BAB IV THE EFFECT OF CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES ON READING REPORT TEXT AT GRADE XI SMA NEGERI 1 SIABU

 

THE EFFECT OF CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES ON READING REPORT TEXT AT GRADE XI SMA NEGERI 1 SIABU

CHAPTER IV

THE RESEARCH RESULT

As mentioned in earlier chapter, in order to evaluate the of effect of critical reading strategies on reading report text, the researcher has calculated the data using pre-test and post-test. The researcher used the formulation of T-test the hypothesis. Next, the researcher described the data as follows:

A.    Description of Data

1.      Description of Data before Using Critical Reading Strategies

a.      Score of Pre-test Experimental Class

The result of the test in experimental class before using Critical Reading Strategies on Students Report Text in the appendix 17 and 18, can be seen in following table:

Table 6. The Score of Experimental Class in Pre-test

Total	1484
Highest score	78
Lowest score	44
Mean	61.6
Median	71.5
Modus	64.5
Range	34
Interval	7
Standard deviation	10.1
Variant	126.23

 

 

Based on the table, the total score of experimental class in pre-test was 1484, mean was 61.6, median was 71.5, modus was 64.5, range was 34, interval was 7, researcher got the highest score was 78 and the lowest score was 44, and the last standard deviation was 10.1. Then, the calculatio of the frequency distribution of the students’ score in experimental class can be applied into table frequency distribution as follows:

Table 7. Frequency Distribution of Experimental Class (Pre-test)

No	Interval	MidPoint	F	Percentages
1	44 –50	49	6	25.19%
2	51 – 57	54	4	15.54%
3	58 – 64	61	4	16.54%
4	65 – 71	70	6	25.19%
5	72 – 78	75	4	17.54%
i=7		-	24	100%

 

Based on the table above, the students  score that is there in class interval  between 44-50 was 6 students (25.19%), class interval between 51-57 was 4 students ( 15.54%), class interval 58-64 was 4 students (16.54%), class interval 65-71 was 6 students (25.19%), and the class interval 72-78 was 4 students (17.54%).

Based on the table above, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

 

Frequency     

  

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

       49            54            61             70             75        score

 

                                               Figure 1: Description of Experimental Class (Pre-Test)

 

     Based on the table and histogram above, the students’ score from 49 was 6 students, the student score 54 was 4 students, the students’ score 61 was 4 students, the students’ score 70 was 6 students, and the students’ 75 was 4 students.

b.      Score of Pre-Test Control Class

The result of the pre-test of control class, the researcher calculated is gotten by the students in answering the test at the control class. The score of pre-test control class can be seen in following table:

 

      Table 8. The Score of Control Class in Pre-Test

Total	1428
Highest score	80
Lowest score	36
Mean	60.62
Median	63.49
Modus	59.44
Range	44
Interval	9
Standard deviation	10.21
Variant	153.13

 

Based on the table can be seen the total score in control class in pre-test was 1428, mean was 60.62, variant was 153.13 range was 44, interval was 9, median was 60.49, and modus was 59.44, researcher got the highest score was 80 and the lowest score was 36, and the last standard deviation was 10.21. Then, the calculation of the frequency distribution of the students’ score of control class can be applied into table frequency distribution as follows:

Table 9. Frequency Distribution of Control Class (Pre-Test)

No	Interval	Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	36 – 44	40	2	12.59%
2	45 – 53	49	3	15.13%
3	54 – 62	58	9	30.55%
4	63 – 71	67	6	25.19%
5	72 – 80	75	4	16.54%
i = 9		-	24	100%

 

Based on the table , it can be shown that the students’ score that is there in class interval between 36 – 44 was 2 students (12.59%), class interval between 45-53 was 3 students ( 15.13%), class interval 54-62 was 9 students (30.55%), class interval 63-71 was 6 students (25.19%), and the last class interval 72-80 was 4 students (16.54%).

