THE USE OF DIRECTED READING THINKING ACTIVITY STRATEGY THROUGH LESSON STUDY ACTIVITY TOWARD STUDENTS’ READING COMPERHENSION Suardi & Geri Eka Rahmawati Suardisalbon01@gmail.com Universitas Cokroaminoto Palopo Abstract This thesis aimed at finding out the application of Directed Reading Thinking Activity strategy in improving the students’ reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMPN 2 Palopo. This research applied pre-experimental design and it was conducted for four meetings through lesson study activity in treatment process. The population of this research is 272 students. In determining the sample, the researcher used random sampling technique to choose sample and took class IIA consisted of 30 students. The instrument used to collect the data was narrative text. To collect the data the researcher used SPSS version 20. The researcher concluded that the application of Directed Reading Thinking Activity Strategy can improve students’ reading comprehension. It is proven by the significant difference between the students’ mean score in pretest and posttest. In pretest, the students’ mean score is 71.33 and the students’ mean score in posttest is 80.40. The researcher also finds that the P-value is 0.00 and the α I s 0.05, therefore P< α (0.00< 0.05). It is proven that the null hypothesis (H 0) is rejected and alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. It means that used directed reading thinking activity strategy can improve students’ reading comprehension. Keywords: Directed Reading Thinking Activity Strategy, Narrative Text, Lesson Study, Reading Comprehension. 146 mailto:Suardisalbon01@gmail.com INTRODUCTION Reading is one of four skill in learning English. Reading is a complex process which involves interaction between the reader and the language and ideas of the text. Reading can help anybody to get much knowledge. In addition, reading can help the ability of an individual or group to organize a visual form and understand the meaning of the text. Through reading, someone can get new information or from the text that they read before. Therefore, people who want to expand their knowledge, they have to usually do reading something like textbook, article, newspaper, magazine, novel and many more. Reading without comprehension or understanding is not reading. Many of students can pronouns word fluently but being asked what they have just read, they are unable to respond. Many of students just read the text without knowing what the text about. Everyone can read, but they do not necessarily understand. There are three level in reading comprehension, they are: Literal comprehension level, Interpretative comprehension level and Critical comprehension level. The researcher found that the students of SMPN 2 Palopo still have low comprehension in reading and they are not too active in the class. Therefore, the researcher used literal comprehension as the level to teaching reading. The researcher used Directed Reading Thinking Activity and also known as DRTA strategy to improve students reading comprehension. Directed Reading Thinking Activity is a strategy, which can involve students’ cognition because they should predict the content and and then reading to confirm or refute their prediction. Directed Reading Thinking Activity strategy helps strengthen reading, critical thinking skills and can involve student’s participation. They have to be creative to guess text content. This strategy encourages students to be active and thoughtful readers, enhancing their comprehension. 147 Lesson study is learning strategies conducted by a group of teachers. In the use of Directed Reading Thinking Activity, Lesson Study also can make the teaching process be more effective. It requires teachers and other educators to work collaboratively to strengthen a given lesson until it has been refined as much as possible and then teach it to get powerful data about how well the lesson works. Lesson Study helps experienced as well as inexperienced teachers to learn. Because, through the processes of joint planning, joint observation, joint analysis we have to imagine learning together, we get to see aspects of pupil learning through the eyes of others as well as our own and we compare actual learning observed in the research lesson with the learning we imagined when we planned it. This forces us to become conscious of things we would normally not be conscious of either because we would filter it out or because it would be dealt with through our tacit knowledge system (Dudley, 2011:5) Based on the same explanation above, the researcher is interested in conducting research entitled “The Use of Directed Reading Thinking Activity Strategy through Lesson Study Activity Towards Students’ Reading Comprehension at the Eighth Grade of SMPN 2 Palopo”. READING COMPREHENSION 1) The Definition of Reading Comperhension Oakhill, Cain &Elbro (2015:1) state that, reading comprehension is an important thing not only for understanding a text, but also for broader learning, success in education, and employment. The reading comprehension skill is even important for our social lives. Reading comprehension is a complex task, which requires the orchestration of many different cognitive skill and ability. Stoller , Anderson, Grabe, and Komiyama (2013:8) state that, comprehension is the ultimate goal of all reading; that is, the ability to understand a text underlies all reading tasks. 