CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background In general, there are four skills that should be developed in teaching learning of English. They are listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. Reading is an important skill particularly in English as second or foreign language (ESL/EFL) learning. Reading is necessary when students want to continue from elementary school until university level. They need good reading skill for acquiring knowledge and learning new information. As Krashen (1983:131) states that reading is one of English language skills which can serve as an important source of comprehensible input and may take a significant contribution to the development of overall proficiency. Furthermore, Bond (1984:10) states that the importance of reading is to obtain the information which can be used to solve problem and for pleasure, particularly in the elementary and intermediate levels. Students need reading to confirm their spoken language and to be able to acquire other skills like listening, speaking and writing. So, it is clear that reading becomes the essential point that has to be emphasized in teaching of language in Indonesia. In addition, to the important of reading for the students, it can help them to enrich their knowledge about new information which is coming from the outside because lots of reading material which is coming from another country always written

in English. So that, we are not going to miss the important information. Thus, reading is essential to success in school and in information driven society (Collins, 1998: 2). Although the techniques of teaching reading have already been developed by the experts, but in fact there are still many students who are poor in their reading achievement. One of the problems lead to the poorness of students reading achievement is the inappropriate technique that teacher uses in presenting material. So, the students feel bored in teaching and learning process. Based on researchers observation in Senior High School 2 Kendari on Saturday, July 30th 2011, it seemed that the teaching of English reading in that school is still facing difficulties. The researcher observed that most of students got difficulties when doing task that related to the reading text. It is supported by students score in daily test in which the mean score of the result of reading test from 40 students is only 54.2 (see appendix 19) which is categorized low based on criteria of Sudjana (1984:27). The factor that causes the problem above is that teacher has not applied appropriate technique for students when students work in group, not all students participate in doing a task and the others are passive or only talking. According to Johnson in Ranti (2010:6), cooperation is not assigned a job to a group of students where one student does all the work and the others put their names on the paper. In another time, there is not proportional distribution of students. Students choose their teammates by their own and group some times consists of smarts students and others are poor. Consequently, teaching and learning process are dominated by few students

and the others are passive. So, students involvedness in classroom is not good enough. Students also mostly just keep silent and sit quietly in their seat and did not understand about the reading text. Regarding to above explanation, the English teacher has an important role in teaching learning process. The English teachers have to create or use a model of teaching and learning process which could involve students activeness as a whole; it is because of teachers role as cultivator of teaching and learning process that has to pay attention on students need and students ability. Hence, teacher has to apply method in teaching that reduce teachers dominant and improve students involvement in the class. Cooperative learning is one of the learning methods that involve the students activeness in learning or students centered. As stated by Sharan (1994: 326) , cooperative learning is a group-centered and students-centered approach to classroom teaching and learning. Thus, it will reduce the teachers dominant in teaching and learning process and help students to construct their thinking by working together with their friend. There are lots of interesting techniques of cooperative learning. One of them is jigsaw II technique. It is one appropriate technique that can be used in teaching reading. As Slavin in Wang (2009) states that jigsaw II technique can be used in teaching; listening, speaking, and reading. In addition, Slavin (2009) explains that Jigsaw II technique has been effective both for improving the students achievement and behavior and for increasing their acceptance by their classmates.

Therefore, the researcher believes the using jigsaw II technique in teaching reading can help students to develop their reading achievement. It is also supported by Jacobs et al (2002) jigsaw II technique is a challenging where everyone has responsibility to share their peace to the other member as speaker or listener in group mates organize their idea as much as well so become understandable,

attractive, high motivation, and meaningful in learning process. Based on the simple description above, the writer interested to carry out an investigation concerning to the techniques used in teaching English reading under the title The Effect of Jigsaw II Technique on Students Reading Achievement at Class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari.

1.2 Research Question The research question of this study was is there any significant effect of jigsaw II technique in teaching reading on the students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari?

1.3 Objective of the Study The objective of this study was to find out whether there is or not a significant effect of Jigsaw II technique in teaching English reading on students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari.

1.4 Significant of the Study The significances of the study are as follows: 1. Theoretically, to give significant contribution for English teacher in determining the appropriate method that is used to help the students for improving students reading achievement. 2. Practically, as the source of information for teacher in applying the technique of Jigsaw II. 3. As one of the reference for the further studies who are interested in carrying out the similar research.

1.5 Scope of the Study This study focused on the application of Jigsaw II technique to the students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari. The reading material focused on narrative text that taken from English book for grade X based on KTSP curriculum particularly on the first semester for the tenth grade. The skills under reading that become the concentration of this study were the detail information of narrative text, the mind idea of narrative text, word reference in narrative text, the generic structures of narrative text, kind of tenses that used in narrative text, and the communicative purpose of narrative text.

1.6 Hypothesis The hypothesis of this study was there is a significant effect of jigsaw II technique on the students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari.

1.7 Definition of Terms 1. Cooperative learning is a method of sharing ideas in which students work together to learn about something and responsible for their teammate learning as well as their own ( Slavin, 1990). 2. Jigsaw II technique is a part of cooperative learning technique as team or group learning procedure developed by Slavin (1990). 3. Reading is grasping meaning in that language through its written representation ( Lado, 1997:223). 4. Reading achievement in this study is the result of reading test that already achieved by the students that can be seen by the students reading score.

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter contains the theoretical framework to support this study. It covers; theory of teaching, reading, schema theory, concept of cooperative learning, jigsaw II technique in teaching reading, advantages and disadvantages of jigsaw II technique, reading achievement, and previous study related to technique.