Based on the table, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

Frequency

      

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

       40            49            58             67             76        score

Figure 2: Description of Control Class (Pre-Test)

Based on the table and the histogram above, the students’ score 40 was 2 students, the students’ score 49 was 3 students, the students’ score 58 was 9 students, the students’ score 67 was 6 students, and the students’ score 76 was 4 students.  

2.      Description of Data After Using Critical Reading Strategies

a.      Score of Post-Test Experimental Class

The result of the calculation that had been gotten by the students in answering the question (test) after the researcher did the treatment by using Critical Reading Strategies can be seen the table:

          Table 10. The Score of Experimental Class in Post Test

Total	1960
Highest score	96
Lowest score	62
Mean	81.91
Median	81.66
Modus	80.75
Range	34
Interval	7
Standard deviation	7.259
Variant	59.62

 

Based on the table above the total score of experiment class in post-test was 1960, mean was 81.91, standard deviation was 7.259, variant was 59.62, median was 81.66, range was 24, modus was 80.75, and interval was 7, researcher got the highest score was 96 and the lowest score was 62, and the last standard deviation. Then, the calculation of the frequency distribution of the students’ score of experiment class can be applied into table frequency distribution as follows:

 

       Table 11. Frequency Distribution of Students’ Score

No	Interval	Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	62 – 68	65	1	9.05%
2	69 – 75	72	3	10.16%
3	76 – 82	79	9	33.07%
4	83 – 89	86	7	29.86%
5	90 – 96	93	4	21.66%
i = 7		-	24	100%

 

Based on the table above, it can be shown that the students score is there in class interval between 62-68 was 1 student (9.05%), class interval between 69-75 was 3 students (10.16%), class interval 76-82 was 9 students (33.07%), class interval 83-89 was 7 students (29.86%), and the class interval 90-96 was 4 students (21.66%).

Based on the table above, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

     Frequency 

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

       65            72            79             86                  93        score

Figure 3: Description of Experimental Class (Post-Test)

Based on the table and the histogram above, the students’ score 65 was 1 student, the students’ score 72 was 3 students, the students’ score 79 was 9 students, the students’ score was 86 was 7 students, and the students’ 93 was 4 students.

b.      Score of Post-Test Control Class

The result of control class in post-test, the researcher took class IX IPA 2 as control class, could  had been gotten by the students in answering the question (test) after the researcher taught the reading report text by using conventional strategy can be seen the table below:

     Table 12. The Score of Control Class in Post-Test

Total	1724
Highest score	88
Lowest score	54
Mean	71.87
Median	71.26
Modus	70.81
Range	34
Interval	7
Standard deviation	6.79
Variant	64.31

        Based on the table above the total score of control class in post-test was 1724, mean was 71.87, variant was 64.31, median was 71.87, range was 34, modus was 70.81, and interval was 7, researcher got the highest score was 88 and the lowest score was 54 and the last standard deviation was 6.79.. Then, the calculation of the frequency distribution of the students’ score of control class can be applied into table frequency distribution as follows:

    Table 13. Frequency Distribution of Students’ Score

No	Interval	Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	54 – 60	57	1	9.85%
2	61– 67	64	4	18.24%
3	68 – 74	71	13	42.38%
4	75 – 81	78	3	13.93%
5	82 – 88	85	3	15.60%
i = 7		-	24	100%

 

Based on the table above, it can be shown that the students score is there in class interval between 54-60 was 1 student (9.85%), class interval between 61-67 was 5 students ( 18.24%), class interval 68-74 was 13 students (42.38%), class interval 75-81 was 3 students (13.90%), and the class interval 82-88 was 3 students (15.60%).

Based on the table above, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency

 

      15

      14

      13

      12

      11   

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

       57            64            71             78             85        score

Figure 4: Description of Control Class (Post-Test)

Based on the table and the histogram above, the students’ score 57 was 1 student, the students’ score 64 was 4 students, the students’ score 71 was 13 students, the students score 78 was 3 students, and the students’ score 85 was 3 students.

