INTERACTIVE STRATEGY TRAINER FOR ACTIVE READING AND THINKING (ISTART) FOR THE STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26618/exposure.v6i2.1180Keywords:
Reading Comprehension, Interactive Strategy, Active Reading, Thinking StrategyAbstract
This research aims to find the improvement of the students’ reading in literal comprehension especially main idea and supporting idea in reading comprehension use of ISTART Strategy at Class VIII.5 of SMPN 2 Sungguminasa in the 2012/2013 Academic Year. The researcher used a Classroom Action Research (C.A.R). It was consisted of two cycles. In each cycle consisted of four meetings. The research subject was the students in class VIII.5; it consisted of 35 students with 18 men and 17 women. The researcher obtained the data by using reading test and observation sheet. The research findings indicates that using ISTART Strategy could improve the students’ reading comprehension, from table 1 indicated that there was improvement the students’ Main Idea from cycle I to cycle II, where as in cycle I the students’ achievement main idea in reading was 6.65, but after evaluation in cycle II the students’ main idea in reading became 7.36. The other hand the students’ supporting idea in reading was improved cycle I to cycle II, where as in cycle I the students’ supporting idea in reading was 6.78 but after evaluation in cycle II the students’ supporting idea in reading became 7.38. It means that the use ISTART Strategy could improve the students’ reading comprehension at VIII.5 Class of the second year students of SMPN 2 Sungguminasa.
References
Abbot, Naya, Seiji, Graham. 1982. Cooperation. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Alley, W.B. 1994. The IEA Study of Literacy. Achievement and Instruction in Thirty Two School System. USA: Pergamon.
Anderson, J. Durton H. Berry and Millicent. 1985. Efficient Reading: A Practical Guide, Sidney: MC. Grew-Hill Book Company.
Boonthum Chutima. 2004. Eliciting Self Explanations Improves Understanding. Cognitive Science.
Cottrell, K. and McNamara, D. S. 2002. Cognitive Precursors to Science Comprehension. NJ: Erlbaum.
Crystal, David, Davy D. 1980:Stylistic Analysis. The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistic Volume 1: Reading for Applied Linguistics.
Davies and Whitney, 1983. Reading and Comprehension. Delhi: Aurora Offset Press.
Depdikbud. 1985. Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Proses Belajar Mengajar dan Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Penilaian. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Depdikbud.2005. GBPP Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris SLTP. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Pusat.
Frey Edward, 1981: Teaching Faster Reading. A Manual Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman 1988: Ten Steps to Building College Reading Skills. Townsend: Townsend Press.
Grant Guymon, Ronald Edward, Harrison. (1980). Structured Tutoring. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.
Heidi and Byrness, (1998). Phonology, Reading and Dyslexia. Insights from Connectionist Models. Psychological Review.
Hornsby, 1995: Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. Britain Fifth Edition Oxfords: University Press.
Kintsch. W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for Cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kustaryo, S. (1988). Reading Technique for College Students’. Jakarta: P2LPTK
Lewin, G. (1948). Games for Children. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McNamara, D. S., Levinstein, I. B., & Bonthum, C. (2004). iSTART: Interactive strategy trainer for Active Reading and Thinking. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers.
McNamara, D. S., 2001. Reading Both High Coherence and Low Coherence Text: Effects of Text Sequence and Prior- Knowledge.
McNamara, D. S., & Scott, J. L. (1999). Training Reading Strategies.
Mikulecky, B. S. and L. Jeffries. 1986. Reading Power. Boston: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
Nunan.1995.Language Teaching Methodology. New York .PHOENIX ELT.
Nuttal, N. 1988. Teaching Reading Skill in Foreign Language.
Oxford: Heinemann International Publishing Company.
Richard C. 1998.Becoming a Nation of Readers. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, the National Institute of Education.
Sangkala, I., & ul Haq, M. (2014). Wondershare Quiz Creator Software Improves Students’ Reading Comprehension. JKIP, 1(2), 128-135. Retrieved from https://ojs.fkip.unismuh.ac.id/index.php/jkip/article/view/41
Sudjana, 1990. Metode Statistika, Bndung: PT. Gramedia.
Simanjuntak, Groria, Editihia. 1988. Developing Reading Skill for EFL Students: Jakarta.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R & D program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Sukardi. 2008. Metodologi Penelitian Tindakan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Woryodijoyo S. 1989. Membaca: Strategy Pengantar dan Tekniknya. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
