24 TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION IN NARRATIVE TEXT BY USING CHARACTER MAP STRATEGY TO THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP AZZAWIYAH TANJUNG BATU Riska Amalia UIN Raden Fatah Palembang amaliarizka619@yahoo.com Abstract: The objectives of this study were to find out whether or not there was a significant improvement before and after the treatment on the eighth grade students’ reading comprehension scores of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu by using Character Map Strategy and to find out whether or not there is a significant difference on the eighth grade students who were taught by using Character Map Strategy and those who were not. In this study, the researcher used Quasi Experimental Design using pretest-posttest nonequivalent groups design. There were 72 students taken as sample. Each class consisted of 36 students from VIIIa as experimental group and class VIIIb as control group. In collecting the data, test was used. The test was given twice to both experimental and control groups, as a pretest and posttest. To verify the hypotheses, the data of pretest and posttest were analyzed by using paired sample t-test and independent sample t-test on SPSS program. The findings showed that the p-output from paired sample t-test (Sig2-tailed) was 0.000 which was lower than 0.05 and t-value 11.931 was higher than t-table with df35= (2.0301). The result of p-output from independent sample t-test was 0.003 which was lower than 0.05 and the t-value 3.062 was higher than t-table with df=70 (1.9944). It means that teaching reading comprehension in narrative text by using Character Map Strategy had significant effect on the students’ reading comprehension scores. Keywords: Character Map Strategy, Narrative Text, Reading Comprehension. Introduction Patel and Jain (2008, p.20) state that English as a foreign language has a very complex system of vowels. Lauder (2008, p.12) says that much of the world’s communications are done in English. Kyzykeeva (2006, p.1) states that reading is the most important academic language skill for foreign language students. One of the four skills of English is reading that is defined as a constructing process of meaning interacted among reader’s prior knowledge, information, and context. According to Anderson (2003, p. 2) reading is an essential skill for learners of English. Schoenbach, Greenleaf and Murphy (2014, p. 9) mention: Reading is not a straight forward process of lifting the words off the page In this study the researcher will focus on narrative text. Reading is one of difficult skills to learn besides writing skills. Harley (2014, p.241), states that unlike speaking and listening, reading and writing are clearly not easy to learn. From all kinds of the texts, narrative text is often found in national examination (Depdiknas, 2006, p. 1). Narrative text is a kind of genre mailto:amaliarizka619@yahoo.com 25 aimed to entertain, to gain and hold the reader’s interest in a story. Oakhil, Cain, and Elbro (2015, p. 92) say that narrative text are usually fiction, i.e. made up. Leinhardt, Beck, and Stainyon (2009. P. 70) state that students appear to have difficulty in identifying the main story of the text and are limited in their ability to connect events into causal chains. Practically, there were difficulties in comprehending narrative reading texts. The difficulties were stated by teacher English of Eighth grade level of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. First, the students lacked of vocabulary so that they had difficulty to find the meaning from the sentence. Second, the students were unable to comprehend what the narrative reading text was about. Third, the teacher of English at this school was still using the general study especially when she thought reading skill. The technique usually used by teacher is the teacher read the text and asked the students read the text by themselves, found difficult word and translated into Bahasa Indonesia and gave the exercise to students. One teaching strategy that could help the students in reading subject is Character Map strategy. Tarihoran (2000, p. 4) states that Character is the center of conflict and the story itself; they will get more attention from the writer and reader. Based on the background above, the problems of this study are formulated in the question: 1) Is there any significant improvement before and after the treatments on the eighth grade students’ reading comprehension achievement between the students who are taught by using Character Map Strategy at SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu, Ogan Ilir?, 2) Is there any significant difference on the eighth grade students’ reading comprehension achievement of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu, Ogan Ilir between the students who are taught by using Character Map Strategy and those who are not? Concept of Character Map Strategy According to Tama (2007, p. 318), Character Map Strategy is a strategy that helps students better comprehend what they read and helps students recognize story structure. They learn to organize the text and develop an analysis based on knowledge. There are two meanings for the word character. (1) The person in a work of fiction and (2) the characteristics of a person. According to McCormack (2010, p. 170), character is a person in a story, poem, or play, occasionally, it is an animal or object given human attributes. The Advantages of the Character Map Strategy 26 Through Character Map Strategy, the