148 Its mean that comprehension include all off the goal in reading. We are not just reading the text but we also understand the meaning of the text that we raed. Al – Odwan (2012:3) state that, reading comprehension is a process that requires how to decode through the development of an extensive repertoire of sight words, learning the meanings of vocabulary words encountered in the texts, and learning how to abstract meaning from text. It represents how well readers understand literal comprehension which concentrates on explicit meaning and inferential comprehension which concentrates on implicit meaning in the reading text. Rasinski and Brassell (2008:17) categorize comperhension into the three level, the explanation are as follows : a) Literal Comprehension Level It is the lowest of the level and simplest form of locationg information in texts because the information is stated directly in the text. Question assesing literal comprehension skills examines how well students can identify and understand information that is directly stated in a text. In this level, the abilities needed by the readers are; knowledge of word meanings; recall of the details directly stated or paraphrased in own words; understanding of grammatical clues subject, pronoun, verb, conjuction, and so forth. b) Interpretative Comprehension Level Is the level understanding the ideas and information not explicitly stated in the passage. The abilities needed in the level are; reason with information presented to understand the author’s tone purpose and attitude; infer factual information, main idea, comparison, cause effect relationship that no explicitly stated in the passage ; summarization of the story content. c) Critical Comprhension Level It is the level of analyzing and personally reacting to the information presented in the passage, In this level, the abilities needed are ; personally reacting to information in a passage indicating meaning to the reader and ; analyzing the quality of written symbol of information 149 in the terms of some standards. The readers must be able to differentiate the text, whether it is important or meaningful for them or not and whether it is fact or just opinion. Based on the explanation above, the researcher can conclude that comprehension is a process in which the reader can know the meaning of the text by interacting with the text. without comprehension, reading would be empty and meaningless. In this research, the researcher used literal comprehension level as the level to teaching reading. DIRECTED READING THINKING ACTIVITY According to Yazdani (2015:2), the DRTA is a strategy that guidesstudents in asking questions about a text, making predictions, and then reading to confirm or refute their predictions. In fact, DRTA provides the teacher an opportunity to guide students to think like good readers do by anticipating, predicting, and then confirming and modifying their ideas with the story. Bachtiar and Barus (2011:2) state that, Directed Reading Thinking Activity is a strategy in which student are guided through reading, making predictions, rereading, confirming, or readjusting predictions. The Directed Reading Thinking Activity can be one alternative technique used by teachers in teaching reading comprehension. Since reading is an active process, the students must be active in doing the reading. Based on the some definition above, the researcher concludes that DRTA is an effective strategy for teaching reading comprehension because it helps students set reading purposes by making prediction, read more actively and enthusiastically, and remember more information from what they have read. 150 a. The Purpose of Directed Reading Thinking Activity According to Glass and Zygouris (2006:1) there are seven purpose of Directed Reading Thinking Activity. The purposes are follow; to encourage readers to be more aware of the strategies they use to interpret text; to help students understand the reading process; to develop prediction skills; to stimulate thinking and develop hypotheses about text which aid interpretation and comprehension; to increase understanding of the purposes and effects of the structures and features of particular text; to increase curiosity about particular texts and text- types; and to encourage students to listen to the opinions of others and modify their own in light of additional information. Accroding to Gerhardt (2009:1), the purpose of Directed Reading Thinking Activity strategy is that students will be able to make predictions about the plot of a text. This metacognitive strategy teaches students to use textual facts to support predictions about the future. By having purpose for their reading, students develop their reading and thinking processes. As a teacher, you will model for students how the text will help them make predictions for future events. Based on the explanation above, the researcher can conclude that the main purpose of Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA) strategy are the students will be able to make prediction about the plot of a text, and the teachers will be able to teach the students to use textual facts to support predictions about the future. THE CONCEPT