Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Background of the Study
There are four language skills that are required by the students in studying
English, namely reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Brown (2001:298)
states that reading ability will have a best development if it associates with
writing, listening, and speaking. But reading is one of those skills that are not easy
as people think. In doing reading students are expected to have knowledge.
Knowledge comes from reading. When a student understands what he reads, he
will get some information that he can share or communicate with other people. It
can be concluded that reading is the important skill to improve the ability of
people to communicate with others whether on written or spoken.
Because reading is the important skill, the students are expected to read
various texts to get information or to have knowledge. Harmer (2003:208) states
that students sometimes have low expectation in reading. The students think that
understanding the passage is difficult and when the teacher in the past given them
a text that they have no interest, then they would predict that the future activities
of reading to be boring.
1
Reading means getting out of the text as possible the message that the
writer puts into it (Nuttal, 1980:5). It means in reading, students not only read a
text but they also have to comprehend that text. But in fact, based on my
experience during conducting PPL program, it was found that many students still
find reading comprehension difficult although they have done it for several years.
They do not know how to comprehend an English text and get the message from
it. Consequently, the students become bored and lazy. Moreover, reading
comprehension is not easy as most people think. Most people read a text without
comprehend it because they assume that reading is a task of little concern. So it
becomes a problem for the teacher in teaching reading English text in a classroom.
Based on the condition above, the teacher should make variations and a
suitable technique in teaching reading comprehension in order to increase the
students’ ability in reading comprehension. In this case the writer suggests that
teacher should use Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA) technique which
is developed by Russell Stauffer (1969) to teach in reading comprehension. The
Directed Reading Thinking Activity directs students make predictions about the
text and then read the text to confirm the predictions. Burns et al (1984:311) state
that the DRTA is useful for improving students’ comprehension of selection
because the students are interacting with the material during reading.
2
1.2. The Problem of the Study
Based on the previous discussion in the background of the study, a
research problem is formulated as the following: “Does the application of
Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA) technique significantly affect
students’ reading comprehension?
1.3. The Scope of the Study
This study focuses on the effect of applying Directed Reading Thinking
Activity (DRTA) technique on the students’ reading comprehension. In this case,
the teacher will apply the Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA) for grade
XI (eleven) of the Senior High School students.
1.4. The Objective of the Study
The objective of the study is to find out whether the Directed Reading
Thinking Activity (DRTA) technique significantly affects the students’ reading
comprehension.
3
1.5. The Significance of the Study
The result of the study is expected to be useful for:
a. The teacher in improving students’ reading comprehension by using
Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA) technique.
b. The other researchers who want to search the best technique of reading
comprehension to improve the students’ achievement in reading
comprehension.
4
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Theoretical Framework
In conducting a research, some theories are needed to explain some
concepts which concern for the research. The theories should be made
clear because it is important to avoid misunderstanding of the terms used
in the discussion.
2.1.1 Reading
There are so many definitions of reading and a great variety of definitions
has been developed. This is partly because of the complexity of the reading act,
which includes two major components – a process and a product. By process we
mean a method, a movement toward an end that is accomplished by going through
all the necessary steps. A product is the consequences of utilizing certain aspects
of process in appropriate sequence. The product of reading is the communication
of thoughts and emotions by the writer to the reader.
Hornby (1974:699) states reading means an action of a person who reads.
If it connected with the study, reading is meant the action of students read
textbook in reading comprehension class to understand what is printed in the
paper. Then Nuttal (1980:5) defines reading means getting out of the text as
5
possible the message that the writer puts into it. It means that in this process, the
reader tries to recreate the meaning which the writer intended.
Reading is an essential skill for all the students at all levels. This is in fact
the main goal of learning in school and University. Knowledge comes or is
derived from reading. When a student understands what he reads, he has already
acquired from some knowledge. The knowledge is later expanded by reading
another text. Students learn to read and learn better by reading. Students can read
based on what is their interest. It is difficult for the students who are very lazy to
read and it is difficult for them to achieve the goal of the study.
Reading is a skill that must be developed. Reading can also be defined as a
way to get information from the text and from an interpretation of that
information. In other words, reading is the ability to draw meaning from the
printed page and interpret this information appropriately (Grabe & Stoller,
2002:9).