 

 

B.  Description of the Data Comparison between Pre-Test and Post-Test of Experimental and Control Class

1.      The Comparison Data between Pre-test and Post-test by using Critical Reading Strategies

 

The comparison the data between pre-test and post-test by using critical reading strategies. While the researcher done the research in pre-test, the researcher did not apply treatment to experimental, but in the post test to experimental the researcher gave the treatment.

Based on the description data in pre-test of experimental and control class, there was comparison score between pre-test experimental class before and after gave a treatment by using Critical Reading Strategies. It can be seen the table below:

Table 14. The Comparison Score of Students' Reading

                 Comprehension in Pre-test and Post-test

                 (Experimental Class)

Students’ Reading Comprehension in Pre-test
No	Interval	Mid Point		F		Percentages
1	44 – 50	49		6		25.19%
2	51 – 57	54		4		15.54%
3	58 – 64	61		4		16.54%
4	65 – 71	70		6		25.19%
5	72 – 78	75		4		17.54%
Students’ Reading Comprehension in Post-test
No	Interval		Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	62 – 68		65	1	9.05%
2	69 – 75		72	3	10.16%
3	76 – 82		79	9	33.07%
4	83– 89		86	7	29.86%
5	90 – 96		93	4	21.66%

Based on the table, it can be shown that the students score is there in class interval between that the highest interval score in pre-test experimental class was 72-78 (4 students/17.54%) and the lowest interval score was 44-50 (6 students/25.19%), meanwhile the highest interval score in post-test was 90-96 (4 students/21.66%) and the lowest score was 62-68 (1 students/9.05%).

Based on the table, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

Frequency

         9

7

 

Pre-test

6

Post-test

4

 

 

 

3

score

0

1

 

 

 

 

 49       65     54      72     61       79     70     86      75      93       

         Figure 5. Histogram the Comparison Data of Students’ Reading      

                     Comprehension in Pre-test and Post-test    

                     (Experimental Class)

 

Based on the histogram above, the frequency of students’ score of experimental class from 44 up to 50 (6 students/25.19%) in pre-test, and 62 up to 68 (1 student/9.05%) in post-test; 51 up to 57 (4 students/15.54%) in pre-test, and 69 up to 75 (3 students/10.16%) in post-test; 58 up to 64 (4 students/16.54%) in pre-test, and 76 up to 82 (9 students/33.07%) in post-test; 65 up to 71 (6 students/25.19%) in pre-test, and 83 up to 89 (7 students/29.86%) in post-test; 72 up to 78 (4 students/17.54%) in pre-test, and 90 up to 96 (4 students/21.66%) in post-test.

        Then, the interval which had highest frequency in pre test was 58-64 (4 students/16.54%) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 34-42 (3 students/12%). In post test of experimental class, the interval which had highest frequency was 70-76 (9 students/36%) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 56-62 (3 students/12%).

2.      The Comparison Data between Pre-test and Post-test by Using Conventional Strategy

 

The comparison data between pre-test and post-test by using conventional strategy. Based on the description data in pre-test and post-test of control class, there was the comparison score between pre-test control class before and after gave a treatment by using Conventional strategy. It can be seen in table below:

 

 

 

 

 

Table 15. The Comparison Score of Students’

                Reading Comprehension in Pre-test and Post-test

                (Control Class)

Students’ Reading Comprehension in Pre-test
No	Interval	Mid Point		Frequency	Percentages
1	36 – 44	40		2	12.59%
2	45 – 53	49		3	15.13%
3	54 – 62	58		9	30.55%
4	63 – 71	67		6	25.17%
5	72 – 80	75		4	16.54%
Students’ Reading Comprehension in Post-test
No	Interval		Mid Point	Frequency		Percentages
1	54 – 60		57	1		9.85%
2	61 – 67		64	4		18.24%
3	68 – 74		71	13		42.38%
4	75  – 81		78	3		13.93%
5	82 – 88		85	6		15.60%

    

Based on the table above, it can be shown that the students score is there in class interval between pre=test and pot-test (control class) was 72-80 (4 students/16.54%) and the lowest interval score was 36-44 (2 students/12.59%), meanwhile the highest interval score in post-test was 82-88 (3 students/15.60%), and the lowest score was 54-60 (1 student/9.85%).

