73

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-GAMES-TOURNAMENT
TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM
STUDENTS SELF-ESTEEM
(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik
S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)
A Thesis
By:
Izah Farhani
S 890908011
ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
GRADUATE S CHOOL
S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY
S URAKARTA
2010
i
ABS TRACT
IZAH FARHANI. The Effectiveness of Teams-Games-Tournament to Teach

Reading Viewed from Students Self-Esteem: An Experimental Study at the
Seventh Grade Students of SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of
2009/2010. Thesis. Surakarta: English Education Department Graduate School,
Sebelas M aret University of Surakarta. 2010.
This research is aimed at finding out whether: (1) Teams-Games-

Tournament is more effective than the lecture method to teach reading; (2)
students having high self-esteem have better reading skill than those having low
self-esteem; and (3) there is an interaction effect between teaching methods and
students self-esteem on the students reading skill.
The research was carried out at SM P Batik Surakarta in the academic
year of 2009/2010. The research method used was an experimental study. The
population was the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta in the
academic year of 2009/2010. The sample was taken by using cluster random
sampling. The techniques of collecting the data were a non-test (a questionnaire)
and a test technique (a reading test). The two instruments were valid and reliable
after both were tried-out. The data were analyzed by using multifactor analysis of
variance 2 x 2 and Tukey test.
Based on the result of inferential analysis of the data, there are some
research findings that can be drawn. First, Teams-Games-Tournament is more
effective than the lecture method to teach reading. Second, students who have
high self-esteem have better reading skill than those having low self-esteem.
Third, there is an interaction effect between teaching methods and students self-
esteem on the students reading skill.
Based on these research findings, it can be concluded that in this
experimental research Teams-Games-Tournament is an effective method to teach
reading at the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta.
It is hoped that the result of the study can be useful for teachers to
determine and select the suitable teaching method for their students so that they
can obtain an optimum result of reading achievement.
ii
APPROVAL
This thesis has been approved by the consultants to be examined by the

Board of Examiners of English Education Department Graduate School of Sebelas
M aret University, Surakarta.
Consultant I Consultant II
Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd.

NIP. 196212311988031009 NIP.195203071980031005
The Head of English Education Department

Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University of Surakarta
Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.

NIP. 196212311988031009
iii
BOARD OF EXAMINERS
This thesis has been examined by the Board of Thesis Examiners of English
Education Department Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University, Surakarta.
On
Board of Examiners Signature
1. Chairman :
Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M . Pd.
NIP. 196101241987021001 ....
2. Secretary :
Dr. Sujoko, M . A.
NIP. 195109121980031002 ....
3. Examiner I :
Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.
NIP. 196212311988031009 ....
4. Examiner II :
Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd.
NIP. 195203071980031005 ....
The Director of Graduate School The Head of Graduate School of

English Department
Prof. Drs. Suranto, M . Sc., Ph. D Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.

NIP. 195708201985031004 NIP. 196212311988031009
iv
PRONOUNCEMENT
This is to certify that I myself write this thesis, entitled The

Effectiveness of Teams-Games-Tournament to Teach Reading Viewed from
Students Self-Esteem (An Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade Students of
SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010). It is not a plagiarism
or made by others. Anything related to others work is written in quotation, the
source of which is listed on the bibliography.
If then this pronouncement proves incorrect, I am ready to accept any
academic punishment, including the withdrawal or cancellation of my academic
degree.
Surakarta, July, 2010
Izah Farhani
NIM : S 890908011
v
MOTTO
Verily, my prayer, my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allah
(Al-Anam: 162)
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writer would like to say alhamdulillaahirabbil aalamiin to Allah

who has given everything, so she can complete this thesis as a partial fulfillment
of the requirements for getting the graduate degree of Education in English.
The writer is aware that this thesis cannot be finished without other
peoples help. Therefore, she would like to express her special appreciation and
gratitude to:
1. The Director of Graduate School of Sebelas M aret University for giving her
permission to write this thesis.
2. The Head of the English Education Department of Graduate School who has
given her support and guidance for writing this thesis.
3. Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. and Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd., the first and the second
consultants, for their valuable guidance, advice, and feedback in writing this
thesis.
4. Sri Sumarni, S. Pd., the headmistress of SM P Batik Surakarta who has given
her permission to carry out the study in the school.
5. Her parents, siblings, sisters-in-law, and close friends by whom the writer has
been assisted and encouraged.
The writer realizes that this thesis is still far from being perfect. Therefore,
she will accept all constructive criticism. M ay this thesis be useful to increase the
quality of the education.
Surakarta, July, 2010
IF
vii
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-GAMES-TOURNAMENT
TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM
STUDENTS SELF-ESTEEM
(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik
S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)
A Thesis
By:
Izah Farhani
S 890908011
ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
GRADUATE S CHOOL
S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY
S URAKARTA
2010
0
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the S tudy