OF LESSON STUDY a. The Definition of Lesson Study Dudley (2011: 2) state that, Lesson Study is a highly specified form of classroom action research focusing on the development of teacher practice knowledge.Lesson study involves groups of teachers collaboratively planning, teaching, observing and analysing learning and 151 teaching in ‘research lessons’. They record their findings. Over a cycle of research lessons they may innovate or refine a pedagogical approach which will be shared with others both through public research lessons, and through the publication of a paper outlining their work. Easton (2009:2) state that, lesson study is a potent embedded peer‐to‐peer professional learning strategy. It requires teachers and other educators to work collaboratively to strengthen a given lesson until it has been refined as much as possible and then teach it to get powerful data about how well the lesson works. In a colloquium after the lesson is taught, the teacher (who can be anyone in the lesson study group) reflects on the lesson first, and then the other members of the lesson study group share data they collected during the lesson. Lesson study groups make a decision about whether to revise the field‐tested lesson and teach it again or simply apply what they have learned to another lesson. Bush (2009: 4) state that, lesson Study is a professional learning process. It works because it focuses on the learning and progressmade by children as their teachers develop specific pedagogic techniques designed to improve a particular aspect of teaching and learning that they have identified within their subject area. Hiebert et al in Cerbin and Kopp (2006:1) state that, lesson study is a teaching improvement and knowledge building process that has origins in Japanese elementary education. In Japanese lesson study teachers work in small teams to plan, teach, observe, analyze, and refine individual class lessons, called research lessons. Based on the definition above, the researcher concludes that lesson study is a group of teachers or lecturers who are together in planning, delivering, observing and discussing to their lesson that they are going to to teach. a. The Steps of Applying Lesson Study 152 According to Hurd and Licciardo-Musso. (2005:4-6), there are four steps in applying Lesson study, the steps are follows: 1) Plan the Lesson, we began our planning by brainstorming a list of lessons we had taught in the past that addressed main idea and supporting details. 2) Teach the Research Lesson, once a lesson is developed, the next step is to select a member of the lesson study group to teach the lesson. Because the lesson plan is planned collaboratively, the success of the lesson rests with all of the planning team, not just the volunteer teacher. The additional focus on student thinking and performance also alleviates a focus on the classroom teacher. 3) Debrief the Lesson, following the lesson, each observer takes time to privately reflect on the data collected during the lesson and organize the information to share in the debriefing discussion. The observing members of the planning team consider their data in reference to the lesson goals and hypotheses, and select significant observations to share in the discussion. 4) Draw Conclusions, at the end of the debriefing discussion, the team addresses the implications for instruction from the research lesson. Based on the steps above, the researcher conclude that lesson study is a collaborative activity where all of the steps of applying lesson study is doing by group of teachers from making plan, debrief the lesson and draw conclusions. b. The Benefits of Lesson Study Easton (2009:2) state that, there are eight benefits of lesson study, they are as follow: 1) The teacher can understand why lesson study is important as a way to strengthen teaching and learning in schools, especially those that are low performing. 2) The teacher can understand the role data plays in lesson study and how to collect data during lesson study. 3) The teacher can know how to do lesson study themselves. 4) The teacher can know ways to vary lesson study, including writing lessons and then testing them through lesson study. 5) The teacher can know Florida’s approach to lesson study and how lesson study fits with other initiatives. 6) The teacher can know other professional learning activities related to lesson study. 153 7) The teacher can plan how to implement lesson study in their own environments. 8) The teacher can plan how to connect with each other and follow‐up to this workshop electronically and in‐person as they initiate lesson study within their own professional learning communities. Based on some point above, the researcher can conclude that the benefits of lesson study is to facilitate teachers in planning teaching because lesson study involving several teachers to provide feedback to other teachers. RESEARCH METHOD This research applied pre-experimental research method. It involved of group of students with pre-test and post-test design. The design of this research is: Pre-test Treatment Post-test O1 X O2 O1 = Pre-test is the test given to the students to measure their reading skill before giving treatment. X = Treatment is given to the students after pre-test. O2 = Post-test is the test given to the students to