IMPROVING STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION BY USING KNOW-WANT-LEARN (KWL) STRATEGY AT SMP DHARMA WANITA MEDAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54367/kairos.v2i2.727Abstract
This study is aimed at finding out the impacts of the use of Know-Want-Learn strategy in improving the reading comprehension among seventh grade students of SMP Dharma Wanita Medan in the academic year of 2016/2017. The study was action research in two research cycles. In the study, the writer collaborated with the English teachers and the students. The data of this study were qualitative in nature supported by quantitative data. Qualitative data were obtained from the results of classroom observation and collaborators’ discussion. Quantitative data were obtained from pre-test and post test results. The instruments for collecting the data were observation, interview, and the pre-test and posttest. The data were in the form of field notes, interview, and the scores of the students’ pre-test and posttest. A t-test was used for the analysis of the quantitative data.The results of the two cycles show that the use of Know-Want-Learn Strategy is effective to improve the students’ reading comprehension. It is supported by the qualitative data which show that (1) Know-Want-Learn Strategy can help the teacher to increase the students’ comprehension of the text; (2) Know-Want-Learn strategy can help the students to preview the text, assess what they have learned after reading, and attract their interest in reading. The finding is also supported by the quantitative data. The mean of the students’ reading comprehension scores improves from 31 in the pre-test to 58 in the post-test. From the results above, it can be concluded that the use of Know-Want-Learn strategy can improve students’ reading comprehension. ÂReferences
Anderson, Neil. 2003 “ What is Reading†? In Nunan, David. Practical English Language Teaching. New York: Mcgraw-hill.
Arthur, C. 2007. Reading Comprehension Strategies, Theories, Interventions and technologies. New York: University of Memphis.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Principle Language and Teaching. New York: Longman.
¬¬________ 2004. Language assessment Principles and Classroom Practices. San Francisco: Longman.
Burns, et. al. 1984.Teaching in Today’s Elementary School (3rd ed). New York: Longman.
Burke, E. 2005. Reading Strategies to Guide Learning. Rapid City: Black Hills Special Service Cooperative (BHSSC).
Hien, T.T.T. 2009. Why is action research suitable for education. Journal of Science, Foreign Languages.
Carr, E. & Ogle, D. (1987). K-W-L Plus: A Strategy for Comprehension and Summarization. Journal of Reading, 30 (7), 626-631.
Cook, M. 2004. A guide to Curriculum Planning in Reading. Department of Public Instruction. South Webster Street.
Grabe, W and Stoler, F.L. 2002. The Practice of ELT (3rd edition). New York: Longman.
Harmer, J. 1995. The Practice of English Language Teaching. United Kingdom: Longman.
Mikulecky, B.S, and Jeffries, L. 2007. Reading Power. United States of America: Pearson Education.
Nunan. D. 1999. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Article of The Correlation between Reading Comprehension. Boston, U.S.A: Heile Publisher
Ogle, D.M. 1986. K-W-L: A Teaching Model That Develops Active Reading of Expository Text. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564–570.
_______ . 2008. Reading Comprehension Strategies for Independent Learners. New York: The Guildford Press
Ros, C. and Vaughn, S. (2002) Strategies for Teaching Students with Learning and Behavior Problems. New York: Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Snow, C., Chair. (2002). Reading for Understanding (Towards an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension). Pittsburgh: RAND.
Westwood, P. S. 2008. What Teacher Need to know about Reading and Writing Difficulties. Victoria: Acer Press.
