reading test is used to know the students’ skill in reading. And

to know the students’ intelligence, a test is also used, it is called

intelligence quotient (IQ) test. IQ test is determined by dividing the

student’s mental age (MA) - The total number of month credit earned on

the test- by chronological age (CA) in month and then multiplying the

resulting quotient by 100. In symbol, this ratio IQ is computed as:

100CA

MAIQ

Binet in Aiken (1997: 140)

For the IQ test, the students were already tested at the third

semester by a college academy; the writer uses these scores as the data

(see appendix 9, p.195).

The reading test is in multiple choice forms. Test must be valid and

reliable. Therefore, the test is tried out to know the validity and reliability.

It is done before the treatment. The tryout is not done in the experiment or

control class.

The Product Moment formula is used to know the validity of the

reading test:

1

1

22

q

p

Sr

n

xS

t

tio

t

If ro is higher than rt , the item is valid.

46

The next formula (KR 20 Kuder-Richardson) is used to know the

reliability of the reading test:

rkk=

2

2

11

tS

pq

k

k

If ro is higher than rt , the item is reliable.

To make the instrument to test the students’ reading skill those are in

Reading 3 class, the researcher needs to relate the constructing theory that

has been extended before. The reading construct is ―reading skill is the

ability to obtain meaning and select the massage from a written text by

finding reference, identifying main ideas, finding detail information,

comprehending the meaning based on the context, identifying lexical

meaning, and understanding communicative function‖.

For conducting the tryout test, the reading test consists of 70 items.

Those items are based on 2 types of texts. They are analytical and

hortatory exposition. They consist of 8 reference items, 14 main ideas

items, 27 detail information items; 18 explicit meaning items and 9

implicit meaning items, 6 the meaning based on the context items, 10

identifying lexical meaning items; 5 antonym items and 5 synonym items,

and 5 communicative function items. All of the tryout items are 70 items.

It can be seen from the blue-print of the test (see appendix 2, p.141)

The tryout test is done in TBI IV consists 30 students in 90

minutes. It is done before the treatment.

47

After conducting the tryout test, the next step is analyzing the data

for validity and reliability. The result of the tryout shows that from 70

items, there are 42 items are valid. The researcher uses 40 valid items to

test the students of the experiment and the control class after the treatment.

And the instrument of reading test is reliable; it can be seen in appendix 5,

p. 180.

The total of reading test items that are used is 40 items. The

complete result of the tryout can be seen in appendix 4 on page 159-180.

E. Technique of Analyzing the Data

The writer uses a descriptive analysis and inferential analysis in

this research. The descriptive analysis is used to know the mean, median,

mode, and standard deviation of the score of reading test. Normality and

homogeneity test are used before testing the hypothesis. The data are

analyzed using multifactor analysis of variance 2X2. Ho is rejected if Fo >

Ft. If Ho is rejected the analysis is continued to know which group is better

using Tukey test. The design of multifactor analysis of variance is as

follows:

48

Table 2. Factorial Design 2X2

Teaching Model

Intelligence

Reciprocal

Teaching Model

(A 1 )

Direct

Instructional

model

(A2)

High (B 1 ) A 1 B 1 A2B 1 B 1

Low (B 2 ) A 1 B 2 A2B 2 B 2

A 1 A2

N o t e :

A1B1 : The mean score of reading test of students having high

intelligence who are taught by using reciprocal teaching model

A2B1 : The mean score of reading test of students having high

intelligence who are taught by using direct instructional model

A1B2 : The mean score of reading test of students having low intelligence

who are taught by using reciprocal teaching model

A2B2 : The mean score of reading test of students having low reading

who are taught by using direct instructional model

A1 : The mean score of reading test of experimental class which is

taught by using reciprocal teaching model

A2 : The mean score of reading test of control class which is taught by

using direct instructional model

49

B1 : The mean score of reading test of students having high

intelligence

B2 : The mean score of reading test of students having low intelligence

The data are analyzed using the following ways:

1. The total sum of squares:

N

XXx

t

tt

2

22

2. The sum of squares between groups:

N

X

n

X

n

X

n

X

n

Xx

t

b

2

4

2

4

3

2

3

2

2

2

1

2

12

3. The sum of squares of within groups:

222

btw xxx

4. The between-columns sum of squares:

N

X

n

X

n

Xx

t

c

c

c

c

bc

2

2

2

2

1

2

12

5. The between rows sum of squares:

N

X

n

X

n

Xx

t

r

r

r

r

br

2

2

2

2

1

2

12

6. The sum-of-squares of interaction:

222

int brbcb xxxx

50

The number of degrees of freedom associated with each source of variation:

1. df for between-columns sum of squares = C – 1

2. df for between-rows sum of squares = R – 1

3. df for between-groups sum of squares = G – 1

4. df for within-columns sum of squares = ∑ (n-1)

5. df for interaction = (C-1) (R-1)

6. df for total sum of squares = N – 1

Note:

C = the number of columns

R = the number of row

G = the number of group

n = the number of subjects in one group

N = the number of subjects in all group

After analyzing the data by ANOVA, the researcher uses Tukey HSD

test, HSD is Honestly Significant Different. Tukey test is used to know

which teaching model is more effective or better to teach reading and which

group is better.