Based on the table above, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

 

 

Frequency

 

 13

         9

6

 

Pre-test

4

Post-test

3

 

 

 

2

score

0

1

 

 

 

 

 40       57     49      64     58       71     67     78      75      85       

Figure 6. Histogram the Comparison Data of Students’ Reading

                  Comprehension in Pre-test and Post-test (Control Class)

 

Based on the figure above, the frequency of students’ score of contol class from 36 up to 44 (2 students/12.59%) in pre test, and 54 up to 60 (1 student/18.24%) in post-test; 45 up to 53 (3 students/15.13%) in pre-test, and 61 up to 67 (4 students/18.24%) in post-test; 54 up to 62 (9 students/30.55%) in pre-test, and 68 up to 74 (13 students/42.38%) in post-test; 63 up to 71 (6 students/25.19%) in pre-test, and 75 up to 81 (5 students/13.91%) in post-test; 72 up to 80 (4 students/16.54%) in pre-test, and 82 up to 88 (3 students/15.60%) in post-test.

        Next, the interval which had highest frequency in pre test was 54-62 (9 students/30.55%)) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 36-44 (2 students/12.59%). In post test of contol class, the interval which had highest frequency was 68-74 (13 students/42.38%) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 54-60 (1 student 9.85%).

3.      The Comparison Data between Using Critical Reading Strategies and Conventional Strategy in Post-test

 

After the researcher gave  pre-test to both of classes, before researcher giving a treatment to (XI IPA 3 as experimental class and XI IPA 2 as control class), the researcher knew the ability of students’ on reading report text.  In pre- test, the researcher did not apply treatment to experimental and control class, but in post test, the researcher giving a treatment in experimental class. In Experimental class by using Critical Reading Strategies and control class by using Conventional Strategy. It can be seen in table below:

Table 16. The Comparison Score of Students’ Reading Compehension

in Experimental and Control Class (Post-test)

Students’ Reading Comprehension in Post-test (Experimental Class)
No	Interval	Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	62 – 68	65	1	9.05%
2	69 – 75	72	3	10.16%
3	76 –82	79	9	33.07%
4	83 – 89	86	7	29.86%
5	90 – 96	93	4	21.66%
Students’ Reading Comprehension in Post-test (Control Class)
No	Interval	Mid Point	Frequency	Percentages
1	54 – 60	57	1	9.85%
2	61 – 67	64	4	18.24%
3	68 – 74	71	13	42.38%
4	75 – 81	78	3	13.93%
5	82 – 88	85	3	15.60%

Based on the table above, it can be shown that the highest interval score in post test of experimental classwas 90-96 (4 students/21.66%) and the lowest interval score was 62-68 (1 student/9.05%), meanwhile the control class was 82-88 (3 students/15.60%), and the last the lowest interval score was 54-60 (1 student/9.85%).

Based on the table above, it could be seen the histogram on the following figure:

Frequency

13

                                                                                                                                                Experimental Class

9

Control Class

7

4

 

 

 

 

3

 

  1

 

score

  0

   65     57      72    64      79      71       86     78       93     88         

Figure 7. Histogram the Comparison Data of Students’ Reading

       Comprehension in Experimental and Control Class         

       (Post-test)

Based on the figure, it can be shown the frequency of students’ score in post test from 62 up to 68 (1 students/9.05%) for experimental class, and 54 up to 60 (1 student/9.85%) for control class; 69 up to 75 (3 students/10.16%) for experimental class, and 61 up to 67 (4 students/18.24%) for control class; 76 up to 82 (9 students/33.07%) for experimental class, and 68 up to 74 (13 students/42.38%) for control class; 83 up to 89 (7 students/29.86%) for experimental class, and 75 up to 81 (3 students/13.93%) for control class; 90 up to 96 (4 students/21.66%) for experimental class, and 82 up to 88 (3 students/15.60%) for control class.