2.1.1.2 Reading Comprehension
The first point to be made about the reading process is reading
comprehension. In reading comprehension, readers must be able to get the main
idea of the text. Burns et al (1984) have pointed out that reading comprehension
is at once a unitary process and a set of discrete process. While Grabe and Stoller
(2002) state that reading comprehension is an extraordinary feat of balancing and
coordinating many abilities in a very complex and rapid set of routines that
6
makes comprehension seemingly effortless and enjoyable activity to fluent
readers. In other words, reading comprehension is an achievement to use many
abilities to comprehend or understand text easily.
Reading comprehension involves more knowledge of structure and
vocabulary. For most second language learners who are already literate in a
previous language, reading comprehension is primarily a matter of developing
appropriate, efficient comprehension strategies.
From the statements, it is clearly that reading comprehension is important
thing in reading. It can also be concluded that reading is the first step for someone
to get the meaning of the text, while the second step is comprehension, which
requires more effort of the reader to interpret and get deeper understanding.
2.1.2.2. Level of Comprehension
According to Burns et al (1984) there are four levels of comprehension,
they are:
2.1.1.2.1. Literal Reading
Reading for literal comprehension involves acquiring information that is
directly stated in a selection, is important and also prerequisite for higher-level
understanding. In literal reading, the main ideas are directly stated. Every one who
wants to obtain a higher-level of reading must master literal reading at first.
7
2.1.1.2.2. Interpretive Reading
Interpretive reading is the process of deriving ideas that are implied. In
other words, the ideas are not stated directly. There are some skills for
interpretative reading, they are:
a) Finding main ideas of passages in which the main idea are not directly
stated.
b) Finding cause and effect relationships when they are not directly stated.
c) Determining referents of pronouns and adverbs
d) Inferring omitted words
e) Knowing the author’s purpose in writing
f) Drawing conclusions
g) Detecting moods.
2.1.1.2.3. Critical Reading
In critical reading, readers evaluate written material, compare the ideas
found in the materials with his/her previous knowledge and draw conclusions
appropriately. The readers must be able to grasp implied ideas, and make good
decisions on the materials that he/she has read. To foster critical reading skills in
the classroom, teacher must give students many chances to ask questions.
8
2.1.1.2.4. Creative Reading
In creative reading, students must be able to think and to use their
imaginations. From the text that they have read, they must be able to produce new
ideas, and develop new insight. Creative reader must understand cause and effect
relationships in a text although it is not stated directly.
2.1.2 Experience Text Relationship Method
According to Abisamra (2006), experience text relationship method is a
teaching procedure of advance speculative organization on the teacher's part, who
selects texts in relation to what he thinks may interest his group of learners. The
basic element of the ETR method is discussion of a text and topics related to the
text, especially students' own experiences.
The ETR lesson provides opportunities for the children to explore many
dimensions of the story and to integrate features of it with their existing prior
knowledge.
2.1.2.1 The Advantages of Directed Reading Thinking Activity
The Advantages of using Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA)
technique are:
It encourages students to be active and thoughtful readers.
It develops students’ prediction skills
It activates students' prior knowledge.
9
It teaches students to monitor their understanding of the text as they're
reading.
It helps strengthen reading and critical thinking skills.
2.1.2.2 The Procedure of Directed Reading Thinking Activity
The procedures of using Directed Reading Thinking Activity technique is
described as following:
1. Choose a text. It can be a fiction or nonfiction text.
2. Activate students’ prior knowledge. Have students read the title of the text
or tell them the topic of the text. Ask students to brainstorm a list of ideas
that come to their mind when see and hear about the title or topic. Wrote
those ideas on the board
3. Have students make predictions about what they will read about in the
text. Use all available clues, such as picture, charts, table of contents.
4. Have students read a section of the text. Either have a volunteer student to
read aloud or have students real silently. The teacher should determine
stopping points when the students are reading to themselves.
5. Ask students to confirm or revise prior prediction and make new
predictions. Students should be encouraged to explain what is in the text
that makes them to confirm or revise their prior predictions and what
makes them to make new predictions.
10
6. Have students to combine what they have read and the importance of it to
their lives. Teacher can address the question, “How is what was learned in
the text important to the students’ lives?”