1. Between columns q =

√

51

2. Between columns q=

√

3. Between columns q =

√ or q =

√

The statistic test is obtained by dividing the difference between the

means by square root of the ratio of the within group variation and the

sample size.

TS: q =

√

CHAPTER IV

THE RESULT OF STUDY

52

This chapter shows the result of study. It consists of four parts, the

description of study, normality and homogeneity test, data analysis, and the

discussion of the result of the study.

A. Description of Study

There are 2 classes of Reading 3 used for the research, class I and class III.

For the sake of research, students who join in class III are taught by using

reciprocal teaching while students who sit in class I are taught by using direct

instructional model. Each class consists of 40 students. There is a border

separating the students. The border is their level of intelligence.

The data described here are the result of the reading test. The description

includes mean, mode, median, standard deviation, and frequency distribution

followed by histogram and polygon. Based on the group analyzed, the

descriptions of the data are divided into eight groups, they are as follows:

1. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having high intelligence

who are taught by reciprocal teaching (A1B1).

2. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having high intelligence

who are taught by direct instructional model (A2B1).

3. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having low intelligence

who are taught by reciprocal teaching (A1B2).

4. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having low intelligence

who are taught by direct instructional model (A2B2).

53

5. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who are taught by

reciprocal teaching (A1).

6. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who are taught by

direct instructional model (A2).

7. The data of the reading test of the students who have high intelligence (B1).

8. The data of the reading test of the students who have low intelligence (B2)

To describe the data, the writer works on the highest score, the lowest

score, the range, the class, and the interval to know the frequency distribution. The

data of each group are presented as below:

1. The data of reading test of students having high intelligence who are taught by

using Reciprocal Teaching (A1B1)

Descriptive analysis of the data of A1B1 shows that the score is 70 up to

90. The mean is 79.6, the standard deviation is 6.16, the mode is 77.5, and the

median is 78.7. The frequency distribution of the data of A1B1 is in table 3. The

highest score is 90 while the lowest score is 70. From these, the range is 20. The

class is 4, and the interval of these scores is 6. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 4.

Table 3. Frequency Distribution of data A1B1

Class Class Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

54

Class Limits

Fre

qu

en

cy

6

5

4

3

2

0

1

86.5

Group A1B1

74.568.5 92.580.5

Figure 4. Histogram and Polygon of data A1B1

2. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having high

intelligence who are taught by direct instructional model (A2B1).

Descriptive analysis of the data of A2B1 shows that the score is 55 up to

68. The mean is 60.95, the standard deviation is 3.69, the mode is 61.5, and the

median is 61. The frequency distribution of the data of A1B1 is in table 4. The

highest score is 68 while the lowest score is 55. From these, the range is 13. The

class is 4, and the interval of these scores is 4. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 5.

limits boundaries

69 - 74

75 - 80

81 - 86

87 - 92

68.5 - 74.5

74.5 - 80.5

81.5 - 86.5

87.5 - 92.5

71.5

77.5

83.5

89.5

II

IIII

II

II

2

5

2

2

18.18

22.72

18.18

18.18

11 100

55

Table 4. Frequency Distribution of data A2B1

Class limits Class

boundaries Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

54 – 57 53.5 - 57.5 55.5 II 2 18.18

68 – 61 57.5 - 61.5 59.5 IIII 4 36.36

62 – 65 61.5 - 65.5 65.5 IIII 4 36.36

66 – 69 65.5 - 69.5 67.5 I 1 9.09

11 100

Class Limits

61.5 65,557.553.5 69,5

Fre

qu

en

cy

5

4

3

2

1

0

Figure 5. Histogram and Polygon of data A2B1

3. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having low

intelligence who are taught by reciprocal teaching (A1B2).

Descriptive analysis of the data of A1B2 shows that the score is 35

up to 58. The mean is 44.04, the standard deviation is 7.33, the mode is 38.25, and

the median is 42. The frequency distribution of the data of A1B2 is in table 5. The

highest score is 58 while the lowest score is 35. From these, the range is 23. The

56

class is 4, and the interval of these scores is 6. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 6.