measure their reading skill after giving treatment. FINDINGS The classification of the frequency and percentage of the result students’ score in the pretest and posttest can be seen in the table below: The percentages of students’ score in pretest No Classification Score Pretest Frequency Percentage % 154 1. Excellent 95-100 0 0 2. Very good 86-94 3 10 3. Good 76-84 4 13.3 4. Average 66-75 18 60 5. Fair 56-65 3 10 6. Poor 36-55 2 6.6 7. Very Poor 0-35 0 0 Total 30 100 Table 4 shows the percentages of students’ score in pretest. In pretest, there is no student get excellent and very poor. There are 3 (10%) students classified as very good, 4 (13.3%) students classified as good, 18 (60%) students classified as average, 3 (10%) students classified as fair and 2 (6.6%) students classify as poor. It means that the students had poor achievement in reading comprehension. The percentages of students’ score in posttest No Classification Score Posttest Frequency Percentage % 1. Excellent 95-100 0 0 2. Very good 86-94 13 43.3 3. Good 76-84 7 23.3 4. Average 66-75 10 33.3 5. Fair 56-65 0 0 6. Poor 36-55 0 0 7. Very Poor 0-35 0 0 Total 30 100 Table 5 shows the percentages of students’ score in posttest. In the posttest there are 13 (43.3%) students classified as very good, 7 (23.3%) students classified as good and 10 (33.3%) students classified as average, there are no of the students get score excellent, fair, poor and very poor. It mean that generally the students’ achievement in reading comprehension had improver after give treatment, although there are no students get excellent. 155 The Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Students’ Present and Posttest After calculating the result of the students’ pretest, the mean score and standard deviation of both groups are presented in following table: Table 6. The mean score and standard deviation of pretest and posttest Type of Text N Mean Score Standard Deviation Standar Error Mean Pretest 30 71.33 9.211 1.681 Posttest 30 80.40 8.636 1.576 The data above (table 5) shows that the mean score of the stPudents’ in pretest is 71.33 and the mean score of the students’ in posttest is 80.40. Standard deviation of pretest is 9.211 and posttest is 8.636. It shows that the mean score of posttest higher than pretest. It means that using directed reading thinking activity strategy in teaching narrative text can improve the students’ reading comprehension. The Ttest Value of Students’ Reading Comperhension The hypothesis test by using inferential statistic. In this case, the researcher uses ttest (testing of significance) for independent simple test, which a test to know the significance difference between the result of students’ mean score in pretest and posttest. Assumes that the level of significance (α) = 0.05, the only thing which is needed: the degree of freedom (df) = N = 1, where N = 27, than ttest is present in the following table: Table 7. The P-value of students reading comprehension. Variable P-Value (α) Y1 X Y2 0.00 0.05 From the analysis, the researcher concludes that there is a significant difference between pretest and posttest in teaching reading comprehension by using fix up strategy. The result of statistical analysis for level of significance (α) = 0.05) with degree of freedom (df) = N = 1, 156 where N = 27, df = 26. The probability value is smaller than α (0.00< 0.05), it is indicated that the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted and null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. It means that directed reading thinking activity is effective in teaching reading comprehension at SMPN 2 Palopo. DISCUSSION In this research, the researcher used pre-experimental design, the researcher presented the discussion of the data. This section presents the result of data analysis that the researcher did the observation in four times. It aims to know the increase of students’ in reading comprehension by using Directed Reading Thinking Activity through lesson study activity. First meeting Before teaching in the class, the researcher did the first plan with the team of observers to discuss about what should the teacher do in the class such as like how to manage the time, what kind of the text would get students interest, how to manage the students when they are not paying intention in the class, how to motivated the student to interest with the lesson and to make students be more active and understood the lesson by using the technique that researcher used in the teaching learning process. In the first meeting the researcher introduces the team and herself in front of the class. After that the researcher asked the students to get ready for the lesson. The observer also starts to observe the students’ activity while the teaching process. Then the researcher explain the material about using DRTA strategy and explain about Narrative Text, after that the researcher distribute the question about narrative text that is written on the paper to all of students. The researcher gives a hint of one paragraph of the text so that it can help the students to make their prediction. After first meeting end, the researcher and the team of observers did the first reflection (see). In this reflection the researcher and the team of observers discuss about students activity in the class