2.2. Conceptual Framework
Teaching learning English in high school demands on the active
participation of the students as the subject of four-skill implementation, listening,
speaking, writing and also reading. The success of teaching reading is influenced
by the technique that is used in teaching process. That is why the teacher should
select the appropriate technique in teaching. In this study, Directed Reading
Thinking Activity will be chosen as one of the appropriate technique in teaching
reading. It can improve student’s reading comprehension because the students are
interacting with the material during reading and it also activates the students’
reading background knowledge.
By applying Directed Reading Thinking Activity, it is expected could
significantly improve the students’ reading comprehension and also the students
will realize that reading is an interesting activity and easier to understand.
2.3 Hypothesis
11
The research hypothesis is formulated as follows:
Ho = “There is no significant effect of applying Directed Reading Thinking
Activity technique on the students’ reading comprehension”
Ha = “There is a significant effect of applying Directed Reading Thinking
Activity technique on the students’ reading comprehension”.
REFERENCES
Abisamara, N. (2006). Teaching Second Language Reading from an Interactive Perspective. Available at http://nadabs.tripod.com/ Accessed on March 25, 2012
Brown, H.D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy Second Edition. San Fransisco: Addison Wesley Longman
Burns, et al. 1984. Teaching Readings In Today’s Elementary School. New Jersey: Houghton Mifflin Company.
El-Koumy, A.(2004). Metacognition and Reading Comprehension Current Research trends in Theory and Research. Available at http://www.eric.ed.gov/ Accessed on March 25, 2012
Grabe, William and Stoller, Fredricka L. 2002. Teaching and Researching Reading. Great Britain. Pearson Education.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2003. The Practice of English Language teaching (3rd ed). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited
Hornby, A.S. 1974. Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionaryof Current English (3rd
ed). Oxford University Press
12
Nuttal, C. 1980 Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London. Heineman Educational Book
1. Elementary School
An elementary school is an institution where children receive the
first stage of compulsory education known as elementary or primary
education.
2. The characteristics of elementary students
CHAPTER III
THE RESEARCH METHOD
1.1. Research Design
This study is applied experimental research. To collect data, two groups
of students were involved. The experimental group was the group which was
taught by applying Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA), while the
13
control group was the group which was taught by applying conventional method.
This design can be seen in the following table:
Table 3.1
The Design of Research
Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test
Experimental group (X) √ Applying DRTA √
Control group (Y) √ Applying Conventional Method √
1.2. Population and Sample
The population of this research was the 2011/2012 students of the Grade
Eleven of the State Senior High School I Hinai. There were four parallel classes
with the total number of 150 students. Table 3.2. presents the total number of the
students from each class.
Table 3.2
The Population
No Class Total Number
1 XI IPA1
14
2
3
4
XI IPA2
XI IPS1
XI IPS2
Total number of population
Table 3.2 showed the population of the students. It can be seen that the
population was too large to be taken as the sample for this research,
therefore, for the efficiency and practicality of it, it was necessary to take a
sample.
3.3. Instrument for Collecting Data
The data of this study was collected by using a test. It was teacher’s made
test which consisted of 20 items. The type of test was objective test. For one
correct answer was given 5 points, so the maximum point of the test was 100. The
test is administered both before and after the treatment is completed.
3.3.1 Pre – Test
Before the teaching presentation (treatments), a pre – test was
administered to the experimental group and control group. The pre – test was used
to find out the homogeneity of the samples and the mean score of each group.
15
3.3.2 Teaching Presentation
The experimental and control groups was taught by using the same topics
but different treatments. It means that the experimental group was taught by
applying Directed reading Thinking Activity strategy, while in the control group
was taught by applying conventional method. The treatment was given
3.2. The Validity and Reliability of the test
3.6.1. The Validity of the Test
Validity is defined as the degree to which a test measures what it claims to
be measured (Brown, 1988:101). Standard and widely adopted classification
system (American Psychology Association, 1974) in Grondlund (1982) divides
validity into three basic kinds that are (1) content validity, (2) construct validity,
(3) criterion-related validities. As Borg and Gall (1983:101) state that the sample
of the test items represents the content that the test is designed to measure. Thus,
in this thesis, content validity was used in making the test.