Table 5. Frequency Distribution of data A1B2

Class limits Class

boundaries Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

35 – 40 34.5 - 40.5 37.5 IIII 5 22.72

41 – 46 40.5 - 46.5 43.5 II 2 18.18

47 – 52 46.5 - 52.5 49.5 II 2 18.18

53 – 58 53.5 - 58.5 55.5 II 2 18.18

11 100

Class Limits

46.5 52.5

Group A1B2

40.534.5 58.5

Fre

qu

en

cy

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Figure 6. Histogram and Polygon of data A1B2

4. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having low

intelligence who are taught by direct instructional model (A2B2).

57

Descriptive analysis of the data of A1B1 shows that the score is 40 up to

65. The mean is 52.81, the standard deviation is 7.89, the mode is 49, and the

median is 51.62. The frequency distribution of the data of A2B2 is in table 6. The

highest score is 65 while the lowest score is 40. From these, the range is 25. The

class is 4, and the interval of these scores is 7. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 7.

Table 6. Frequency Distribution of data A2B2

Class limits

Class boundaries

Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

39 – 45 38.5 - 45.5 42 II 2 18.18

46 - 52 46.5 - 52.5 49 IIII 4 36.36

53 – 59 52.5 - 59.5 56 II 2 18.18

60 - 66 59.5 - 66.5 63 III 3 27.27

11 100

Class Limits

52.5 59.5

Group A2B2

45.538.5 66.5

Fre

qu

en

cy

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

58

Figure 7. Histogram and Polygon of data A2B2

5. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who are taught by

reciprocal teaching (A1).

Descriptive analysis of the data of A1 shows that the score is 35 up to 90.

The mean is 62.5, the standard deviation is 18.14, the mode is 76.5, and the

median is 68.5. The frequency distribution of the data of A1 is in table 7. The

highest score is 90 while the lowest score is 35. From these, the range is 55. The

class is 5, and the interval of these scores is 12. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 8.

Table 7. Frequency Distribution of data A1

Class

limits

Class

boundaries Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

33 – 44 32.5 - 44.5 38.5 IIII 5 22.71

45 – 56 44.5 - 56.5 50.5 IIII 5 22.71

57 - 68 56.5 - 68.5 62.5 I 1 9.09

69 – 80 68.5 - 79.5 74.5 IIII 7 63.63

81 - 92 80.5 - 92.5 86.5 IIII 4 36.36

22 100

59

Class Limits

5

3

2

44.532.5 80.5

6

Fre

qu

en

cy 7

9

Group A₁

4

92.5

1

056.5 68.5

Figure 8. Histogram and Polygon of data A1

6. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who are taught by

direct instructional model (A2).

Descriptive analysis of the data of A2 shows that the score is 40 up to 68.

The mean is 57.23, the standard deviation is 8.03, the mode is 63.5, and the

median is 58.5. The frequency distribution of the data of A2 is in table 8. The

highest score is 68 while the lowest score is 40. From these, the range is 28. The

class is 5, and the interval of these scores is 6. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 9.

Table 8. Frequency Distribution of data A2

Class limits

Class boundaries

Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

40 - 45 39.5 – 45.5 42.5 II 2 18.18

46 - 51 45.5 – 51.5 48.5 IIII 4 36.36

52 - 57 51.5 – 57.5 54.5 IIII 4 36.36

58 - 63 57.5 – 63.5 60.5 IIII I 6 54.54

64 - 69 63.5 – 69.5 66.5 IIII I 6 54.54

60

22 100

Class Limits

5

4

69.5

1

063.551.5 57.545.539,5

Group A₂

Fre

qu

en

cy 7

6

3

2

Figure 9. Histogram and Polygon of data A2

7. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who have high

intelligence (B1).

Descriptive analysis of the data of B1 shows that the score is 90 up to 55.

The mean is 70.5, the standard deviation is 10.401, the mode is 84.5, and the

median is 69.3. The frequency distribution of the data of B1 is in table 9. The

highest score is 68 while the lowest score is 90. From these, the range is 55. The

class is 8, and the interval of these scores is 6. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 10.

Table 9. Frequency Distribution of data B1

Class limits

Class boundaries

Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

55 - 62 54.5 – 62.5 58.5 IIII I 6 54.54

61

63 - 70 62.5 – 70.5 66.5 IIII I 6 54.54

71 - 78 70.5 – 78.5 74.5 IIII 5 22.71

79 - 86 78.5 – 86.5 82.5 III 3 27.27

87 - 94 86.5 – 94.5 90.5 II 2 18.18

22 100

Class Limits

4

1

0

3

2

82.566.5 74.5

Group B₁

5

58.554.5 90.5

Fre

qu

en

cy 7

6

Figure 10. Histogram and Polygon of data B1

8. The data of the reading test of the students or the group who have low

intelligence (B2).