students will understand specifically about characters of the text and also help the teacher to keep their students’ attention to the text or the story. According to Kim (2008, p. 105) there are some advantages of using Character Map Strategy: Help students understand the concept of the text through character, Develop students’ ability to make responses to characters, Give opportunity to use the language creatively, Develop students’ ability in expressing their own ideas, opinions, feelings on the issues related to characters. The Procedures of Character Map Strategy In the process of using character map, according to Kim (2008, p. 118), teachers must implement the procedures as follows: Establish the purpose of the Character Map Strategy, Discuss the main component of characterization, how a character acts, and how others view and treat the character, Discuss how characters impact and are impacted by other elements of literature, e.g., setting, characters, and plot, provide students with a character map graphic organizer and model how to use it, as students read, have them complete the character map. Research Method The method used in this study was quasi experimental method. In this study, the researcher used the pre-test post-test non equivalent groups design. This design, one of the most commonly use quasi experimental designs in educational research, is such naturally assembly groups as intact classes or samples which may be similar (Cohen, Manion & Morison, 2007, p. 283). Model of the pre-test post-test non equivalent groups design is as follows: O1 X O2 Experimental group --------------------- O3 O4 Control group Where, O1 is the pretest of the experimental group, O2 is the posttest of the experimental group, O3 is the pretest of the control group, O4 is the posttest of the control group, X is the treatment in experimental group by using Character Map Strategy, --- is dashed line (Non random). 27 Population The population of this study was all students in the eighth grade of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. There were 108 students which are divided into three classes. Those were VIIIa, VIIIb, and VIIIc. Each class consisted of 36 students. Sample In this study, the writer took sample by using purposive sampling. The sample of the study is VIIIa as experimental group, VIIIb as control group. Technique for Collecting the Data Pretest purpose of giving pretest to the students was to know the students’ ability in learning reading comprehension before implementing Character Map Strategy. Posttest, the aim of giving posttest to the students was to measure students’ ability in reading comprehension after implementing the Character Map Strategy. Findings In distribution of frequency data, score, frequency, and percentage were analyzed. The scores were got from; (1) pretest scores in control group; (2) posttest scores in control group; (3) pretest scores in experimental group; (4) posttest scores in experimental group. Students Pretest Scores in Control Group From the result of the test in control group it showed that in the pretest the lowest score was 45 and the highest score was 72.5, there were two students (5.6%) who got 45, three students (8.3%) got 47.5, two students (5.6%) got 50, one student (2.8%) got 52.5, one student (2.8%) got 55, three students (8.3%) got 57.5, seven (19.4%) got 60, one student (2.8%) 62.5, six students (16.7%) got 65, six students (16.7%) got 67.5, two students (5.6%) got 70, two students (5.6%) got 72.5. Table 14 shows distribution of frequency scores in pretest control group. Table 3 Distribution of Data Frequency on Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 45 2 5.6 5.6 5.6 47.5 3 8.3 8.3 13.9 28 50 2 5.6 5.6 19.4 52.5 1 2.8 2.8 22.2 55 1 2.8 2.8 25.0 57.5 3 8.3 8.3 33.3 60 7 19.4 19.4 52.8 62.5 1 2.8 2.8 55.6 65 6 16.7 16.7 72.2 67.5 6 16.7 16.7 88.9 70 2 5.6 5.6 94.4 72.5 2 5.6 5.6 100.0 Total 36 100.0 100.0 Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group In the posttest of control group, there were one student (2.8%) got 47.5, one student (2.8%) got 52.5, four students (11.1%) got 55, two students (5.6%) got 57.5, five students (13.9%) got 60, five students (13.9%) got 62.5, two students (5.6%) got 65, three students (8.3%) got 67.5, five students (13.9%) got 70, one student (2.8%) got 72.5, five students (13.9%) got 75, one student (2.8%) got 77.5, one student (2.8%) got 82.5. Table 18 shows the score distribution of the posttest in the control group. Table 4 Distribution of Data Frequency Students’ Posttest in the Control Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 47.5 1 2.8 2.8 2.8 52.5 1 2.8 2.8 5.6 55 4 11.1 11.1 16.7 57.5 2 5.6 5.6 22.2 60 5 13.9 13.9 36.1 62.5 5 13.9 13.9 50.0 65 2 5.6 5.6 55.6 67.5 3 8.3 8.3 63.9 70 5 13.9 13.9 77.8 72.5 1 2.8 2.8 80.6 29 75 5 13.9 13.9 94.4 77.5 1 2.8 2.8 97.2 82.5 1 2.8 2.8 100.0 Total 36 100.0 100.0 Students’ Pretest Scores in Experimental group The result of pretest showed that the lowest score was 40.00 and the highest score was 67.50. Table 18 shows the distribution of frequency pretest in experimental group. Table 5 Distribution of Data Frequency Students’ Pretest in Experimental Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 40 2 5.6 5.6 5.6 45 3 8.3 8.3 13.9 47.5 2 5.6 5.6 19.4 50 1 2.8 2.8 22.2 52.5 5 13.9 13.9 36.1 55 7 19.4 19.4 55.6 57.5 3 8.3 8.3 63.9 60 6 16.7 16.7 80.6 62.5 4 11.1 11.1 91.7 65 2 5.6 5.6 97.2 67.5 1 2.8 2.8 100.0 Total 36 100.0 100.0 Table 12 shows that in the pretest, there were two students (5.6%) who got 40, three students (8.3%) got 45, two students (5.6%) got 47.5, one student (2.8%) got 50, five students (13.9%) got 52.5, seven students (19.4) got 55, three students (8.3%) got 57.5, six students (16.7%) got 60, four students (11.1%) got 62.5, two students (5.6%) got 65, one student (2.8%) got 67.5. 