before. The observers found that there are a lot of students who still not paying 157 attention when the lesson start, some of them still not understand with the material, and few of them just keep silent in their seat. The observers found that there are a lot of students who still not paying attention when the lesson start, some of them still not understand with the material, and few of them just keep silent in their seat. The observer said beside of students’ activity, time management is very lees. After the observer reveal what are they found in the class, they also give some suggestion to the researcher. They are said that the researcher should explain the material slowly, when there are students who not paying attention the researcher have to ask them what their problem with the material so the researcher can solve the problem. For the students who keep silent in their seat, the researcher has to more motivate them. About time management, the observers give some suggestion. When the students are given task in the class, the researcher should given a limit so there is still timing to reflect back their work. Second meeting The researcher did the second plan with the team of observers, in this plan discuss about the next material that would be presented the researcher in the class. The observers suggest that the text have to easy to understand and not to long and the researcher have to good in manage the time. If there are students who not paying attention, the researcher have to ask what their problem. In the second meeting, the researcher discuss about the previous lesson in order to strengthen students’ understanding of the material. Just like in the first meeting, the researcher distribute the questions about narrative text that is written on the paper to all of students and make an order to the students to ask if they are not understand or still confused. And then the students making their prediction according the question, the researcher give instruction to the students if they know the answer they have to rise their hand and then answer the question. After the second meeting end, the researcher and the team of observers did the second reflection (see). In this reflection the researcher and the team of observers discuss about students activity in the class before. The observers found that there are student who not brave 158 to rise their hand to answer the question, the observers suggest that the observer have to explain to the students that it’s fine if their answer is wrong because the researcher will help you to fixed your answer. And then when the students do their work some of them cheated their friends answer, the researcher have to reprimand the students and say it’s better if its your own work. Third meeting The researcher did the third plan with the team of observers; in this plan discuss how to make the students to become active in answering the questions from the teacher. The observers suggested that the researcher have to motivate them before the lesson start and give the reward for students who bravely raise their hand and answer the question. In the third meeting, the researcher give some motivate to the students and then give the same work to the students with different title. The students make their prediction according the question that given by the researcher, and then they are read carefully the text to fix their prediction. After they fixed their prediction, the researcher asked them to raise their hand to answer the question, in this third meeting the students start to be brave to raise their hand maybe because they had familiar with the lesson and the researcher. The researcher also gives extra point to the students who have answered the question. They are able to answer the question from the teacher about the material, its shows that their reading understanding is rise. After the third meeting end, the researcher and the team of observers did the third reflection (see). In this reflection the researcher and the team of observers discuss about students activity in the class before. The observers found that, in the third meeting just few of students who not paying attention compared with the previous meeting. The observers suggest that the researcher only need to strengthen students’ understanding of reading material by questioning them one by one with random questions related to the reading material. Fourth meeting 159 The researcher did the fourth or the last plan with the team of observers; in this plan discuss how to make the students to become more understanding with the reading material. In the last meeting before students entering the lesson, the researcher strengthens the students about previous lesson. After that the researcher present the narrative text to the students makes their prediction according the question that given by the researcher, and then they are read carefully the text to fix their prediction. After they fixed their prediction, the students and the researcher answer the question and the students check their own work. After gave some assessment to the students, the researcher give reflection the students by asking them one by one about the text that they read before with random question. After the fourth meeting end, the researcher and the team of observers did the second reflection (see). In