Next, the interval which had highest frequency in post test of experimental class was 90-96(4 students/21.66%) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 62-68 (1 students/9.05%). In post test of contol class, the interval which had highest frequency was 82-88 (3 students/13.93%) and the interval which had lowest frequency was 54-60 (1 student/9.85%).

Based on the description of comparison from the data, it can be shown that the students’ scores of experimental class by using Critical Reading Strategies was higher than the students’ score of control class by using Conventional strategy.

 

 

C.  Data Analysis

1.         Requirement Test

a.    Normality and Homogeneity of Experimental and Control Class in Pre-Test

Table 17. Normality and Homogeneity in Pre-Test

Class	Normality Test		Homogeneity Test
	x2count	x2table	fcount	ftable
Experimental Class	7.636	11.070	1.21 < 1.98
Control Class	4.802	11.070

 

Based on the table above researcher calculation, the score of experiment class Lo = 7.636 < Lt = 11.070 with n = 24 and control class Lo = 4.802 < Lt = 11.070 with n= 24, and real level 0.05. Cause Lo< Lt in the both class. So, H_a was accepted. It means that experiment class and control class were distributed normal. Researcher calculation, it can be seen in appendix 18.

The coefficient of F_count= 1.21 was compared with F_table. Where F_table was determined at real α 0.05, and the different numerator dk = N-1 = 24-1= 23 and denominator dk N-1 = 24–1 = 23. So, by using the list of critical value at F distribution is got F_0.05 =1.98. It showed that F_count1.21 <F_table 1.98. So, it can be concluded that the variant from the data the effect of critica reading strategies on reading report text at grade XI SMA Negeri 1 Siabu by using experimental and control class was homogeny.

b.   Normality and Homogeneity of Experimental and Control Class in Post-Test

      Table 18. Normality and Homogeneity in Post-Test

Class	Normality Test		Homogeneity Test
	x2count	x2table	fcount	ftable
Experimental Class	8.763	11.070	1.21 < 1.98
Control Class	7.042	11.070

 

Based on the table above, the score of experimental class Lo = 8.765 < Lt = 11.070 with n = 24 and control class Lo = 7.042 < Lt = 11.070 with n = 24, and real level 0.05. Because Lo< Lt in the both class, it means H_a was accepted. It meant that experiment class and control class were distributed normal. Researcher calculation, It can be seen in appendix 21.

The coefficient of F_count= 1.21 was compared with F_table. Where F_table was determined at real α 0.05, and the different numerator dk = N-1 = 24-1 = 23 and denominator dk N-1 = 24-1 = 23. So, by using the list of critical value at F distribution is got F_0.05 =1.21. It showed that F_count1.21<F_table1.98. So, the researcher concluded that the variant from the data of the students’ reading comprehension at IX  grade of SMAN 1 Siabu in experimental and control class was homogenous. The calculation of the data can be seen on the appendix 21.

