Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No.1, Mei 2016 20 THE EFFECT OF LEARNING CELL TOWARDS STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY IN READING Teddysetiadi SMP Negeri 4 Lingsar, Lombok Barat, NTB Setiadi21@gmail.com Abstract The aims of this research was to find out whether learning cell has an effect toward students’ reading ability at the eight year students of SMPN 4 Lingsar Lombok Barat in The Academic Year of 2016/2017. This research was an experimental research consists of four classes as population and one class taken as sample by using purposive sampling technique. In sustaining the research result, the data was collected by using a reading test in the form of multiple choices and creativity questionnaires. Then, the data were analyzed by using statistic and descriptive analysis. Based on The data analysis, it can be found that the average score of experimental group was 61.72 for the reading test meanwhile for the creativity mean score was 14.05. To know the correlation level the researcher used r-test in which the result was 1.059 in other word it has a strong correlation level. Then to know the significance correlation of the result, the score was identified by using t-test, the result shows that t0 (t-obtain) > tt (t-table) or 17.738 > 1.69. Thus, it can be concluded that learning cell has a significant effect toward the students’ reading at SMPN 4 Lingsar Lombok Barat in The Academic Year of 2016/2017. Key Words: Learning Cell, Creativity, and Reading Abstrak Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah sel belajar memiliki efek terhadap kemampuan membaca siswa pada tahun delapan siswa SMPN 4 Lingsar Lombok Barat dalam tahun akademik 2016/2017. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian eksperimental terdiri dari empat kelas sebagai penduduk dan satu kelas diambil sebagai contoh dengan menggunakan teknik sampling dilakukan secara purposif. Dalam mempertahankan hasil penelitian, data yang dikumpulkan oleh menggunakan tes membaca dalam bentuk multi pilihan dan memanfaatkan angket kreativitas. Kemudian, data dianalisis oleh menggunakan analisis deskriptif dan statistik. Berdasarkan pada analisis data, ia dapat ditemukan bahwa nilai rata- rata-kelompok eksperimental 61,72 untuk tes membaca sementara untuk platform kreativitas berarti skor adalah 14.05. Untuk mengetahui tingkat korelasi peneliti digunakan r-test dalam yang hasilnya adalah 0.444 dalam kata lain korelasi yang kuat. Kemudian untuk mengetahui maksud korelasi hasil, skor adalah dikenalpasti oleh menggunakan t-test, hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa t0 (t-memperoleh) > tipe tt (t-tabel) atau 2.889 > 1,69. Dengan itu, ia dapat menyimpulkan bahwa sel pembelajaran telah sangat berpengaruh terhadap siswa membaca di SMPN 4 Lingsar Lombok Barat dalam tahun akademik 2016/2017. Kata Kunci: Sel Pembelajaran, Kreativitas, dan membaca INTRODUCTION Reading is a basic need as a skill which is very important for all learner, whether they are a native speaking people or as a foreign learner. It is one of the important elements in language skill. Reading can be the bridge for someone to know something important or some knowledge. Reading can be the connection between the reader and the writers’ idea. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No.1, Mei 2016 21 The students who mastered reading are able to determine the main idea in the text, and also the students able to find out the messages which is the author want to express. Beside that, the students are able to catch out more information (explicit and implicit) from reading, and know more about the words. At the other side the students able to conclude a gist of some texts and understand the references. Based on the researcher’s observation at SMPN 4 Lingsar on 12 February 2016, when the researcher saw the teacher giving the students some texts for examine the students ability in reading, the researcher found that the students could not distinguish between the main idea and supporting sentence in reading text. For example, when the teacher tell the students to find out the main idea, instead they wrote the tittle as the main idea. As the result, they got difficulties in identifying the explicit and implicit information of the text. The same things also happened when the teacher asked them about the reference word and making inferring, most of the students are confused how to solve the problem given by the teacher. Then the student’s activities in teaching and learning process were low, it was proved by fact that the students just listening, writing and doing the teacher’s offering. And if they could not answer the question, they will say they do not have the pen book or dictionary for a reason. Review of Related Literature Based on Johnson (2008: 3) Reading is a complex interaction between the text and the reader which is shaped by the reader’s prior knowledge, experiences, attitude, and language community which is culturally and socially situated. The Indicators of Reading Competence The processes ones go through