Descriptive analysis of the data of B2 shows that the score is 65 up to 35.

The mean is 47.86, the standard deviation is 8.271, the mode is 84.5, and the

median is 64.16. The frequency distribution of the data of B2 is in table 10. The

highest score is 65 while the lowest score is 35. From these, the range is 30. The

62

class is 7, and the interval of these scores is 6. Histogram and polygon are

presented in figure 11.

Table 10. Frequency Distribution of data B2

Class

limits

Class

boundaries Midpoint Tally Frequency Percentage

35 - 41 34.5 – 41.5 38 IIII I 6 54.54

42 - 48 41.5 – 48.5 45 IIII I 6 54.54

49 – 55 48.5 – 55.5 52 IIII I 6 54.54

56 - 62 56.5 – 62.5 59 III 3 27.27

63 - 69 62.5 – 69.5 66 I 1 9.09

22 100

Class Limits

66

Fre

qu

en

cy 7

6

5945 52

Group B₂

5

3835

4

1

0

3

2

Figure 11. Histogram and Polygon of data B2

B. Normality and Homogeneity

63

The tests that have to be done before analyzing data are normality and

homogeneity. The normality test is to check whether the data are in normal

distribution or not. And the homogeneity is applied to find out whether the data

are homogeneous or not. This test is important because homogeneity of the data

shows that the population is well-formed.

1. Normality test

If Lo (L obtained) is lower than Lt (L table) at the level of significance

α=0.05 on Liliefors, the sample is in normal distribution. The formula used in

this testing is:

√

( )

a. Cell (A1B1).

In this cell, that contains 11 students having high intelligence who are

taught by using reciprocal teaching (n = 11), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi)

or Lo is 0.142. Lt at the level of significance α=0.05 is 0. 249. Because Lo is

lower than Lt (0.142 < 0.249), it can be concluded that the sample is in

normal distribution.

b. Cell (A2B1).

In the cell A2B1, that contains 11 students having high intelligence who are

taught by using direct instructional (n = 11), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi)

or Lo is 0.175. Lt at the level of significance α=0.05 is 0.249. Because Lo is

64

lower than Lt (0.175 < 0.249), it can be concluded that the sample is in

normal distribution.

c. Cell (A1B2).

In the cell A1B2, that contains 11 students having low intelligence who are

taught by using reciprocal teaching (n = 11), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi)

or Lo is 0.184. Lt at the level of significance α=0.05 is 0.249. Because Lo is

lower than Lt (0.184 < 0.2492), it can be concluded that the sample is in

normal distribution.

d. Cell (A2B2).

In the cell A2B2, that contains 11 students having low intelligence who are

taught by using direct instructional (n = 11), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi)

or Lo is 0.171. Lt at the level of significance α=0.05 is 0.249. Because Lo is

lower than Lt (0.171<0.249), it can be concluded that the sample is in normal

distribution.

e. Cell (A1).

In the cell A1, that contains 22 who are taught by using reciprocal teaching

(n = 22), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi) or Lo is 0.145. Lt at the level of

significance α=0.05 is 0.190. Because Lo is lower than Lt (0.145 < 0.186), it

can be concluded that the sample is in normal distribution.

f. Cell (A2).

In the cell A2, that contains 22 students who are taught by using direct

instructional (n = 22), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi) or Lo is 0.096. Lt at the

65

level of significance α=0.05 is 0.190. Because Lo is lower than Lt (0.096 <

0.0.186), it can be concluded that the sample is in normal distribution.

g. Cell (B1).

In the cell B1, that contains 22 students who are having high intelligence

(n = 22), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi) or Lo is 0.151. Lt at the level of

significance α=0.05 is 0.186. Because Lo is lower than Lt (0.151< 0.0.186), it

can be concluded that the sample is in normal distribution.

h. Cell (B2).

In the cell B2, that contains 22 students who are having low intelligence (n

= 22), the highest value of F(Z i)-S(Fi) or Lo is 0.146. Lt at the level of

significance α=0.05 is 0.185. Because Lo is lower than Lt (0.146 < 0.0.186),

it can be concluded that the sample is in normal distribution.

Table 11. The Normality Test

. No Data

The

Number of

sample

L

Obtained

(Lo)

L

Table

(Lt)

Alfa

( )

Distribution

of

Population

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

A1B1

A2B1

A1B2

A2B2

A1

A2

B1

B2

11

11

11

11

22

22

22

22

0.142

0.175

0.184

0.171

0.145

0.096

0.151

0.145

0.249

0.249

0.249

0.249

0.186

0.186

0.186

0.186

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

Normal

Normal

Normal

Normal

Normal

Normal

Normal

Normal

2. Homogeneity Test

66

The testing is done to find out whether the data are homogeneous. This test

is important because homogeneity of the data shows that the population is well-

formed. To test homogeneity of data, ( ) test is used. If 2

o is

lower than 2

t at the level of significance α=0.05, the data are homogeneous.