30 Students’ Posttest Scores in Experimental Group The result of test after the treatment (posttest) in experimental group showed that the lowest score 57.5 and the highest score 85. In the posttest, there was one student (2.8%) who got 57.5, six students (16.7%) got 60, two students (5.6%) got 62.5, three students (8.3%) got 65, one student (2.8%) got 67.5, seven students (19.4%) got 70, one students (2.8%) got 72.5, five students (13.9%%) got 75, three students (8.3%) got 77.5, four students (11.1%) got 80, two students (5.6%) got 82.5, one students (2.8%) got 85. Table 20 shows the distribution of frequency posttest in experimental group. Table 6 The Distribution Frequency Posttest in the Experimental Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 57.5 1 2.8 2.8 2.8 60 6 16.7 16.7 19.4 62.5 2 5.6 5.6 25.0 65 3 8.3 8.3 33.3 67.5 1 2.8 2.8 36.1 70 7 19.4 13.9 55.6 72.5 1 2.8 8.3 58.3 75 5 13.9 13.9 72.2 77.5 3 8.3 8.3 80.6 80 4 11.1 11.1 91.7 82.5 2 5.6 5.6 97.2 85 1 2.8 2.8 100.0 Total 36 100.0 100.0 Descriptive Statistics In the descriptive statistics, the total of sample (N), minimum and maximum scores, mean score, standard deviation were analyzed. The scores were got from; (1) pretest scores in control group; (2) posttest scores in control group; (3) pretest scores in experimental group; (3) posttest scores in experimental group. Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group 31 Based On the analyzing data of the pretest in the control group, the writer found out the result of test which is the lowest score in the pretest was 45.00 and the highest score was 72.50 , the mean was 60.4167 and the standard deviation was 7.96196. The detailed description is described in table 22. Table 7 The result of Descriptive Statistic of the Pretest in Control Group N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.Deviation Pretest_control Valid N (listwise) 36 36 45.00 72.50 60.4167 7.96196 Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group Furthermore, based on analyzing data of the posttest in the control group, the writer found out that results of the test show the lowest score in the posttest was 47.50 and the highest score was 82.50, the mean score was 64.9306 and the standard deviation was 8.09511. The detailed description was described in table 23. Table 8 The result of Descriptive Statistic of the Posttest in Control Group N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.Deviation Posttest_control Valid N (listwise) 36 36 47.50 82.50 64.9306 8.09511 Students’ Pretest Scores in Experimental Group Based on analyzing data got from the pretest of the experimental group, the writer found out that the result of the test showed the lowest score in the pretest was 40.00 and the highest score was 67.50, the mean score was 55.2083 and the standard deviation was 6.90173. The detailed description is described in table 24. Table 9 The result of Descriptive Statistic of the Pretest in Experimental Group N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.Deviation Pretest_experiment Valid N (listwise) 36 36 40.00 67.50 55.2083 6.90173 32 Students’ Posttest Scores in Experimental Group After describing the descriptive statistic of the pretest experimental group, the writer described the posttest in the experimental group. Based on the analyzing data got from the posttest of the experimental group, it was found that the results of the test show that the lowest score in the posttest was 57.50 and the highest score was 85.00, the mean score was 70.6944 and the standard deviation was 7.87426. The detailed description is showed in table 25. Table 10 The result of Descriptive Statistic of the Posttest in Experimental Group N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.Deviation Posttest_experiment Valid N (listwise) 36 36 57.50 85.50 70.6944 7.87426 Prerequisite Analysis In the prerequisite analysis, normality test and homogeneity test were analyzed. Normality Test In the normality test, the scores were got from; (1) students’ pretest scores in control group and experimental groups; and (2) students’ posttest scores in control and experimental groups. Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in Table 26. Table 11 Normality Test of Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups No Students’ Pretest N Kolmogorov Smirnov Sig. Result 1 Control Group 36 0.972 0.301 Normal 2 Experimental Group 36 0.761 0.609 Normal After the data obtained from the scores of the 36 students in control group and experimental group, it was found that the p-output 0.972 and 0.761. From the result of the p-output , it can be stated that the students’ pretest control and experimental groups were normal since they were higher than 0.05. 33 Students’ Posttest scores in Control and Experimental groups The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in Table 12. Table 12 Normality Test of Students’ Posttest and Scores in Control and Experimental Groups No Students’ Pretest N Kolmogorov Smirnov Sig. Result 1 Control Group 36 0.708 0.698 Normal 2 Experimental Group 36 0.746 0.633 Normal After the data obtained from the scores of the 36 students in control group and experimental group, it was found that the p-output was 0.708 and 0.746. From the result of the p-output, it can be stated that the student’ pretest control and experimental groups were normal since they were higher than 0.05. Homogeneity Test In measuring homogeneity test, Levene Statistics was used. Levene Statistics is a formula that used to analyzed the homogeneity data, it was found in SPSS program. The homogeneity test was used to measure students’ pretest scores in experimental and control groups, and students’ posttest scores in experimental and control groups. Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups Homogeneity test was used to find out whether the group was homogenous or not. The computation of homogenous used computation in SPSS 16. The result of homogeneity test of students’ pretest is figured out in table 13. Table 13 Homogeneity Test on Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups No Students’ Pretest N Levene Statistic Sig. F Result 1 Control Group 36 1.000 0.321 8.796 Homogenous 2 Experimental Group 36 Based on measuring homogeneity test of students’ pretest scores, it was found that the significance level was 0.321. From the result of the output, it can be stated that the 34 students’ pretest in control and experimental group was homogenous since it was higher than 0.05. Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Group Homogeneity test is used to find out whether the group was homogenous or not. The computation of homogeneity used computation in SPSS 16. The result of homogeneity test of students’ posttest is figured out in Table 29. Table 14 Homogeneity Test on Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups No Students’ Pretest N Levene Statistic Sig. F Result 1 Control Group 36 0.017 0.896 9.378 Homogenous 2 Experimental Group 36 Based on measuring homogeneity test, it was found that the significance level was 0.896. From the result of the output, it can be stated that the students’ posttest in control group was homogenous since it was higher than 0.05. Result of Hypothesis Testing In this result of hypothesis testing, paired sample t-test and independent sample t- test were used to measure the significant improvement and significant difference on students’ reading comprehension scores taught by using Character Map Strategy usually used by the teacher at SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. Measuring a Significant Improvement on Students’ Reading Comprehension In this result of hypothesis testing, measuring means significant improvement is presented. Result Analysis of Paired Sample T-test from Students’ Pretest to Posttest Scores in Experimental Groups 35 Table 15 Result Analysis of Paired Sample T-test from Students’ Pretest to Posttest Scores in Experiment Groups Using Character Map Strategy at SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu Paired Sample t-Test Ha T Df Sig. (2- tailed) 11.931 35 0.000 Accepted Based on the table analysis, it was found that the p-output is 0.000 with df=35 (2.0301), and t-obtained= 11.931. It can be stated that there is a significant improvement from students’ pretest to posttest scores in experimental group taught using Character Map Strategy since p-output is lower than 0.05. It can be stated that the Null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected, and the Alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. Measuring a Significant Difference on Students’ Reading Comprehension In this result of hypothesis testing, measuring means significant difference was presented. Table 16 Result analysis of Independent sample t-test from Students’ Posttest Scores in Experimental and Control Group Using Character Map Strategy and Teacher’s Method at SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu Independent sample t-Test Ho Ha T Df Sig.(2-tailed) 3.062 70 0.003 Rejected Accepted From the table analysis, it was found that the p-output was0.003 and the t-value was 3.062. It can be stated that there was significant difference on students’ reading comprehension scores taught by using Character Map Strategy since p-output was lower than 0.05 and the t-value was higher than t-table (df 70= 1.9944). So, it was concluded that the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. 36 Discussion Based on the findings above, some interpretations were made as follows: After conducting the research, it was found that there was a significant improvement from students’ pretest to posttest scores in experimental and control group from the result of Paired Sample T-test analysis. In other words, students’ reading comprehension achievement in experimental group improved after they were being taught by using Character Map Strategy. Meanwhile, students’ reading comprehension achievements in control group also improved but not as significant as the experimental group. From the result, it could be stated that the students in experimental and control group can be proceed to do this research. In other words, the researcher want to know there was a significant different from students’ posttets in experimental and control group after the treatment in experimental group and it was found that there was a significant difference between the students’ posttest score of control group who are taught by the English teacher of the SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung batu and the experimental group were taught by the researcher by using Character Map Strategy. At the beginning, the researcher had conducted the pretest in both control and experimental. After the students’ pretest scores obtained from control and