2.1 Theory of Teaching As the learning concept, teaching should also be comprehended by the teacher. Teaching and learning process is a nucleus of the comprehension education system with the teacher as primary role agent. Thus, it is because the teacher comprehension about teaching will affect their actions in the teaching and learning process. So, it is very important to present the teaching theories. In narrow sense, teaching can be defined as delivering knowledge from teacher to students. Many experts give their definitions about the sense of teaching. Burner in his book toward at Theory of Instruction cited in Usman (2000:5) states that teaching is a presentation of idea, problem, or knowledge in the simple form in order the students can understand it. He explains, to simply the teaching matter, the teacher can use enactive, iconic, and symbolic presentation mode. Enactive is the presentation of teaching material by using kinetic form. Iconic is the presentation of teaching matter by using graph or picture. Symbolic is the presentation of teaching

matter by using a language and its presentation follow the childrens development (p.5). In addition, Usman (2000: 6) states that teaching is to give the students a lead in the teaching and learning process or teaching is an effort or organizing of learning environment and learning matter in order to create the students learning process. This opinion implies that the teachers are demanded to play a role as the organizer in students learning activity. So, the students can use this condition well. Besides that, Firdayanti (2000:7) states that teaching is an activity that needs moral responsibility. It is an effort to organize the environment in relating to the teaching and learning process which skill going on. Based on the above definitions, we may say that teaching is an effort which is done by teacher in organizing of the teaching and learning process in order to create the students learning condition well.

2.2 Reading Many experts give their definitions about reading. Their definitions are different each other. Finochiaro and Bromo in Tarigan (1987: 8) point out that reading is bringing meaning to and getting meaning from printed or written materials. Finochiaro emphasizes at the output of reading that is getting meaning. Thus, reading is grasping meaning in that language through its written representation ( Lado, 1997 : 223) . Reading in the content is not just reading as kind of transfer for written symbols to a sound like reading aloud, but reading establishes

with understanding the meaning of words, sentences, and paragraph sensing relationship among the ideas. Another definition of reading which sound similar to the expression above is given by Nunan in Marhumi (2001: 28) who says that reading is an interactive process between what the reader already knows about given topic or subject and what the writer writes. Reading also can be seen as an interactive process between a reader a n d a t e x t w h i c h leads to automatic or (reading fluency) (Alyousef, 2006:64). Nurnia (1998:56) adds that At present, reading is viewed as an interactive process that the reader not only uses information from the text but also use their prior knowledge to interpret a message text conveys. Furthermore, Tarigan (1987) states that membaca adalah suatu proses dilakukan serta dipergunakan oleh pembaca untuk memperoleh pesan yang hendak disampaikan oleh penulis melalui kata-kata atau bahasa tulisan. This mean that reading is a process and used by the teacher to grasp message being delivered by the writer in the medium of the word or written language. Based on the explanation above, we may say that reading is a process that used by the reader to grasp message in the medium words or written language. Thus, reading is not only to identify or spell words or looking at the books but also to have better comprehension on ideas coming from the words. Hence, someone is considered to success in reading when she or he has an ability to extract or to comprehend the writers massage.

2.3 Schema Theory Many reading researchers intend to subcategories the term schema. Qian (2004) points out that generally there the most popular categorization are three major types of schemata, as follow: Linguistic Schemata (language proficiency), Content Schemata(background knowledge of the world including universal and cultural specific knowledge) and Formal Schemata (prior knowledge of discourse structures and text organization). The three essential types of schemata will be discussed one by one.

1. Linguistic Schemata Qian (2004) states that linguistic or language schemata refer to readers existing language proficiency in vocabulary, grammar and idioms. They are the foundation of other schemata. Without certain related linguistic schemata, it is impossible for the reader to decode the language in the text, let alone to activate the content, discourse schemata by making use of the context clues to comprehend the text fully. Of course, if the reader has adequate knowledge of the content, discourse schemata of text, they can help the reader to predict or infer what will happen in the following part, which to certain extent, can compensate for certain linguistic deficiencies.

2. Content Schemata Content schemata refer to background knowledge of the content (Qian, 2004). If readers are quite familiar with the topic under discussion, they can figure out most of the meaning of the text even by reading just the title and the beginning part of the

text. Based on Liberto (1989) in Singhal, content schema, which refers to a readers background or word knowledge, provides readers with a foundation, a basis for comparison. Generally speaking, the familiarity of the topic has a direct influence on readers comprehension. The more topics readers know about, the more reading efficiency they can gain. Thus is one wants to be an efficient reader, one needs to read widely including various topics such as philosophy, psychology, geography, chemistry, biology, zoology and so on. Bracey in Tsuguhiko (2007) states that students lack of content knowledge or prior knowledge (pertainning to the topic of the text) is become apparent, as measured by such reading comprehension assessment or reading achievement. In this case, prior knowledge has a great effect to the reading achievement and teacher also helpful in build the students scheme. It is evident that readers content schema are as important as their language ability in being able to extract meaning from a text (Qian, 2004). Appropriate text should include material that involves readers in cognitive processes using their knowledge of the language as well as what they know about the subject matter so that they can make predictions when encountering unfamiliar vocabulary and structures. Proficient readers rely as much on what they know about the topic as they do on the actual text provided to them.

3. Formal Schemata Formal schemata refer to the organizational forms and rhetorical structures of the written text, i.e. how pieces of textual information will relate to each other and in what order details will appear (Carrell, 1987 in Qian). Formal schemata are higher order structures containing knowledge of rhetorical organization structures, including knowledge of the general properties of the text types and differences in genre (Carrel and Eisterhold, 1988 in David). Formal schema, often known as textual schema, refers to the organizational forms and rhetorical structures of written texts. It can include knowledge of different types of texts types and genres, and also includes the understanding that different types of text use text organization, language structures, vocabulary, grammar, level of formality/register differently. Schooling and culture play the largest role in providing one with a knowledge base of formal schemata. Formal scheme, often known as textual schema, refers to the organizational forms and rhetorical structures of written texts (Singhal, 1998). It can include knowledge of different text types and genres, and also includes the understanding that different types of texts use text organization, language structures, vocabulary, grammar, level of formality/register differently. Readers use their schematic representations of the text (narrative, compare/contrast, cause/effect, newspapers, magazines, journals, textbooks, research books, library books, menus, directions etc) to help them interpret the information in the text. For example, in a detective story, a reader could expect the following chain of event: a crime occurs, possible suspects are identified, evidence is uncovered, and

the perpetrator is apprehended. Various studies in both L1 and L2 show that knowledge of different text types and genres also facilitates reading comprehension. For different text types often use different forms of text organization, linguistic structure. Students can be trained to take advantage of text organization and discourse structures to enhance reading comprehension. Nevertheless, compared with the linguistic and content schemata, the formal schemata offers less power in the reading process. To sum up, the three schemata activated in the reading process can be shown as follows:
Vocabulary meaning linguistic schemata Grammatical meaning or syntax recognition skills

input from text content schemata s

inference interpretation of text skills

Formal schemata

text organization discourse structures

2.4 Concept of Cooperative Learning Stahl in Muslim (2007:14) claims that, the using of cooperative learning model is as the approach in the teaching and learning process which needs the member group participation. Cooperative learning can increase the students motivation to learn.