Table 12. Homogeneity Test

Group ni – 1 1 / (ni – 1) si2 Ln(si

2) (ni – 1) Ln(si

2)

1 10 0.1 40.273 3.696 36.957

2 10 0.1 19.473 2.969 29.690

3 10 0.1 57.655 4.054 40.545

4 10 0.1 54.655 4.001 40.010

40 0.4 147.202

2 =

kN

1

1n

1

1k3

11

sln1nB

i

2

ii

=

40

14.0

143

11

202.147461.150

= 3.128

2

0. 05 = 7.815

Because 2

o (3.128) is lower than )815.7(2

t , the data are homogeneous.

C. Data Analysis

Hypothesis test can be done after the results of normality and homogeneity

test are fulfilled. The test is done by using multifactor analysis of variance 2 x 2.

Ho is rejected if Fo > Ft meaning that there is a significant difference and an

67

interaction. If Ho is rejected, the analysis is continued to know which group is

better by using Tukey test. The multifactor analysis of variance 2 x 2 and Tukey

test are described as below.

1. Summary of a 2 x 2 Multifactor Analysis of Variance

Table 13. Multifactor Analysis of Variance

Source of variance SS df MS Fo Ft (.05)

Between columns

(model)

Between rows

(Intelligence)

Columns by rows

(Interaction)

295.364

5324.000

1833.091

1

1

1

295.364

5324.000

1833.091

6.867

123.775

42.617

4.08

Between groups

Within groups

7452.455

1720.545

3

40

2484.15

43.014

Total 9173.00 43

a. Because Fo between columns (6.867) is higher than F t (.05) (4.08), the

difference between columns is significant. It can be concluded that the

model used differs significantly from one another in their effect on their

performance of the subjects in the experiment. The students’ mean of c1

(62.09) is higher than the students’ mean of c2 (56.90), so the students who

are taught by using reciprocal are better in reading skill than students who

are taught by using direct instructional.

b. Because Fo between rows (123.77) is higher than F t (.05) (4.08), it means

difference between rows is significant. It can be concluded that the

difference between the achievement of those subjects having high

68

intelligence and those having low intelligence is significant. The students’

mean of r1 (70.50) is higher than the students’ mean of r2 (48.50), so the

students who have high level of intelligence have better reading skill than

the students who have low intelligence

c. Because Fo interaction (42.617) is higher than F t (.05) (4.08), it can be

concluded that there is interaction effect between the two variables, the

teaching models and the degree of intelligence. It means that the effect of the

teaching model used on the achievement depends on the subjects’ degree or

level of intelligence.

2. Tukey Test.

Tukey test is done to find which model is more effective and which group

is better. q is found by dividing the difference between the means by the square

root of the ration of the within group variation and the sample size.

Table 14. Tukey Test

PAIR TUKEY CRITICAL

A1 – A2 3.92 2.95

A1B1 –

A2B1

9.18 3.11

A1B2 –

A2B2

4.06 3.11

B1 – B2 15.8 2.95

A1B1 - A1B2 17.1 3.11

A2B1 - A2B2 4.56 3.11

69

a. Comparing two means between columns to find which model is more

effective

1) Comparing two means between columns qo is 3.92. The value of qt for α =

0.05 and n = 22 is 2.95. Because qo (3.92) is higher than qt (2.95)

reciprocal teaching differs significantly from direct instructional for

teaching reading. The mean score of students who are taught by using

reciprocal teaching (62.09) is higher than who are taught by using direct

instructional (56.90), so reciprocal teaching is more effective than direct

instructional for teaching reading.

2) Comparing two means between cells (A1B1 and A2B1). qo is 9.18. The

value of qt for α = 0.05 and n = 11 is 3.11. Because qo (9.18) is higher than

qt (3.11) reciprocal teaching differs significantly from direct instructional

for teaching reading for students having high intelligence. The mean score

of students having high intelligence who are taught by using reciprocal

teaching (79.54) is higher than those who are taught by using direct

instructional (61.45), so reciprocal teaching is more effective than direct

instructional for teaching reading for students having high intelligence

3) Comparing two means between cells (group A1B2 and group A2B2). qo is

3.42. The value of qt for α = 0.05 and n = 11 is 3.11. Because qo (4.06) is

higher than qt (3.11) instructional model differs significantly from

reciprocal teaching model to teach reading for students who have low

intelligence. The mean score of students having low intelligence who are

taught by using direct instructional (52.36) is higher than those who are

70

taught by using reciprocal teaching (44.63), so direct instructional is more

effective than reciprocal teaching for teaching reading for students having

low intelligence.

b. Comparing two means between rows to find which group is better

1) Comparing two means between rows (group B1 and group B2). qo is 15.8.