experimental groups, the researcher chose VIIIb as a control group and VIIIa as a experimental group. It was because the students’ scores in control group were higher than the students’ scores in experimental group. It was also proved by the mean of pretest in VIIIb which was higher than VIIIa. It could happen because the students of VIIIa seemed bored in doing the test. They were lazy to read the providen texts in the test. So, they answered the questions without comprehending the texts. The researcher found that the students faced difficulties before the treatment in experimental group. The problem were the lack of students’ motivation in reading English text, the students got difficulty to identify the character of the narrative text, the students had poor vocabulary, and they could not understand the content of the narrative text. The last, some of the students got difficulties in comprehending the text. To solve these problems, the researcher conducted Character Map Strategy to help students in teaching and learning of narrative reading comprehension. When the researcher did the treatment in experimental group, there were a significant improvements through Caharacter Map Strategy after 10 meetings. Finally, based on the result in the research, Character Map strategy was successfully applied to the eighth grade students of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. It can be interpreted that the strategy for teaching narrative reading comprehension. It was also 37 supported by two previous studies Novi Kasari (2014) and Indoman Chairina (2011) who states that this strategy is one of effective strategies that can be applied by the teacher in teaching English reading. In addition, the researcher would like to say that there was a significant improvement on students’s narrative reading comprehension an experimental group taught by using Character Map Strategy. There was a significant difference on student’s reading comprehension in narrative text achievement between the students who were taught by using Character Map Strategy and those who are not. Therefore, the teacher of English can use Character Map Strategy in teaching and learning process to improve the students’ narrative reading achievement. Conclusion There are some conclusion of this research referred to the findings and interpretattion presented in the previous chapter. First, based on the result of pretest to posttest, Character Map Strategy significantly improved students’ reading comprehension score to the eighth grade students of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. Second, there was significant difference on students’ reading comprehension score to the eighth grade students who were taught by using Cahracter Map Strategy and those who were taught by strategy that usually used by the teacher of SMP Azzawiyah Tanjung Batu. Therefore, it can be inferred that the teaching reading comprehension in narrative text by using Character Map Strategy can be considered as one of alternative strategy to be used. 38 REFERENCES Anderson, J. N. (2003). Scrolling, clicking, and reading comprehension tp ESL/EFL learners. The Reading Matrix, 5(2), 143-154. Retrieved from http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/ anderson/article.pdf Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research method in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Chairina, Indoman. (2011). Using Character Map strategy to improve reading comprehension to the Eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 33 Palembang (Undergraduate thesis). Sriwijaya University, Indralaya, Indonesia. Cresswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitaive and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Departemen Pendidikan nasional. (2006). KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan pendidikan). Jakarta, ID: Pusat Penelitian Pendidikan. Harley, T. A. (2014). The psychology of language: From data to theory (4th ed.). New York, NY : Barron’s Educational Series. Kasari, Novi. (2014). Teaching reading comprehension using story map strategy to the Eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 2 Sembawa (Undergraduate thesis). Institut Agama Islam negeri Raden Fatah, Palembang, Indonesia. Kim, A Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., &Wei, S. (2008). Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105-118. Kyzykeeva. (2006). “Teaching Reading in an EFL Classroom”Nerald Kasu Magazine, No.2. Lauder, Allan. (2008). The Status and the Function of English in Indonesia: A Review of Key Factors. Makara: Sosial Humaniora. Volume. 12. No.1. pp 9-20 McCormack, Rachel L and Pasquqrelli, Susan L. (2010). Teaching Reading. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Oakhil, J., Cain, K., & Elbro, C. (2015) Understanding and teaching reading comprehension. New York, NY: British Library Patel, M.F. & Jain, P.M. (2008). English language teching. Jaipur, IN: Sunrise Publisher & Distributor. Schoenbach, R., Greenleaf, C., & Murphy, L. (2014). Reading for understanding:How Reading apprenticeship improves discliplinary learning in secondary and collage classrooms. San Fransisco, CA: WestEd Tama, M. C., & Haley, A. M. (2007). Guiding reading and writing in the content areas: Practical strategies. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/ 39 Tarihoran, E.M. (2000). An analysis of Nathaniel Hawthornes Novel The Houseof the Seven Gables in themes, characters, and structure (Undergraduate thesis). University of Sriwijaya, Inderalaya, Indonesia.