Slavin in Jacobs (1996:26) points out that, all cooperative learning methods share the idea that students work together to learn and are responsible for their teammates learning as well as their own. Panitz (1996) states that, cooperative learning is defined by a set of processes which help people interact together in order to accomplish a specific goal or developed an end product which is usually content specific. Furthermore, Sharan (1994:336) states, cooperative learning is a group centered and students centered approach the classroom teaching and learning. Group center learning is facilitated by learning students group practice in regulating their own activities in the classroom including conducting of learning. Beside that, Kagan (1994:25) states that cooperative is a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of subject. Each member of a team is responsible for not only learning that is taught but also for helping teammates learn, this creating an atmosphere of achievement. Similarly, Johnson and Johnson (1986) say that cooperative learning is the using of small groups of students, which the students work together with their teammates after given instruction. Students work through the assignment until all group members successfully understand and complete it. In line with above definitions, we may say that there are four features in applied of learning through cooperative learning. They are forming of group, work together, get experience, and attainment of learning goal.

2.4.1 Components of Cooperative Learning Teaching English by using cooperative learning mode can encourage the students motivation in learning because the students are more dynamic in the teaching and learning process. Kagan and Kagan cited in Susilawati (2007: 16) point out that there are five components of cooperative learning: they are (1) simultaneous interaction, (2) positive interdependence, (3) face to face interaction, (4) equal participation, and (5) individual accountability. These components will be explained more in the following section. Simultaneous Interaction. In a teacher fronted instructional mode, normally only one person, either the teacher or a student the teacher has called upon ,is taking at any one time, however, when group activities are do, one person per group is, hopefully, speaking, e.g. if 40 students working in a group of 4. They are talking simultaneously, greatly increasing the amount of interaction in which student directly take part. In this same way, among group, including pairs increases the amount of simultaneous interaction. Positive Interdependence. Positive interdependence is the feeling among group of students that, what helps any member of group help every one in the group and what hurts any member of group hurt every one in the group members feel that they sink or swim together To achieve positive interdependence among students just putting them in group and telling them to work together may not be sufficient. The way of promoting

positive interdependence in a group include: goals reward, roles, resources and identity. Face to Face Interaction. Face to Face Interaction may be defined as students being in close physical proximity involved in communication as they work together and talk through the task they are doing ( Jonhson and Jonhson and Holubec) cited in Susilawati (2007 : 17) points out that group work can promote each others learning by helping, questioning, suggesting, sharing information/ material, and encouraging each others efforts to learn. Individual Accountability. One of the most commonly heard objections to having students work in the group is that some group members will end of doing all the work. This can occur because the others want to do everything. Thus, might encourage every one to fell that they are individually accountable of their group. There are many way to structure group activities so as to promote this feeling of individual accountability. Some of these are as follows: (1) each student individually takes a quiz, complete a task, or write an essay on the material studied. (2) Group members are called on random to answer a question and/or to explain an answer. (3) Each group member has a designed role, which they are to perform. These roles can rotate. For examples, a reading passage can be divided into sections. Members of pair each read the first silently. Then, one person is to summarize the section and other materials the class has studied or with aspects of their live. These role rotate for the next section of reading passage.

Equal Participation. Too often one or two group do most of the learning, while others do little and show little progress. To encourage each member to play an important role in the group and benefit from the group effort, cooperative learning seeks to equalize participation. This encourages all students to be active learners. Jacob et al (1996: 17-21) point out that cooperative learning has five components: (1) positive interdependence; (2) collaborative skills; (3) processing group interaction; (4) heterogeneous grouping and (5) individual accountability. Based on the above explanation, we may say that cooperative learning method helps the students or the learners to share the ideas and working together and there are responsible for their group mates learning as well as their own. And the objective of cooperative learning is to guide the students to work together and share their ideas.

2.4.2 Characteristics of Cooperative Learning The characteristic of cooperative learning is as a behavior which appears and become a habit or character from of cooperative learning activities. Slavin (1995: 37) points out that cooperative learning has amount of certain characteristics. They are as follows: a. Refers to the groups success. Groups success is the winning of the group in the computation in the learning material. Through the success of the group make the members of group to become a high motivation to learn the material. They realize that the unity of groups as the key of groups success.

b. Members role emphasized. Every group member has a task and function clearly. It means that every member of group has a role as the giving motivation, accelerator, activator, and as the decision maker. c. Individuals accountability. The winning of the group depend on individuals result study. It means that the individuals comprehension toward the material is as the basic of the groups. So that, every member of group has a responsibility to guide his group mates to comprehend the material. d. Individuals interaction. Interaction of individual in the group of study is as the kinds of communication which always appear. It means that without interaction between the group members the success of group will be beyond hope. It indicates that all member of group should be mutual interaction and help each other in learning materials. e. Leader together. Every member of group has a right to speak. Beside of that he/she has individual responsibility about the groups progress. It indicates that every group member is as the leader in their group.