3.2.2. The Reliability of the Test
The reliability of a text is designed as the extent to which the result can be
considered consistent or stable (Brown, 1988:98). It is used to see in what extent
the test items are reliable, it can be said that reliability relates to the consistency of
the test scores. Reliability refers to how consistent text score and other evaluation
result are from one measurement to another (Grondlund, 1981:117). The formula
16
in measuring the reliability of the test is Kunder-Richardson’s formula in
Grondlund (1981:99)
Where: K = the number of items in the test
M = the mean of the test score
S = the standard deviation of the test score
3.3. Technique of Data Analysis
The study applied quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data
was found by analyzing the score test of the students while the qualitative data
was found by describing the situation during the teaching and learning process.
The quantitative data was analyzed by computing the score of reading test. The
qualitative data was analyzed from observation sheet and diary notes.
To know the development of the students’ score for each cycle, the mean
of students were computed and to categorize the master students, the percentage
of students who got up to 75 was calculated.
CHAPTER IV
17
THE DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS
1.1. The Data
This study applied quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data
were taken from the test result of students taking multiple choice tests while the
qualitative data were taken from observation sheet and diary notes. This research
was conducted in one class which consist 32 students. It was accomplished in two
cycles. The first cycle including pre test was conducted in three meetings while
the second cycle was conducting in two meetings, so there were five meetings
altogether. Every cycle consisted of the four steps of action research; they are
planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. In the last meeting of every cycle,
students were given 20 questions of multiple choice tests.
1.1.1. The Quantitative Data
The quantitative data were taken from the test result of students taking
multiple choice tests which carried out in five meetings. The improvement of
students’ reading comprehension through cooperative learning score from the pre
test in cycle 1 and cycle 2 can be seen as following table:
Table 4.1.1. The score of the students from pre-test until Post-test cycle I and
cycle II
No Student’s
initial
Pre-Test Cycle - I Cycle – II
Competence Post Test Competence Post Test18
Test – 1 Test – 2
1 NI 76 80 92 90 92
64 72
60 70 74
54
70
60 66
60 66
74
80
19
72
92
74
74
∑ X = 1896 ∑ X = 2264 ∑ X = 2442 ∑ X = 2656 ∑ X = 2852
The data shows that there is the improvement of students’ reading
comprehension which is taught by using cooperative learning
1.1.2. The Qualitative Data
The qualitative data which were taken from observation sheet and diary
notes proved that the students were interested in learning reading by having an
improving reading comprehension by applying cooperative learning (group
investigation).
Subsequently, the result which implied from observation sheet and diary
notes showed that most of the students were active and enthusiastic in learning
their reading comprehension taught by cooperative learning (group investigation
20
technique). Although some students were hard to adapt at first, finally they were
really cooperative and comprehend in learning reading subject.
1.2. Data Analysis
4.2.1 Analysis of Quantitative Data
The improvement of the students’ mean kept growing from the pre test
until the post test of cycle II. To find out the mean in every meeting, the analysis
of the data in this research applied in the following formula:
Where: X = the mean of the students’ score
∑ x = the total score
N = the number of the students
The result score of students’ reading comprehension in the first three
meetings (Cycle II) was:
- In the first meeting when the pre test was held and occupied, the total score of
the students was 1896 and the number of the students were joined the reading
comprehension test were 32, so the mean was
21
- In the second meeting, when competence test – 1 was held, the total score of
the students was 2640 and the number of the students were joined the reading
comprehension test were 32, so the mean was
- In the third meeting when the post test was held the total score of the students
was 2884 and the number of the students were joined the reading
comprehension test were 32, so the mean was
The result score of the students’ reading comprehension in the second two
meetings (Cycle II) was:
- In the fourth meeting when the competence test – 2 was held, the total score of
the students was 2222 and the number of the students were joined the reading
comprehension test were 32, so the mean was
- In the fifth meeting when the post test of cycle II was held, the total score of
the students was 2888 and the number of the students were joined the reading
comprehension test were 32, so the mean was
22
The mean of the students’ score in the last meeting showed that the highest
score were achieved by the students. Moreover, by considering that the students’
score has been achieved in the highest points when the students had been taught
after two cycles of Cooperative learning (Group Investigation).