 

 

2.    Hypothesis Test

After calculated the data of post-test, researcher has found that post-test result of experimental and control class is normal and homogenous. The data would analyzed to prove the hypothesis. It used formula of t-test. Hypothesis of the research was “critical reading strategies has significant effect on reading report text at IX grade of SMAN 1 Siabu”. The calculation can be seen on the appendix 23 and 24. The result of t-test was as follow:

 Table 19. Result of T-test from the Both Averages

Pre-test		Post-test
tcount	ttable	tcount	ttable
-1.07	1.678	13.38	1.678

 

The test hypothesis have two criteria. First, if t_count<t_table, H₀ is accepted. Second, t_count>t_table, H_a is accepted. Based on researcher calculation in pre test, researcher found that t_count -1.07while t_table1.678 with opportunity (1 –α ) = 1 - 5% = 95% and dk = n₁ + n₂ – 2 = 24 + 24 – 2 = 44. Cause t_count<t_table(-1.07 <1.678), it means that hypothesis H_a was rejected and H₀ was accepted. So, in pre test, the two classes were same. There is no difference in the both classes. But, in post test, researcher found that t_count13.38 while t_table1.678 with opportunity (1 –α ) = 1 - 5% = 95% and dk = n₁ + n₂ – 2 = 24 + 24 – 2 = 44. Cause t_count>t_table(13.38 > 1.678), it means that hypothesis H_a was accepted and H₀ was rejected. The calculation can be seen on the appendix 23. In this case, the mean score of experimental class by using Critical Reading Strategies 81.91 and mean score of control class was 71.87 that was taught by using conventional strategy. So, there was the significant effect of Critical Reading Strategies on Reading Report Text at Grade XI SMAN 1 Siabu

D.    Discussion

Based on the related findings, the researcher discussed the result of this researcher and compared the related findings. It also discussed with the theory that has been stated by the researcher. First, Determining Main Ideas Strategy[1] showed that the experimental group got 70.3. Second, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC)[2] showed that the experimental group got 56.64 for the mean score of pretest. Determining Main Ideas Strategy pre-test result was higher than Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) result. Third, Critical Reading Strategies[3] showed that the experimental group 60.5 for the mean score of pre-test. The last, STAD (Student Team Achievement Division)[4] showed the experimental group got 56.64. Critical Reading Strategies pre test result was higher than STAD (Student Team Achievement Division) result. Then, Determining Main Ideas Strategy, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Critical Reading Strategies pre test result was higher than STAD (Student Team Achievement Division).

Then, for the post-test result, Determining Main Ideas Strategy [5] got the experimental class’ score was 81.15. Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC),[6] got the experimental class’ score was 80.95, and Determining Main Ideas Strategy was higher than Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC). STAD (Student Team Achievement Division),[7] got the experimental class’ score was 80.5, and Critical Reading Strategies [8] got the experimental class’ score was 75.47, and STAD (Student Team Achievement Division) was higher than Critical Reading Strategies. Then, Determining Main Ideas Strategy, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) and STAD (Student Team Achievement Division) post test result was higher than Critical Reading Strategies result. Beside, the researcher got the mean score for experimental class after using Critical Reading Strategies was 81.91 and was the highest score among the related findings.

from the description, it can be seen that the highest mean score of post-test of the experimental group was gotten by researcher where the mean score of post-test was 81.91 and the lowest  mean score of post test was gotten by CRS   in her thesis where the mean score of post-test 75.47. So, among the mean score of post-test, the mean scores have increased than pre-test. Where, for the researcher result, the mean score of post-test was passed the standardization where the standardization mark is 75.

Based on the result, the researcher has got the significant effect of using Critical Reading Strategies, so have the researcher who mentioned in related finding.  Determining Main Ideas Strategy[9] found that t₀ was higher than t_t (32.35>2.000). Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC)[10] found that t₀ was higher than t_t (6.98>2.021). STAD (Student Team Achievement Division)[11] found that t₀ was higher than t_t (1.71>1.67). Critical Reading Strategies [12] found that t₀ was higher than t_t (0.244>0.217). From the description, t-test result from Determining Main Ideas Strategy, was highest between Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC) and STAD (Student Team Achievement Division) result and t-test result from Critical Reading Strategies was lowest among them. Beside, the researcher also found that t₀ is higher than t_t where t₀ was 1.679 and t_t was -1.07 (1.679 > -1.07). Where, the researcher result of t-test was the highest among the related findings result. So, the result of t-test of Critical Reading Strategies highest than the result t-test of related findings. It can be seen that among the researchers, the using of Critical Reading Strategies gave the effect to students’ reading report text especially at grade XI SMA N 1 Siabu where it is suitable with the theory from Muhammad Ali Nasrollahi, Pramela Kris N. Krishnasamy and Noorizah Mohd Noor, Critical Reading Strategies helps students to read their textbooks and various reading passage systematically and critically.[13] It means that theory has been proved where the students can think critically and use their higher order thinking elements to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate a text, they need to understand it, which can be difficult when they are reading complicated material.[14]So, Critical Reading Strategies has given the significant effect to the researcher that has been done by researcher or the other researcher who mentioned in related findings.