when reading a novel are likely to be different from those ones use when we are looking for someone’s number in a telephone directory. The use of these different skills will frequently depend on what we are reading for. Harmer (1983: 201) states that several skills in reading that students need to acquire as follows: (a) Identifying the topic. Good readers are able to pick up the topic of a written. With the help of their own schemata they quickly get an idea of what is being talked about. This ability allows them to process the text more effectively as it progresses. (b) Predicting and guessing. Readers sometimes guess in order to try and understand what is being written, especially if they have first identified the topic. Sometimes they look forward, trying to predict what is coming; sometimes they make assumption or guess the content from their initial glance—as they try and apply their schemata to what is in front of them. Their subsequent reading helps them to confirm their expectations of what they have predicted. (c) Reading for general understanding. Good readers are able to take in a stream of discourse and understand the gist of it without worrying too much about the details. Reading for such ‘general’ comprehension means not stopping for every word, not analyzing everything that the writer includes in the text. A term commonly used in discussions about reading is skimming (which means running your eyes over a text to get a quick idea of the gist of a text). By encouraging students to have a quick look at the text before plunging into it for detail, we help them to get general understanding of what it is all about. This will help them when and if they read for more specific information. Gist readings are not lazy options. The reader has made a choice not to attend to every detail, but to use their processing powers to get more of a top-down view of what is going on. In contrast to reading for gist, ones frequently go to written text because we want specific details. Ones may read to the news, only concentrating when the particular item that interests us comes up. Ones may quickly look through a film review to find the name of the director or the star. In these cases ones almost ignore Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No.1, Mei 2016 22 all the other information until we come to the specific item ones are looking for. In discussions about reading this skill is frequently referred to as scanning. Sometimes ones read in order to understand everything ones are reading in detail. This is usually the case with written instructions or directions, or with the description of scientific procedure; it happens when someone gives us their address and telephone number and ones write down all the details. If ones are in an airport and an announcement starts with Here is an announcement for passengers on flight AA671 to Lima (and if that is where we are going), we listen in a concentrated way to everything that is said. Readers are able to see beyond the literal meaning of words in a passage, using a variety of clues to understand what the writer is implying or suggesting. Successful interpretation of this kind depends to large extent on shared schemata as in the example of the lecturer who, by saying to a student You’re in a non- smoking zone was understood to be asking the students to put her cigarette out. Besides, ones get a lot more from reading text than the word alone suggest because, as active participants, ones use own schemata together with own knowledge of the word to expand the pictures ones have been given, and to fill in the gaps which the writer seems to have left. RESEARCH METHODS This research was conducted to know the significant effect of learning cell toward student’s reading ability. This research design arranged to observe the validity of the result. The design of this research was experimental which was focused on the effect of learning cell for student’s reading ability, at second grade students of SMPN 4 Lingsar in the academic year 2016/2017. This research employed a quasi-experimental with one group post-test only. The test consists of 60 items, but after doing the validity test, there are 40 items which are valid and reliable. From the 40 items the researcher will use only 25 items considering the time allotment which the students of SMPN 4 Lingsar need to complete the answer are only 60 minutes. The researchers gives score 1 for correct answer and score 0 for the wrong answer. Meanwhile for the creativity test items, the researcher used Verbal Creativity Test which consist of 30 items and the final scores of this test was judged by using liker scale standard scoring in which the total score will be summed up and then divided by the total items times 100% so the final score was in the form of a percentages from 100. RESEARCH FINDING Once again, the aim of the study was to find out whether the Learning Cell has a significant effect or not towards Students’ Creativity in Reading at the Second Grade Students of MA SMPN 4 Lingsar in the Academic Year 2016/2017. Based