The number of the master students was calculated as follows:
Where:
P = the percentage of the students got score > 75
R = the number of students who got score > 75
T = the total number of students who did the test
P1 = the number of master students in the pre test
P2 = the number of master students in the competence test 1
P3 = the number of master students in post test in first cycle
23
P4 = the number of master students in the competence test 2
P5 = the number of master students in post test in cycle 2
4.2.2. Analysis of Qualitative Data
4.2.2.1 The Data of the Pre Test
While doing the pre test, there were just two students who were sighing
because they found it difficult to answer the question. It seems most of the
students found it difficult to answer the questions although they just kept silent.
4.2.2.2 The Data of Cycle 1
There were many activities that were done in this cycle, they were:
a. Group Discussion
In discussing the topic, there were just one group that could do their task
actively and cooperatively, that was group 2. In this group, all the member of the
group worked together. They expressed their opinion and found the meaning of
difficult word together. In the first group, there were just two students who were
active, while the other members didn’t do much to help the group to finish the
group task, even they made noisy. In the third group, there were 2 students who
were active. They discussed the subtopics and made summary while the other
24
members just listen. In the fourth group there were 2 students who were active
and the discussed the main point of the text. In the fifth group there were 3
students who were active and they analyzed the main point of the text and made
conclusions, while the other member just laughing and kidding.
b. Group Presentation
In presenting the result of discussion, just 3 or 5 students whom the
teacher asked to come in the front of the class to explain their subtopics, while the
other just sit and listened.
c. Asking and answering the questions when presentation
In giving the questions, there were 4 groups that were active. From the
group two there were almost of the members can ask and answer the question.
From group 1 and 3, there were 2 students who gave questions. From group 4 and
5 there were also 2 students who gave questions and comments.
d. Doing the test
While doing the test, there were many of the students who were very noisy
and didn’t do their test well. They disturbed the other students by asking the
answer.
4.2.2.3. The Data of Cycle 2
In this cycle, there were also 4 activities that were done, they were:
25
a. Group Discussion
In discussing the subtopics, there were 3 groups who could do the tasks
group cooperatively and seriously, they were group 1, 2, and 5. The entire
members of these groups work together to find the main point of the text and
made the summary by using simple words and prepare it in such a way in order to
make the whole class understand their subtopics. In the third group there were 4
students who were active to discuss while the others still passive. In the fourth
group, there were also 4 students who were active and communicate each other,
while the other two were still listened and didn’t give contribution to the group
discussion.
b. Group Presentation
In this phase, students were asked to give the best in explaining the
subtopics. There was 1 group that couldn’t explain their subtopic by using their
own words, so their explanation difficult to understand by the other groups. While
the other group (4 groups) explained the subtopics clearly and also by using their
own words so the other group could understand their explanation easily.
c. Asking and answering the questions when presentation
In this session, the entire group was active to ask questions, give
comments or suggestions when the other group presented their discussion in front
of the class. While the group that has presentation in front of the class active to
answers the questions from the other group.
26
d. Doing the test
While doing the test, only a few of the students who couldn’t their task
well because they didn’t active in the group discussion, so they didn’t understand
about the task.
1.3. The Reliability of the Test
In order to find out the reliability of the test, Richard Kuderson formula
was used and the calculation of the reliability is shown below:
K = 20 M = 20,3 S = 8,3
27
The calculation shows that the coefficient reliability of the test is 1,06.
This coefficient is considered very high.
1.4. The Research Findings
The result of the research indicated that there was an improvement on the
students’ reading comprehension by applying cooperative learning. It was
supported and proved by the fact that the mean of the students’ score in the
second cycle (77,07) was higher than in the first cycle (75,14) and also in the pre
test (71,07).
The qualitative data taken from the diary notes and observation sheet
showed that the students had been motivated and interested in reading
comprehension because they could express their opinions and share their
knowledge each other and they also could find the difficult words together. The
activities which the students done during the research were running well and they
became more active and realize their competence by getting it by their own self.
1.5. Discussion
Oslen Kagan (1992:8) in Rodgers (2001:192) states that cooperative
learning is group learning activity organized, so that learning is dependent on 28
exchange of others. In this research, students comprehend the topic by sharing
their knowledge and by changing the information about the subtopics given to
them. But in most of the groups in the first cycle, the member of the group who
were enthusiastic to do the group tasks didn’t motivate their friend who was not
active in doing the group tasks. The leader of the group didn’t care whether there
was their friend in group who were passive and noisy. They just tried to find the
main point of the text without including their friends who didn’t do anything in
group discussion, so not all of the students gave contribution to the group tasks. In
this cycle, the teacher also didn’t move from chair to chair, so the students could
not ask helping when they needed.