2.5 Jigsaw II Technique in Teaching Reading Johnson and Johnson (1991: 121) states that cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so the students work together to maximize their selves and each other learning. Moreover, Nunan (1992:35) supports that cooperative learning

group are deliberately heterogeneous and consist of two to four members. In jigsaw II

technique, students are form heterogeneous group into four students in one group and it allows students to work together to maximize their selves and each other learning. Jigsaw II technique is well-known as cooperative learning technique. This technique is team or group learning procedure (Slavin, 2009). This technique is modification of the original jigsaw which is called as Jigsaw I that has been proposed by Elliot Aronson. In this matter, Slavin modifies original jigsaw become Jigsaw II in order to overcome the weakness of original jigsaw itself. As Slavin in Jacobs (1996 : 7) states that one thing that is important to keep in mind is that jigsaw I only works if each piece of the text is understandable on its own. Thus, for example, the technique probably would not work well with a short story, because it would be difficult to understand the middle if we had not read the beginning of the story first. An alternative is jigsaw II in which everyone in the home team has all the text pieces. Jigsaw II has been used in second language teaching using print (Johnson & Johnson, 1998) and spoken texts, Harmer in Wang (2009). Based these points, choosing Jigsaw II enables students to experience active reading and speaking to share what they have learned with their group members. It is supported by Arend in Emildadiany (2010) states that jigsaw II helps students reinforce and internalize important concept-related information based on lectures or textbook material. In other hand, it could be able to make the students more active and explores their opinion in peer teaching activity of reading class.

Cooperatively jigsaw II technique is the part that has challenging activity. Which the learner has positive interdependent to achieve groups goal. As Slavin in Jacobs et al (1990) positive interdependence simply means that the group members feel sink or swim together. In other words, helps one group member helps them all, and what hurts one group member hurts everyone in the group. In jigsaw II technique has the main positive interdependence. It supported by As Jacobs et al, (2002) states that jigsaw II technique highlights three types of positive interdependent. First type is goal interdependent that has simply means that the group members themselves as sharing a common goal or goals. In this case the goal is to learn their peaces in order to share the information with group mates so that the group can do their task well relate to the objectives of the lesson. Second type is resources positive interdependent means that every each group has unique resources that they must share in order for group succeed. Third type is celebration or reward positive interdependent. In this case the individual students receive such as grade or praise depends on group mates receive. According to Slavin in Jacob et al (2002) there are some steps of jigsaw II in teaching reading. They are; Students original groups of four are called home teams. The activity in this step is reading with team members. Students work in heterogeneous teams. Reading could occur during the first part of the period, as homework, or during a class activity. All students are assigned the reading and are given an Expert Sheet that contains different sections. Each team members is assigned a specific section to focus on when reading.If there are 4 topics and

a 5-member team, assign two students the same expert topic. Assigning could be random, but predetermined would be preferable. With predetermined assignments, be sure to mix the ability levels of the expert groups. Then, the students leave their home team and form Expert group discussion: After everyone has read the material, students from different teams with the same section meet in expert groups and then, they are given some questions related to their section. In order to keep the expert groups (6-8 members), have two expert groups per section. It is helpful to assign a discussion leader (not necessarily the most able student) to facilitate and to see that everyone participates. Each student should take notes on important and agreed upon points to share. Students are motivated to become experts, as they are responsible for teaching that information. After that, the team reports where the students return to their teams. Each expert shares their information with the teammates by turns. It is important that the students know that they are to be good teachers and good listeners and that the reports should be well organized, concise, and to the point. Then, the given test; each student is required to take the test independently. The test can be essay or another forms for each section. Students may exchange papers to check answers or the teacher may want to collect the tests to grade. As with STAD, students are assigned base scores, so improvement points are also used in determining the team score. Alternative methods of exhibiting knowledge learned such as oral or written reports or projects (e.g., visual cognitive organizer) are also acceptable. If an alternative method is used, all students must participate. Finally, Team recognition: the teacher gives appreciation such as rewards to the three the best groups they are

super, great, and good team. The kinds of rewards such as certificates, newsletters, recognition, or tangible rewards could be used to recognize high-scoring teams. In the other hand, the technique used categorizing and awarding point that same in STAD technique. The point used to assign the three best groups. They are supper team, great team, and good team. These categorizing have function to create the competition among group and motivate every group to do the best among them. As Jacobs et al (1996) explaines that one point to keep in mind when constructing Jigsaw II activities that students be motivated in teaching and learning process because of the awards that gotten by students, such as good team, great team, and super team. In addition, Slavin (2009) states that the given categorizing and awarding to three the best group is to motivate the students achieve the goal of learning process. The categorizing is as follows; Table 2.1 Recognition Points and Awarding Recognition AWARDING POINTS Quiz Score Team Points 10 points bellow to 1 point bellow past 5 average Same or Past average to 10 points above past 20 average More than 10 points 30 above past average Perfect paper(regardless 30 of past average) AWARDING RECOGNITION Average Points 15 Award Good team

20

Great team

25

Super team (Slavin, 2009)

For more clearly the researcher provides graph about the moving of students group form. It is cited from Arend in Emildadiany (2010). The graph is about the moving of home team and expert team in teaching reading. A C B D A C B D A C B D A C B D A C B D

Home Team

` Expert Team teamtomee

A A A

A A

B B B

B B

C C C

C C

D D D

D D

TOPIC 1

C C C C D D D D Graph 2.1 Moving of students in home team and expert team in jigsaw II technique. 2.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of Jigsaw II Technique 2.6.1 Advantages of Jigsaw II Technique There are some advantages of jigsaw II technique. It has been stated by Slavin (1990) are as follows; (1) It is an efficient way to learn the material, (2) Builds a depth of knowledge, (3) Discloses students own understanding and resolves

TOPIC 2

TOPIC 3

TOPIC 4

misunderstanding, (4) Develops team work and cooperative working skills, (6) Easier to use of textbooks and readily materials used without any adaption.

In the other hand, Broward in Parker (2010) states that there are some advantages of jigsaw II technique, they are; it is an efficient way to learn the material, builds a depth of knowledge, and discloses a student's own understanding and resolves misunderstanding, builds on conceptual understanding, develops teamwork and cooperative working skills.

2.6.2 Disadvantages of Jigsaw II Technique There are some disadvantages of jigsaw II technique are as follows: 1) Forming heterogeneous group disturb the group members. 2) Uneven time in expert groups. 3) Students must be trained in this technique of learning. 4) Classroom management can become a problem.