this reflection the researcher and the team of observers discuss about students activity in the class. The observers found that, the students became more active in answers the question from the researchers. Almost of them had become brave to rise their hand, the researcher can handle the students to paying attention while the lesson. The students became brave to asking their problem with the researcher, in the previous meeting they just asking their seatmate. The students also mastered the material that given to them, its proved by they can answer the random question from the researcher. In this meeting almost all of students became more active, focus, able to answering the question and enjoying the learning narrative text by using directed reading thinking activity strategy. According to Glass and Zygouris (2006:1) state that directed reading thinking activity engages students in a step-by-step process that guides students through understanding and thinking about text. DRTA also promotes active comprehension. This metacognitive strategy teaches students to acquire and activate their own purposes for reading and develops their reading and thinking processes. Based on the result of the test shows that mean score between the student the pretest and the posttest were significantly different. In pretest mean score was 71.33 with standard 160 deviation 9.211 and in the posttest mean score was became 80.40 with standard deviaton 8.636. The comparison table shows the percentages of students’ score in pretest. In pretest, there is no student get excellent and very poor. There are 3 (10%) students classified as very good, 4 (13.3%) students classified as good, 18 (60%) students classified as average, 3 (10%) students classified as fair and 2 (6.6%) students classify as poor. In the posttest there are 13 (43.3%) students classified as very good, 7 (23.3%) students classified as good and 10 (33.3%) students classified as average, there are no of the students get score excellent, fair, poor and very poor. Based on the explanation above, the researcher found that the use of directed reading thinking activity strategy in teaching narrative text can develop students’ reading comprehension. This strategy not only develop students’ reading comprehension but also improve students’ participation, confident, motivation, this strategy is able to train the way of thinking of students and also improve students focused when reading. Before applying DRTA strategy, there are only few of students who focus to follow the lesson, but after giving DRTA technique almost all of them became more active, focus and participate in the learning process. Directed reading thinking activity strategy not only improves students’ reading comprehension but also improve the independence of students in answering the question. The researcher used narrative text because narrative text has many references and was easy to learn for Junior High School and also it is interesting to read. Because of that the researcher chosen narrative text to teach reading at the eighth grade through directed reading thinking activity. Based on the result of data analysis, the researcher found that the use of directed reading thinking activity strategy through lesson study activity in teaching narrative text can improve the students’ reading comprehension at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 2 Palopo REFERENCES 161 Al-Odwan, T. A. A. H. 2012. The Effect of The Directed Reading Thinking Activity through Cooperative Learning on English Secondary Stage Students’ Reading Comprehension in Jordan. International Journal of Humanities And Social Vol. 2 No. 16. The World Islamic Sciences and Education University. Amman, Jordan. Bachtiar and Barus, D. R. 2011. Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension Through Directed Reading Thinking Activity. Bush, C. 2006. Improving Subject Pedagogy through Lesson Study: Handbook for Leading Teacher in Mathematics and English.Unpublished Thesis. Crown: Departement for Education, University of Chicago. Dudley, P. 2011. Lesson Study: Handbook. University of Cambridge. Easton, L. 2009. An Introduction to Lesson Study. OH: National Staff Development Council, Oxford. Gerhardt, B. 2009. Directed Reading Thinking Activity (DRTA).Journal of Clinical Reading Research and Programs. Glass, C. and Zygouris-Coe, V. 2006 Directed Reading Thinking Activity. Florida. Hurd, J and Lori Licciardo-Musso, L. 2005. Lesson Study: Teacher-Led Professional Development in Literacy Instruction. Vol. 82 No. 5. The National Council of The Teacher of English Oakhill, J., Cain, K., Elbro, C. 2015. Understanding and Teaching Reading Comprehension. Routledge. New York. Rasinski, T and Brassel, D. 2008. Comperhensiontthat work: Taking Students Beyond Ordinary Understanding to Deep Comprehension. Corrine Burton. Huntington. Rock, C. T., Wilson, C. 2005.Improving Teaching through Lesson Study.Teacher Education Quartely. Stoller, L. Fredericka., Anderson, J. Niel., Grabe, W., Komiyama, R. 2013.Instructional Enchancment to Improve Students’ Reading Abilities.United State. Yazdani, M. M. 2015. The Explicit Instruction of Reading Strategies: Directed Reading Thinking Activity vs. Guided Reading Strategies. ELT Department, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran. 162