In the second cycle, the teacher controlled the class better than in the
first cycle. The teacher motivated the students to give the best, asked the students
to give questions if they didn’t understand about the topics. The teacher also
admonished directly to the students who were noisy so the class was quieter. The
teacher also moved from one chair to other chair to make sure that all the students
worked in their group.
There were 16 students who were able to improve their score from pre
test until post test in cycle 1. They could improve their score because they were
active in learning and teaching process. They had learned how to know the
meaning of difficult words from the text. In cycle 1 there were 3 students whose
score is below 60, they are YO, JI, and DE. Although their score were still below
29
60, but they had improvement in their score from the pre test until the post test in
cycle 1.
In cycle 2, most of the students had improved their score from cycle 1
to cycle 2, although there were still students who made noisy. But because the
teacher admonished directly the students who were made noisy, they became
quieter than before. Although they made noisy, their score had improvement, they
are AS, ZA, PP and DA. Their score had improvement although not really
significant. The students whose score had improvement were the students who
were active in teaching and learning process. They admitted that they enjoyed to
learn reading comprehension by using cooperative learning (group investigation
technique) because they could share their opinions and found the meaning of
statement and even the definitions of difficult words together while those who
didn’t have significant improvement in their score were the students who were not
really serious, they are JI and DE, but the important thing is their score had
improved in every meeting. It means that by using cooperative learning (group
investigation) technique, the students felt enjoy and could be more active in
teaching learning process.
30
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusions
Based on the result of the study, the conclusions are drawn as following:
1. There was an improvement of students’ reading comprehension by applying
the cooperative learning. It can be proven by recognizing the improvement of
the mean of students’ reading comprehension test. Pre test (71,07), post test in
cycle I (75,14), and the post test in cycle II (77,07)
2. The students felt more enjoyable and interested in leaning reading
comprehension by using cooperative learning. It is showed by their
31
enthusiasm in reading comprehension in the two cycles and their respond
while they were asked about cooperative learning.
5.2. Suggestions
Since teaching reading by using cooperative learning has a significant
improvement to improve the students’ reading comprehension, it is suggested
that:
1. English teacher gives suitable strategy to increase students’ achievement in
reading comprehension, it is cooperative learning.
2. Students are more active in the class when they are taught by using
cooperative learning because they can share their opinions and their
knowledge to their friends.
REFERENCES
32
Carnine, D. Et.al.1990. Direct Instruction Reading (2nd Ed.). Merrill Publishing
Company: Columbus Ohio.
Gilstrap, R.L. and Martin, W.R.1975. Current Strategies for Teachers: A
Resource for Personalizing Instruction, Goodyear Publishing Company, Inc:
California
Joice, B. and Weil, Marsha. 1986. Models of Teaching. Prentice-Hall, Inc: New
Jersey
Smith, R.J. and Johnson, D.D. 1980. Teaching Children to Read. Addison –
Wesley Publishing Company: Madison
Richard, P. A.2005. Academic Success for Language Learners Strategies
Tofa,M.2007. Membaca. http://libraryforall.blogspot.com. Accessed on
December 10 2010
Mikulecky, Beatrice S. 1990. Teaching Reading Skills. New York: Addison
Wesley Publishing Company
Savage, John F, and Mooney, Jean F. 1979. Teaching Reading of Children with
Special Needs. New York: Allyn and Bacon
Osbom, Jean.1985. Reading Education: Foundation with a Literate America, New
York: Lexington Books.
33
Harmer, J. 2003. The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd Ed.) Longman,
Malaysia
Hopkins, D. 1993. A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research (2nd Ed.) Open
University Press, Buckingham
Slavin, R. E. 1995, Cooperative Learning Theory, Research , and Practice, (2nd
Ed.) A. Simon and Schuster Company: Massachusetts
Huang, G. Conference Presentation: “Working Together to Learn: Cooperative
Learning in the Group Classroom”
34