The value of qt for α = 0.05 and n = 22 is 2.95. Because qo (15.8) is higher

than qt (3.95) the students who have high intelligence are significantly

different in reading from the students who have low intelligence. The

mean score of students having high intelligence (70.5) is higher than those

who have low intelligence (48.5), so the students who have high level of

intelligence have better reading skill than the students who have low

intelligence.

2) Comparing two means between cells (group A1B1 and group A1B2). qo is

17.7. The value of qt for α = 0.05 and n = 11 is 3.11. Because qo (17.7) is

higher than qt (3.11) the students who have high intelligence who are

taught by using reciprocal teaching are significantly different in reading

from the students who have low intelligence who are taught by using

reciprocal teaching. The mean score of students having high intelligence

(70.5) is higher than those who have low intelligence (48.5), so the

students who have high level of intelligence have better reading skill than

the students who have low intelligence those taught by using reciprocal

teaching.

71

3) Comparing two means between cells (group A2B1 and group A2B2). qo is

4.56. The value of qt for α = 0.05 and n = 11 is 3.11. Because qo (4.56) is

higher than qt (3.11) the students who have high intelligence who are

taught by using direct instructional model are significantly different in

reading from the students who have low intelligence who are taught by

using direct instructional model. The mean score of students having high

intelligence (61.4) is higher than those who have low intelligence (52.4),

so the students who have high level of intelligence have better reading

skill than the students who have low intelligence those taught by using

direct instructional model.

D. Discussion

1. Reciprocal teaching model is more effective than direct instructional

model to teach reading.

Reciprocal teaching is better applied for teaching reading in university

because the students are no longer medium level students indeed they are

advanced level students. It is seen from their cognitive learning process. In

advanced level class, the students have to be the centre of process; the

teacher only facilitates students to obtain the knowledge including the skill

for comprehending reading text. The role of lecturer in teaching advanced

level students is assisting in the ongoing attempt to automatism. One

72

teaching model that is appropriate with the cognitive level of the university

students is reciprocal teaching model. This model helps students to build

their cognitive by generating and answering some questions cooperatively;

the students work in a team to solve the problem of a text. This model

permits students to be more active in searching and overcoming the

problem of a text. In reciprocal teaching class the lecturer presents a

certain text and students have to summarize, make some questions, clarify

the difficult word or grammar, and predict what will be the next. Pelinscar

and Brown (1984: 175) state that the teacher hands out a passage of text to

each student in the group. Each student reads the passage and writes

summarizing, clarifying, predicting questions related to what they have

read. The ―teacher‖ of the group asks one of the questions. The ―teacher‖

is leader of the group who starts off the questioning. One group member

responds, using the text to support their answer. The student, who answers

the question, then asks a question and the process repeats. This model is

designed as a discussion technique and built on the cooperative nature of

learning that causes the student’s reading comprehension of the text to be

deeper through social interaction. On contrary, direct instructional used by

the teacher is less effective to improve the students’ reading skill since the

direct instructional less encourages students to involve in teaching-

learning process. Joyce and Weil (1986: 326) say that in direct

instructional the teacher also provides feedback and correction for the

students’ mistake. Direct instructional model is one of the highest

73

priorities on the assignment and complexion of academic tasks in the

classroom. It is also characterized by teacher-centered and teacher-

dominated classroom (Peterson, 1999: 231). Teachers/lecturers cannot

assess what the students’ prior knowledge is, so will be unaware of why

the students cannot learn and improve their reading. It can be concluded

that reciprocal teaching model is more effective than direct instructional

model to teach reading.

2. The students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than

the students who have low intelligence

The students who have high level of intelligence will be encouraged if

the lecturer gives them a chance to involve in teaching-learning process.

They have better attitudes in joining the teaching and learning process. They

have high interest to pay much attention to the teacher and all of the

activities in the class and always do the reading task well. The situation of

the class is more cheerful. There are a lot of argumentation and opinion. The

students become the centre of teaching-learning process. They are not bored

in joining class because they are more active than the students who have low

intelligence. There is a substantial correlation between intelligence and

reading ability. It is true that a child who is intelligent enough to go to

school is intelligent enough to learn to read simple materials. It means that

the students who have high intelligence will have high ability in

understanding a text (Deboer, 1966: 132).