from the result of the research that is previously stated, it was proved that students of the experimental group who were taught reading report ext by using Critical Reading Strategies got better result than the control group that were taught reading report text by using conventional strategy.

 

 

 

 

E.     Limitation of the Research

The researcher found the threat of this research as follow:

1.      The students needed more time for answering the test.

2.      There were some of students that were noisy while teaching and learning process. So, it can disturb the concentration of the others.

3.      It was also a possibility that some of students were not too serious in answering the pre-test and post-test. It may caused by the test, because they knew before that the test would not influence their score in school. It made them answer the test without thinking hard and the answer of the test was not pure because they did not do it seriously.

---

[1] Rafika Sa’adah Siregar, The Effect of Determining Main Ideas Strategy On Students’ Reading Comprehension at Grade VIII SMP Negeri 5 Padangsidimpuan in Academic Year 2015/2016, Unpulished Thesis, Padangsidimpuan: Faculty and Teacher Training, STAIN PAdangsidimpuan, 2016.

[2] Lonni Nur Iffah Nasution, The Effect of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC)  Strategy on Students’ Reading Comprehension at XI Grade of MAN 1 Padangsidimpuan in Academic Year 2014/2015, Unpulished Thesis, Padangsidimpuan: Faculty and Teacher Training, STAIN PAdangsidimpuan, 2015.

[3] Ermita Harianja, The Influence of Critical Reading Strategies Mastery On Students Reading Comprehension at English Aducation Study Program State Collage for Islamic Studies Padangsidimpuan in Academic Year 2011/2012, Unpulished Thesis, Padangsidimpuan: Faculty and Teacher Training, STAIN Padangsidimpuan, 2012.

[4] Khoridah, The Effect of STAD (Student Team Achievement Division) On Students’ Reading Comprehension at Grade VIII N 5 Padangsidimpuan in Academic Year 2014/2015, Unpulished Thesis, Padangsidimpuan: Faculty and Teacher Training, STAIN PAdangsidimpuan, 2015.

 

 

[5]Rafika Sa’adah Siregar, The Effect of Determining Main Ideas Strategy, Op.Cit.,…

[6] Lonni Nur Iffah Nasution, The Effect of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Op.Cit.,…

[7]Khoridah, The Effect of STAD (Student Team Achievement Division), Op.Cit.,…

[8] Ermita Harianja, The Influence of Critical Reading Strategies, Op.Cit.,…

[9] Sa’adah Siregar, The Effect of Determining Main Ideas Strategy, Op.Cit.,…

[10] Lonni Nur Iffah Nasution, The Effect of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Op.Cit.,…

[11] Khoridah, The Effect of STAD (Student Team Achievement Division), Op.Cit.,…

[12] Harianja, The Influence of Critical Reading Strategies, Op.Cit.,…

 

[13] Moh Mohammad Ali Nasrollahi, Pramela Kris N.Krishnasamy and Noorizah Mohd Noor Journal, “Identifying the Critical Reading Strategies Employed by Iranian EFL Learners,” Volume 5, No. 2223-4934 E and 2227-393X Print 2015, p. 360.  

 

[14]Ibid. p. 360.