2.7 Reading Achievement The American Heritage Dictionary in Darta (2001: 20) points out that achievement is the act or accomplishing or finishing something especially by means of exertion, skill practice or preserving. Furthermore, Negoro (1984:196) points out that achievement is a successful activity; it refers to someones ability which has obtained. In terms of reading, Usman (2000:39) states that Achievement is the result of activity which has been done by someone. It is usually showed by the values or mark which is given by the teacher. In this case, reading achievement which is made by the students will result in some, change will visible become attainment or achievement through question or

measurement that has been given by teacher on the reading test form. Thus, the tests must be flexible to respond the particular goals and needs of the students in a language program. Mulyasa (2004:104) states that penilaian di kelas dilakukan oleh guru untuk mengetahui kemajuan dan hasil belajar peserta didik , mendiagnosa kesulitan belajar, memberikan umpan balik untuk perbaikan proses pembelajaran dan penentuan kenaikan kelas. So, that is why reading achievement is very important to evaluate students development in learning process.

2.8 Previous Study Related to Technique The study of applying this technique in teaching and learning process had been conducted for several times. The researcher found at least four researchers. In this case, those researchers applied in different design and skills. Firstly was Fullu Azka (2005). He applied his study by using a comparative study of the teaching of Mathematic especially for teorema Pythagoras of students at Junior High School 10 Semarang. He compared among Jigsaw II, students team achievement division (STAD), and Conventional. He conducted the research with using true experimental design for 230 populations of students and took sample were 115 students by using random sampling technique. The finding of the study, he found that jigsaw II technique more effective than STAD and conventional. The secondly was Gina (2005). She applied her study by using the effective of jigsaw II technique for reading motivation and achievement for EFL. The participants were 44 grade five students in a private school in Lebanon. The students were randomly assigned to control and

experimental conditions and a post-test only control group design was employed. The finding was indicated that Jigsaw II had a significant effect on students reading achievement, students self concepts as reader, and their reading motivation. The thirdly was Sahin (2010). He investigated the effects of jigsaw II technique on academic achievement and attitudes to written expression course at Atatrk University, Turkey. His study aims to explore the effects of a cooperative technique Jigsaw II as experimental class and instructional teacher-centered teaching method as control group on Turkish language teacher education department students attitudes to written expression course academic achievement, retention, and their views, in 2009 to 2010 academic year. In his research, the pre-test and post-test with control group experimental design was used. The data was collected through Attitudes to Written Expression Scale (ATWES) and Written Expression Achievement Test (WEAT), Students View Form (SVF). The result used statistical analyses and revealed that there were significant differences between the experimental and control groups in terms of their attitudes, academic achievement, and retention in favor of the experimental group. In addition, It was determined that the experimental class by applying jigsaw II technique had positive significance effect towards students

written expression course. The last was Sri Fita Rahmawati. She applied the research in an action research design at speaking skill. She applied at class XI IA-3 of Senior High School 6 Kendari. The total subjects were 32 students. She applied for three cycles. Result of her study showed that jigsaw II technique can improve students

speaking achievement. Where there are 26 students or 81.6% who passed the target of the research namely 65 of 70% of total number students. Based on the finding of the previous study, it had shown that there is a significant improvement to the students achievement after implementing Jigsaw II technique. Nevertheless, comparing four studies which were presented by the researcher in this section, three of them found significant improvement to the students achievement in terms of mathematic, writing ability and speaking, but according Slavin in Wang (2009) that jigsaw II technique can be used in teaching; listening, speaking, and reading. in addition, Slavin (2009) explains that Jigsaw II technique has been effective both for improving the students achievement and behavior and for increasing their acceptance by their classmates. These theories are also supported by one of previous researcher that conducted by Gina (2005) who investigated the effectiveness of jigsaw II technique for reading motivation and achievement for EFL in Lebanon and the finding was indicated that Jigsaw II had a significant effect on students reading achievement, students self concepts as reader, and their reading motivation. Hence, from the theoretical framework and the previous researcher that conducted by Gina (2005) which has been presented above, it created a hypothesis that would be examined by the researcher. The hypothesis of this study was there is a significant effect of jigsaw II technique on students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari.

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

This chapter aims to provide methodology of the study. This chapter is divided into the following subsections: design of the study, subject of the study, instrument of the study, marking scheme, pilot study, technique of data collection, teaching procedures, observer, and technique of data analysis.

3.1 Design of the Study The design of this study was Quasi Experimental Design that consists of control class and experimental class. Ary, et al (1979:260) define that quasi-experimental design as the design that would provide as much control class as possible under the existing situation and it is used when the experimental design is not feasible. Control group reffered to the group that given the usual set of conditions, while experimental group reffered to the group that given the more unusual. In this matter, Control group was taught under explicit instruction technique, while experimental group was taught under jigsaw II technique. The design of this study can be seen in the following scheme. Table 3.1 The Scheme of Quasi Experimental Design Group E C Pretest Y1 Y1 Independent variable X Postest

Y2 Y2 Ary, et al (1979:260)

Where: E = Refers to the experimental group (the group that is given the independent variable treatment). C = Refers to the control group (the group that does not receive the experimental treatment). X = The independent variable, it is also be referred to as the experimental variable or the treatment. Y1 = The dependent variable, it is as pretest before the experimental treatment. Y2 = The dependent variable, it is as posttest after the experimental treatment.

3.2 Subject of the Study The subject of this study was all students at class X3 who registered in academic year 2011/2012 with the total number of students was 40 students (16 male and 24 female). In this study, the researcher used class X4 as control class with the total number of students was 40 students (19 male and 21 female). The researcher chose class X4 as control class because it had the same total of students with experimental class. Beside that, students for both X3 and X4 were not distributed based on their rapport and mark of National Examination from Junior High School. So, it was considered homogeneous. It was also supported by the students score in daily test in which the mean score for both classes were categorized low (see appendix 19) and the result of testing homogeneity for both classes also showed that both X3 and X4 were

homogenate. In addition, by testing homogeneity, it was found X3 had low variance and X4 had big variance (for more clearly see appendix 13). So, by considering these data, the researcher chose directly X3 as experimental class and X4 as control class.

3.3 Instrument of the Study The instrument of this study was reading test. The test consisted of 40 items in form of multiple choices based on the reading test. The instrument of the pre-test and posttest were the same questions. The test that used in this study was taken from Interlanguage English for Senior High School Students X by Joko Priyana, et al, Published by Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional ,2008, and Look Ahead an English Course for Senior High School Students Year X by Sudarwati, Th.M,et al, published by Erlangga, 2007.