74

The students who have low level of intelligence don’t have any interest

in joining the learning process and they do so since they don’t have a desire

to learn more. They have little attention to the lecturer and the material that

is given. The students depend on the teacher and their friends all the time in

teaching learning process. They are passive to learn in the class, and tend to

listen to the lecturer’s explanation during the lesson rather than express the

opinion and ask the question. They prefer becoming the follower and

listener, and also slower in doing any reading tasks which are given to them.

Deboer (1966:132) states that the students’ who have low level of

intelligence will have low ability in understanding a text.

3. There is an interaction between teaching models and students’

intelligence.

Model tends to be concerned primarily with students and lecturer roles

and behavior. In reading process, the teacher also needs to use suitable

technique that motivates the students to join the class. Direct instructional

model cannot motivate the students because this model just focuses on

academic content. The students are passive in learning. Reciprocal teaching

requires the students to be active in learning-process.

The fact shows that the students having high intelligence perform very

well in the class when they are taught by using reciprocal teaching; they

attempt to be active in teaching learning process and do the task better. The

75

students will not depend on the teacher’s translation and explanation, and

they try to find the meaning and message from the text by themselves. This

model makes the students develop their social relation with other students.

Borich (1996: 397) says reciprocal teaching provides opportunities to

explore the content to be learned via classroom dialogue. At the centre of

reciprocal teaching are group discussions in which you and your students

take turns as leader in discussing the text. The high level of intelligence

students got higher score than the low level students. The students who have

high level of intelligence will have high ability in reading many texts. They

can read anything that the teacher gives to them. They will be active in

joining the teaching learning process especially in reading because they have

high level of intelligence. So reciprocal teaching is more effective for

students having high intelligence toward students’ reading skill.

Meanwhile, the students taught by using direct instructional learn

reading material as usual. They have less attention to the lecturer’s

explanation and need support in comprehending a text. They depend on the

teacher’s explanation to read something. They don’t need to be more active,

and just wait for their teacher’s translation and explanation to know the

message of the text. They are passive in joining reading class, and they are

slower in doing the task. Direct instruction as an instructional method works

for only a small percentage of students, not for a great variety. The students

who have other than verbal intelligence, or who come from different cultural

world views will fail (http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/mcvittiej/

76

methods/direct.html). Direct instructional seem satisfy the students having

low intelligence. That is why direct instructional model is more effective for

the students who have low level of intelligence toward students’ reading

skill.

The effect of teaching model used depends on the level of students’

intelligence. In the end, it can be concluded that there is an interaction

between teaching model and students’ intelligence.

77

BAB V

CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion

The findings of the research are:

1. Reciprocal teaching model is more effective than direct instructional model

to teach reading.

2. The students who have high intelligence have better reading skill than the

students who have low intelligence.

3. There is an interaction between teaching models and students’ intelligence to

teach reading.

Based on the research findings, it can be concluded that reciprocal teaching

model is a very effective model for teaching reading and improving the students’

reading skill at the fourth semester students of the English Department of STAIN

Zawiyah Cot Kala Langsa. Consequently, the teacher/lecturer should choose the

suitable model for their students in order to improve their reading skill.

B. Implication

As the result, reciprocal teaching is proved as an effective model to teach

reading. It is so because it offers possibility for the students to build their

cognitive by generating and answering some questions for summarizing,

questioning, clarifying and predicting a text cooperatively. The role of lecturer is

assisting in the ongoing attempt to automatism. Before applying, the four

78

strategies of reciprocal teaching have to model by the teacher. After students have

practice with each of strategies, the students work together in small groups. The

teacher monitors the small groups and guides those students having difficulty with

the activity. It is designed as a discussion technique and scaffolding that causes

the students’ reading skill of the text to be deeper and more optimal.

Intelligence contributes to the effectiveness of teaching model in the class.

The lecturer/teacher must know which model is suitable in the class considering

the students’ intelligence. The students having high intelligence who are taught by

using reciprocal teaching have higher score than the students having high

intelligence who are taught by using direct instructional, while the students having

low level of intelligence that are taught by using reciprocal teaching have lower

score than the students having low intelligence who are taught by using direct

instructional. It means that reciprocal teaching is well used for high intelligence

and directs instructional is effective used for low intelligence.

C. Suggestion

1. For the lecturer/teacher.

The teacher/lecturer has to know which model is exactly suitable for the

member of class. Referring to the result of study, reciprocal teaching is effective

for students’ reading skill. Lecturer/ teacher can use this model to improve the

students’ reading skill. In choosing the model of teaching, we should consider

some factors. One of the factors is the students’ psychological condition

including the students’ intelligence. Intelligence influences the students in

79

teaching learning process. The teacher has to know the students’ intelligence, so

he/she can choose the appropriate model for their students.