on correlation statistical analysis of the students’ Creativity and their Reading achievement after being taught by Learning Cell, the researcher found that in the significant degree 0.5% the total r- count is 0.444 while r-table is 0.329. So r- count higher than r-table, it can be concluded that there was a significant effect Learning Cell towards Students’ Creativity in Reading at the Second Grade Students of SMPN 4 Lingsar in the Academic Year 2016/2017. Based on this findings, the researcher also concluded that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which stated that There is significant effect of Learning Cell towards students Creativity in Reading skill was accepted and the null hypothesis (Ho) which stated There is no significant effect of Learning Cell towards students Creativity in Reading skill was rejected. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS Conclusion Based on the statistical analysis on the students’ Creativity and their Reading achievement after being taught by Learning Cell, the researcher found that in Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No.1, Mei 2016 23 the significant degree 0.5% the total r- count is 0.444 while r-table is 0.329. So r- count higher than r-table, it can be concluded that there was a significant effect Learning Cell towards Students’ Creativity in Reading at the Second Grade Students of SMPN 4 Lingsar in the Academic Year 2016/2017. Suggestions The teacher should support the students’ expectation about Reading.The teacher should encourage the students to arouse their Creativity in studying more and more. The students of SMPN 4 Lingsar should understand that their Creativity has a great impact on what they learned at school. REFERENCES Ammer, Christine. (1997). The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms. New York. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco; Jossey-Bass Publishers. Beebe, S. A., & Masterson, J. T. (2003). Communicating in small groups. Pearson Education Inc. Boston: Massachusetts. Brown, H. Douglas. (2003). Language assessment principles and classroom practice. San francisco, California: Longman.com Craft, A. (2002) Creativity in the Early Years. Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd. Freeman, L., & Greenacre, L. (2011). An examination of socially destructive behaviors in group work. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(1) p. 5-17. Graduate Outlook Survey (2010). University of Canterbury. Grellet, F. (1999). Developing Reading Skills. New York. Cambridge University Press. Guilford, J.P. 1978.Creativity: Its Measurement and Development. in Parnes and Harding, A Source Book for Creative Thinking. Harris R. (1998) Introduction To Creative Thinking. www.vittualsalt.com. Innovation and Goal – free Living – Stephen Shapiro. http”//www-24-27 innovation.com/innovationorcle.htn. Harmer, Jeremy. (1983). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition. UK. Cambridge University Press Harmer, Jeremy. (1998). How to Teach English. New York. Longman. Hoover, Katylee. (2008). Research Alignment for MM-H California Treasure. New York. Cambridge University Press. Hughes, Arthur. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers; Second Edition. New York. Cambridge University Press. Johnson, Andrew P. (2008). “Teaching reading and writing : a guidebook fortutoring and remediating students”. United States of America; British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available. Kagan, S.Dr. & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan Cooperative Learning. San Clemente. Kagan Publishing. Kothari, C. R. 1990. Research Methodology: Methodes & Techniques. Former Principla, Collage of Commerce University of Rajasthan, Jaipur (India): New Age International (P) Publisher. McKay, Penny. (2006). Assessing Yaoung Language Learner. United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press. Miller, S. (2005). Experimental Design and Statistics: Second Edition. London and New York. The Taylor & Francis e-Library. Moreillon,J. (2007). Collaborative Strategies for Teaching Reading Comprehension. United State of America. The American Library Association. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No.1, Mei 2016 24 Munandar, Sukarni Catur Utami. 2012. Creativity and education : a study of the relationships between measures of creative thinking and a number of educational variables in Indonesian Primary and Junior Secondary Schools. Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL Reading and Writing. New York. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Nunan, David. (1991). Language Teaching Methodology; a Textbook forTeachers. Sydney. Macquarie University; Prentice Hall International English Language Teaching. Okpara, Friday O. 2007. The Value of Creativity and Innovation in Entrepreneurship. Journal of Asia Entrepreneurship and Sustainability. Pearson, David, Dr.P. (1998). Essential Elements of Reading. The University of the State of New York. The State Education Departement. Rosen, M. (2010) Foreword to Born Creative