3.4 Marking Scheme The marking scheme in this study was 1(one) for the correct answer and 0 (zero) for the incorrect answer. Then, score was made to be grated by using the formula as follows:

Mark Where: X = Score (Total of correct answer) n = Total number of question Arikunto, (2009: 69)

To determine the students reading achievement, the researcher used the following criteria: Table 3.2 Criteria of students reading achievement R 86 100 70 85 56 69 36 55 0 35 Categories Very high High Moderate Low Very low (Sudjana, 1984:27) 3.5 Pilot Study The researcher conducted pilot study as the first step in this study. It was divided into two activities: The instrument of the study and Jigsaw II technique. 3.5.1 Result of Pilot Study of the Instrument Before the instrument was used to both experimental class and control class, it was piloted to the other class, namely X6 in the same school. This class was still categorized had the same level with X3 and X4. The researcher conducted pilot study on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 started from 08.30 10.00 a.m. The main objectives of try out were as follows: (1) to find out the validity and reliability of the test. Validity means to know the instrument measurement what should be to be measured and the reliability means the instrument can be applied anytime and anyplace (consistency) give the constant result. (2) To check the duration of the time when students are doing the test. This is related to eligibility of the test.

The result of try-out of reading test showed that the time needed to answer the questions during the try-out was 90 minutes. This time was enough in answering the test. In determining the time, the researcher added the time used of the students who finished early in answering the test and the time used of the students who finished latest, then divided by two ( 80 + 100 minutes :2) = 90 minutes. Thus, in analyzing items validity of the test, the researcher used Product Moment Correlation with the formula as follows: rxy
=

}{

Where:

rxy X Y n

: Coefficient of correlation : Score of each item : Total score of students : Total of respondent (Arikunto, 2009: 72)

Then, to interpret the value of the coefficient correlation ( rxy) on each items, the researcher compared between rxy-count and r-table of product moment with criteria as follows: - If rxy > rtable it means that the item of the test is valid - If rxy < rtabel it means that the item of the test is invalid After computing the item validity of reading test ( see appendix 3) then examined by using the above criteria using r-table, the researcher found that there were 10 items of reading test which categorized as invalid criteria ( see appendix 3).

They were items number 11, 12, 19, 28, 30, 32, 40, 41, 49, and 50. These had r-count < r- table. All the invalid criteria items were not used as the instrument of this study. While to know the reliability of the test , the researcher used formula of KR21 by Kuder and Richardson as follows:

r11

=[

][

]
(Isaac, 1983: 87)

Where: K M S2 = number of item test = mean score = Variance

The criteria used to determine the degree of the reliability of the tests are as follows: Table 3.3 Reliability of category Reliability 0,80 1,00 0,60 0,79 0,40 0,59 0,20 0,39 0,00 0,19 Categories Very high High Moderate Low Very low (Arikunto,1996:157) Based on the analysis of the test reliability, the result of tried out for test reliability of reading test was 0.84. Based on the criteria of coefficient correlation of reliability provided by Arikunto (1996:157), the value 0.84 was categorized as very

high reliability. Therefore, the test fulfills the criteria to be used as the instrument of this study.

3.5.2 Pilot Study of the Technique Jigsaw II was piloted to see the students response and to minimize the students difficulties (whether there was or not weakness in each aspect of the implementation of Jigsaw II technique) and the researcher herself was more well-trained in applying the technique before entering the main class. It was conducted at class X6 on Monday, 24 October 2011 started from 08.30 10.00 a.m as the teachers consideration. In piloting the technique, the researcher controlled the allocation of time and evaluated the activities during teaching and learning process of each steps of Jigsaw II technique. At the first time, the researcher gave a brief explanation about Jigsaw II technique and all its steps which include in it to the students. Then, the researcher provided them the reading text entitled Durnas trap. At the time, the researcher led the students the teaching and learning process as procedure of Jigsaw II technique in lesson scenario. After tried out Jigsaw II technique, the researcher found some problems. Firstly, in forming heterogeneous of four, some students did not want to cooperate with their groups which were based on their past achievement. To solve the problem, the researcher would explain the benefits of learning to work with others. Secondly, most of students found difficulty to understand the reading text because they were

lack of vocabulary. So, to solve this problem, the researcher would provide some unfamiliar words in their worksheet. Thirdly, there were many groups discussion and it was difficult for the researcher to control one by one. So, to solve this problem, the researcher would point the captain in each group for both home team and expert team to control group discussion. The last, the researcher could not calculate the students point at the time because the number of students were large. So, to solve the problem, the researcher would collect and count it at home and it would be informed to the students in next meeting who become three the best groups; super , great, and good teams.

3.6

Technique of Data collecting

In collecting data of this study, the researcher used the following procedures: 1. Pre-test The researcher performed pre-test in both of classes to find out the students reading achievement before conducting the treatment and pre test scores were used to calculate the homogeneity of variance from subject that used. In addition, pre-test scores in this study were also used in determining group formation in terms of high, average, and low ability and as their base score. Pre-test was conducted in both of classes once in the first meeting. 2. Treatment During the treatment, the researcher taught the students in both of classes. In experimental class, the researcher taught by using jigsaw II technique while in control

class, the researcher taught by using explicit instruction technique. The researcher chose explicit instruction technique to be used in control class was because this technique was commonly used by the teacher in Senior High School 2 Kendari especially in teaching English reading. The researcher conducted the presentation of material five times. To reduce the intervening variables that might appear, in this study the researcher used the same instrument, allocation of time and the researcher acted as teacher in both of classes. The detailed schedule of conducting treatment can be seen in table 3.4 Table 3.4 Schedule of conducting treatment Activities / Time in Experimental Meeting Class Pretest First Second Third Four Fifth Posttest 07.00-08.30, 29 October 2011 08.30-10.00, 1 November 2011 07.00-08.30, 5 November 2011 08.30-10.00, 8 November 2011 07.00-08.30, 12 November 2011 08.30-10.00, 15 November 2011 07.00-08.30, 19 November 2011 Time in Control Class 08.30-10.00, 29 October 2011 07.45-09.15, 31 October 2011 08.30-10.00, 5 November 2011 07.45-09.15, 7 November 2011 08.30-10.00, 12 November 2011 07.45-09.15, 14 November 2011 08.30-10.00, 19 November 2011 Topics _ Blind Listening Three foolish Sons Thumbelina The Fortune Teller An Indian and His Pet Fish _

Note : The topics presented were the reading text that taken from Developing English Competencies for Senior High School Grade X ( Joko Priyana, et al, 2006), and Look Ahead an English Course for Senior High School Year X ( Sudarwati, Th.M, et al, 2007).