2. For the students.

Students have to be more active in teaching learning process in order to

improve their reading skill. For low intelligence students, they must be aware of

the importance of active involvement in teaching learning process and their

lecturer is not the only source in learning, then they have to encourage

themselves.

3. For the other research

There are some weaknesses in this study, which should be considered by

other researchers to conduct better research. And this result of study can become

reference for the other researchers who would like to conduct further research at

the same subject.

80

B i bl i o g r a ph y

Adams, Marilyn J. 1990. Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print.

Cambridge: MA, MIT Press.

Aebersold, Jo Ann. 1997. From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Aiken, Lewis R. 1997. Psychological Testing and Assessment. Boston: Allyn and

Bacon

Alderson, J., Charles. 2000. Assessing Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ani afida. 2008. Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension Using Reciprocal

Questioning Technique. Thesis, it is not published, Sebelas Maret

University, Surakarta.

Borich, Gary D. 1996. Effective Teaching Methods: Third Edition. Ohio: Prentice

Hall.

Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle (An interactive Approach to

language pedagogy). New York: Prentice Hall

. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. San Francisco: Pearson Education, Inc.

Change Mind: Types of Experiment. Accessed on February 21st, 2010

http://changingminds.org/explanations/research/design/experimenttypes.

htm

Christense, Larry and Burke Johnson. 2000. Educational Research (Quantitative and Qualitative Approach). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Debour, John J, and Martha Dallman. 1960. The Teaching of Reading. New York:

Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development of Western Australia

(2004). Reading: Resource book, 2nd ed. Port Melbourne: Rigby Heineman. Accessed on 19

th August, 2009 from

(www.education.vic.gov.au/studentlearning/teachingresources/esl/)

Djaali. 2007. Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara

Good, Thomas L and Jare E. Brophy. 1990. Educational Psychology: the fourth

edition. New York: Longman.

81

Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of

English Language Teaching. England: Longman

Harun Rasyid dan Mansur. 2007. Penilaian Hasil Belajar. Bandung: CV wacana

Prima

Henry Guntur Tarigan.1999. Membaca Ekspresif. Bandung: Angkasa

Intellectual Assessing: an Article. Accessed on October 29th, 2009 from

http://www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/intro_notes_5.html

Joyce, Bruce and Marsha Well. 1986. Models of Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice-

Hall, Inc.

Lowry, Richard. 2000. One-Way Anova: Independent Sample II. Accessed on June 15

th, 2010 from http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/ch14pt2.html

Madsen, Harold S. 1983. Techniques in Testing. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Nunan, David. 1989. Designing Tasks for Communicative Classroom. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Okszkuz, Lori D. 2005. Reciprocal Teaching Strategies at Work: Improving

Reading Comprehension, Grade 2-6. USA: International Reading

Association.

Palincsar, A.S. & Brown, A. L. 1984. Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-

Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition and

Instruction, 1(2), 117-175. Accessed on December 5th, 2009 from

http://condor.admin.ccny.cuny.edu/~ yq6048/*

Persons, Richard D, Hinson and Deborah Brown. 2001. Educational Psychology:

a Practitioner Research Model of Reading. Warthsworth.

Phelps, Alverman. 1998.Content Reading and Literacy: Succeeding in today’s Diverse Classroom. Accessed on August 1

st, 2009 from

http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/612/reading/Reading%20Strate

gies/reciprocal%20teaching.htm

Richard, Jack C. 1997. From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies

for Second Language Classroom. Cambridge: University Press

82

Robinson, H. Alan. 1975. Teaching Reading and Study strategies: the Content

Areas. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Ruddel, B. Robert. 1994. Theoretical Model and Proccesses of Readimg. Great

Britain: Internasional Reading Assosiation. Inc

Santrock, John W. 1990. Educational Psychology. New York: Mc Graw hill

Schoenbach, Ruth; Greenleaf, Cynthia; Czico, Christine; And Hurwitz, Lori. What

is Reading? An Excerpt from Reading for Understanding. Accessed on

August 13th

, 2009 http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/380/

What_is_Reading excerpt.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d

Silberstein, Sandra. 1994. Techniques and Resources in Teaching Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Tuchman, Bruce W. 1978. Conducting Educational Research. New York:

Harcourt Brace Javanovich, inch.

Wagner, Kendra Van. 2009. Theories of Intelligence. Accessed on October 28th

,

2009 from http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p /intelligence.htm

Wasty, Soemanto. 1990. Psikologi dalam Pendidikan (Landasan Kerja Pemimpin

Pendidikan). Malang: Fakultas Pascasarjana IKIP Malang.

Wikipedia free Encyclopedia. Accessed on August 12th, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/DirectInstruction

William, Eddie. 1996. Reading in the Language Classroom. London: Modern

English Publication.