3. Post-test Post test was given to know the students reading achievement after teaching and learning process in experimental class and control class. It was conducted at the last meeting.

3.7 Teaching Procedures 3.7.1 Procedure of Teaching Reading through Jigsaw II Technique There are some steps of jigsaw II technique that is developed by Slavin in Jacobs et al (2002). These steps are as follows: a. Step 1. Students original groups of four are called home teams. The activity in this step is reading with team members: Students work in heterogeneous teams. Reading could occur during the first part of the period, as homework, or during a class activity. All students are assigned the reading and are given an Expert Sheet that contains different sections. Each team member is assigned a specific section to focus on when reading. For example, the generic structures of narrative text are orientation, complication, resolution, and reorientation. So, in this case, the student with head number A is responsible to master orientation, head number B is responsible to master complication, head number C is responsible to master resolution, and head number D is responsible to master reorientation. If there are 4 sections and a 5-member team, assign two students the same section. Assigning could be random, but

predetermined would be preferable. With predetermined assignments, be sure to mix the ability levels (high, middle, and low) of the expert groups. b. Step 2. Students leave their home team and form expert group discussion: After everyone has read the material, students from different teams with the same section meet in expert groups and there are given some questions related to their section. In order to keep the expert groups (6-8 members), have two expert groups per section. It is helpful to assign a discussion leader (not necessarily the most able student) to facilitate and to see that everyone participates. Each student should take notes on important and agreed upon points to share. Students are motivated to become experts, as they are responsible for teaching that information. c. Team reports: Students return to their teams. Each expert shares their information with the teammates by turns. It is important that the students know that they are to be good teachers and good listeners and that the reports should be well organized, concise, and to the point. d. Test: Each student is required to take the quiz independently. The test can be essay or another forms for each section. Students may exchange papers to check answers or the teacher may want to collect the tests to grade. As with STAD, students are assigned base scores, so improvement points are also used in determining the team score. Alternative methods of exhibiting knowledge learned such as oral or written reports or projects (e.g., visual cognitive

organizer) are also acceptable. If an alternative method is used, all students must participate. e. Team recognition: Certificates, newsletters, recognition, or tangible rewards could be used to recognize high-scoring teams.

3.7.2 Procedure of Teaching Reading through Explicit Instruction Technique Researcher applied the explicit instruction technique in control class. It was usually used by the English teacher at Senior High School 2 Kendari. The Procedures of teaching reading through explicit instruction technique are in the following: a. Delivering the objectives of instruction. b. Explaining the material about the topic that will be mastery. c. Asking the students to read the text. d. Asking the students to answer the questions based on the text individually. e. Teacher asked students to exchange their paper to his/her partner. f. Inform the correct answers of the questions. g. Collect the students worksheet.

3.8 Observer In this study, the researcher used an observer to check the consistency of the researcher in teaching both of classes. The observer is the English teacher of the tenth year at Senior High School 2 Kendari. In observing process, the researcher will use the observation sheets that consist of two parts, they are: (1) observation sheet for jigsaw II technique, and (2) observation sheet for explicit instruction technique.

Based on the technique applied, the observer commented that the technique had been applied consistently according to the criteria of those techniques.

3.9 Technique of Data Analysis There were two techniques in analyzing the data. They were descriptive statistic and inferential statistic. Descriptive statistic analysis was used to describe the maximum and minimum scores, mean, and deviation standard, while the inferential statistic analysis was used to test the hypothesis. Before the hypothesis test was done, it was conducted the homogeneity test and normality test of the data as the condition for testing the hypothesis. 1. homogeneity test was used to know the homogeneity of variance of subjects (Sugiyono, 2008: 275). The formula is: Fcount
=

big var iance little var iance

(Riduwan, 2004: 178) With the criteria:If Fcount and If Fcount Ftable, it means that the variance is not homogeneous,

Ftable, it means that the variance is homogenous.

2. normality test was used for knowing the normality of data distribution in both of classes. The formula that can be used is Chi-square test with the formula: [
( )

( Riduwan, 2004: 179)

Where: 2 = the value of chi-square fo = the observed frequency in each cell fe = the expected frequency in each cell With the criteria: If 2count and If 2count 2table, it means that the data is not distributed normally

2table, it means that the data is distributed normally.

In testing the hypothesis of this study, the researcher used two-tailed test (ttest) with formula as follows: t=

X
S

Where: XA XB S nA nB

= the mean score of the first class (experimental class) = the mean score of the second class (control class) = the deviation standard of both classes = the total respondent of the first class = the total respondent of the second class

The testing hypothesis criteria are as follows: 1. If t

test

> ttable, it means that there is a significant effect of jigsaw II on

students reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari (H0 is refused and H1 is accepted).

2. If ttest < t

table,

it means that there is not a significant effect of jigsaw II on

students reading achievement at the class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari. (H0 is accepted and H1 is refused). Moreover, To measure how large the effect of treatment by using jigsaw II technique, the researcher calculated the effect size as follows: Effect size: (Mean of experimental group mean of control group) Deviation Standard

The criteria to determine the effect size based on Cohens criteria (Cohen, 1988) as follow: 0.0-0.2 : 0.2-0.5: 0.6-0.8: Small Moderate Large

REFERENCES

Alyousef, Hesham Sulaiman. 2006. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Lerners. Riyadh: Albaya Intermediate Scholl. Arikunto, S. 2009. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan . Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Arikunto, S. 1996. Prosedure Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek . Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. Ary, D.,Lucy C Jacobs & Asghar R.1979. Introduction to Research in Education. USA: Holt, Rinerat and Winston. Azka, Fullu. 2005. Keefektivan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD dan Jigsaw II Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Pokok Bahasan Teorema Pythagoras Pada Siswa Kelas II Semester 1 SMPN 10 Semarang Tahun Pelajaran 2004/2005.Thesis.UNNES.2005. Retrieved January 25th, 2010, from http://scmariani-unnes.blogspot.com/2008/11/pembelajaran-kooperatifjigsaw-ii.html. Bedir, Hasan. 1992. Cultural Significance in Foreign in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching with Special Emphasis on Reading Comprehension Through Cultural Schema. Unpublished MA thesis. ADANA: Cukurova University. Bond, G. 1984. Reading Difficulties. Their Diagnosis and Correction. New Jersey :Practice Hall, Inc. Brown. H. Douglas.2001. Teaching by principles : An Interactive Approach Pedagogy. New York . Addison Wesley. Longman, Inc. Cohen, J.1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavior Science (2nd ed). New Jersey : Lawrence Elbaum. Collins, David and Ann Collins.1998. Advancing Reading Achievement, becoming Effective Teacherd of Reading through Collective Study. U.S. Department of Educational. Last Visited : Juli 1st, 2009. Darta, Darmiati. 2001. The Effect of Jigsaw Technique on Students Reading Achievement at the Third Year of SLTP Negeri 3 Kolaka Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Doddy, Achmad, dkk. 2006. Developing English Competencies for Senior High School Grade X. Jakarta : Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Emildadiany, Novi. 2010. Concentration, Jigsaw II Group Activity & Attention Training.Retrieved.October5th,2010,from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/DycusJigsaw.html. Firdayanti.2000. The Effect of ETR Technique in The Teaching Reading Comprehension at the Second Year of SMU Negeri 2 Kendari Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis. Gina, Al-Badawi. 2005. The Effect of Jigsaw II versus Whole Class Instruction on EFL Students Reading Motivation and Achievement. Thesis. American university of Beirut. Retrieved January 25th, 2011, from http://ghinathesis.blogspot.com. Issac, S., & William, B. 1983. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jacobs, M G, Gan Siowek, and Ball Jasica.1996. Learning Cooperative : Learning Via Cooperative Learning( A Sourcebook of Lesson Plans for Teacher Education on Cooperative Learning) . Singapore : SEAMEO Regional Language Center. . Jacobs, M.G, Michael A, Loh Wann Inn. 2002. The Teachers Sourcebook for Cooperative Learning (Practical Technique, Basic Principles, and frequently Asked Questions) . California : Corwin Press Inc. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in the Classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec. 1986. Circles of Learning. Retrieved August, 25 ,2010. From hhtp:// literacynet.org/icans/chapter01/traditional.html. Kagan, S. 1994. Cooperative Learning. San Juan Capistrano : Kagan Cooperative Learning (KCL). Krashen, S.1983.The Natural Approach. Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Sanfransisco: Alemany Press.

Lado, Robert.1997. Language Teaching a Scientific Approach. New York: Mc Graw Hill Inc. Marhumi. 2001. A Correlation Study between Students Vocabulary Size and Their Reading Comprehension Achievement at Second Year of SMU 5 Kendari Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis. Mulyasa. 2004. Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Muslim, W. 2007. The Effect of STAD Technique on the Reading Achievement of the Year Two Students of Senior high School Negeri 2 Bau-Bau Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis. Negoro. Adi. 1984. Aspirasi Pendidikan di Lingkungan Sosial Hubungannya Dengan Prestasi Belajar Murid. Jakarta: Bulan Bintang. Nunan, D. 1992. Colaborative Language Learning and Teaching. New York. Cambrige University Press. Nurnia. 1998. Fostering Reading Comprehension Using K-W-L Technique. imiotika Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni FKIP. Unhalu. October Ed., 1998 . Panitz, T. 1996. A Definition of Colaborative vs Cooperative Learning. Retrieved June,152010.From:http://www.city.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/collab.lea rning/panitz2.html. Priyana, Joko. 2008. Interlanguage English for Senior High School Students X . Jakarta : Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Qian, Jifang. 2004. Schemata and Their Interactive Application in English Reading. Zhejiang University of Sciences. Ranti. 2010. Teaching Reading Comprehension Through Students Team Achievement Divisions (STAD) Technique at the Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 3 Lainea. Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis. Riduwan. 2004. Metode dan Teknik Menyusun Tesis. Bandung: Alfabeta. Sahin, Abdullah.2010. Effects of Jigsaw II Technique on Academic Achievement and Attitudes to Written Expression Course. ISSN 1990-3839 2010 Academic Journals. Vol. 5(12), pp. 777-787.

Sharan, S,1994. Handbook of Cooperative Learning Methods. London: Wesport Connectinut, Green Wood Press. Silberman, L Melvin. 1996. Active Learning: 101 Strategies To Teach any Subjects. Boston. Slavin, E Robert. 2009. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Bandung: Nusa Media, Ujungberung. Slavin, Robert Charles.1995. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice. Second Edition. Massachhusetts. Allyn and Bacon Publisher. Slavin, E Rober. 1990. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice-Hall. Sudarwati, Th.M. 2007. Look Ahead an English Course for Senior High School Students Year X. Jakarta : Erlangga. Sudjana, Nana.1984. Metode Statistik. Bandung: Tarsito. Sugiyono. 2008. Metode Penelitian ( Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D). Bandung: Cv ALFABETA. Susilawati.2007. The Improvement of Students Reading Comprehension under Jigsaw Technique at the First Year of SMA Negeri 1 Poleang timur. Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis. Tarigan, H.G .1987. Membaca Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan. Bandung: PT. Angkasa. Tsuguhiko, 2007. Content Knowledge- The Real Reading Crisis. Online ( http://findarticle.com/p/articles/mi qa3614/is /ai n1943822) Retrived on 1st July 2009. . Usman, Moh. Uzer. 2001. Upaya Optimalisasi Kegiatan Belajar Mengajar . Jakarta: Debdikbud. Wang, Tzu-Pu. 2009. Applying Slavins Cooperative Learning Techniques to a College EFL Conversation Class: The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning Vol. 5, Num. 1, June 2009. Yule, G. 1985. The Study of Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.