M astering English requires mastering the four language skills,
namely: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Reading is considered the
most important skill among the four language skills. Reading provides any
exposure to English. It also provides good model for English writing and
opportunities to study language and the way to construct sentences,
paragraphs, and texts. By reading, students can absorb a lot of information and
knowledge because much information can be gained from books, magazines,
newspapers, and bulletins. Simply, reading gives students many advantages.
Therefore, students must have an ability to comprehend texts. The
understanding of the text varies according to both ones knowledge of the
word and the purpose one has in reading. It also varies according to ones
knowledge of language and of text types. A reader has several possible
purposes for reading, and each purpose emphasizes a different combination of
skills and strategies. Reading emphasizes many criteria that define the nature
of fluent reading abilities, it also reveals the many skills, processes, and
knowledge bases that act in combination, and often in parallel, to create the
overall reading comprehension abilities. It is necessary to have adequate
understanding to suit a purpose since it is central to reading. Students need to
understand how texts work and what they do when they read, and they must
be able to monitor their own comprehension (Grabe and Stoller, 2002: 9-10).
However, many students have low reading skill which can be seen
from their achievement. They have difficulties to know the words in the text
and they have low understanding of the message from the text. The students
probably know the words but they dont know the meaning of the text. Some
students may know the meaning of the words or vocabularies of the text but
they cannot get the message of the text. Even, there are some students who
dont know the meaning of the text at all.
1
2
M ethod of teaching is one of the important factors in the teaching-

learning process. There are many kinds of methods. One of them is Teams-
Games-Tournament. Teams-Games-Tournament can be one among the kinds
of cooperative method suggested by experts for its superiority. Teams-Games-
Tournament is supposed to be appropriate to develop students reading skill.
Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is the first of the Johns Hopkins
cooperative learning methods (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/
learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).
Cooperative learning refers to a broad range of instructional methods
in which students work together to learn academic content. The use of
cooperative learning strategies results in improvements both in the students
achievement and in the quality of their interpersonal relationships.
Cooperative learning encourages students to discuss, debate, disagree, and
ultimately to teach one another. Cooperative learning has been suggested as
the solution for an astonishing array of educational problems: it is often cited
as a means of emphasizing thinking skills and increasing higher-order
learning; as an alternative to ability grouping, remediation, or special
education; as a means of improving race relations and acceptance of
mainstreamed students; and as a way to prepare students for an increasingly
collaborative work force (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-
155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).
M ost cooperative learning lessons can be characterized by the
following features: students work cooperatively in teams to master academic
materials; teams are made up of high, average, and low achievers; whenever
possible, teams include a racial, cultural, and sexual mix of students; and
rewards systems are group oriented rather than individually oriented (Arends,
1997: 111). Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 206-207) also mention the
characteristics of cooperative learning, as follows: heterogeneous (mixed)
groups; group tasks, usually either mastery or project work; rule of behavior is
all for one, one for all; group reward is shared equally by individual members.
3
Teams-Games-Tournament is one type of cooperative learning which

is easy to implement, involving the activities of all students without a
difference in status, involving the role of students as peer tutors and an
element of the game and reinforcement (http://dudy-adityawan.com/ education
/team-games-tournament-method-tgt). Learning activities designed to play in
TGT allow students to learn to relax in addition to cultivate responsibility
cooperation, healthy competition and the involvement of learning.
Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is a strategy usually used to
check for understanding information, for reviewing and test preparation
(http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/pdfs/w/ii/TeachingM asters.doc). Johnson (1996:
114) states that Teams-Games-Tournament technique requires student groups
to work cooperatively to rehearse information and/or skills before competing
in a tournament against other groups. Teachers assign tasks to be completed
collaboratively in groups, and eventually groups compete as teams against
other teams.
However, many teachers still apply lecture in teaching reading. The
activity in lecture is teacher-centered. Lecture encourages one-way
communication. Students just become the followers and depend on the teacher
during the teaching-learning process. In other words, lecture places students in
a passive rather than an active role. The information tends to be forgotten
quickly when students are passive.
Another factor influencing the learning process is affective domain.
Affective as stated by Brown (2000: 143) refers to emotion and feelings. It is
considered the emotional side of human behavior. Stern in Finch
(http://www.finchpark.com/arts/) notes that the affective component
contributes at least as much and often more to language learning than
cognitive skills. In recent years, the importance of affective factors has been of
interest in the field of language learning because of their high effects on
learning a foreign or a second language (http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/
andres.html).
4
Affective factors in reading can be attitude, motivation, self-esteem,

and self-actualization (Davies, 1995: 73). Brown in Aebersold and Field
(2000: 8) details several individual factors that influence language learning,
including self-esteem, inhibition, risk-taking, anxiety, and motivation. They
can be positive or negative factors. All of these factors operate in reading
classroom as well. For this reason, researchers call upon reducing anxiety and
inhibition and enhancing students motivation and self-esteem in the
classroom context.
Self-esteem is the evaluation which the individual makes and
customarily maintains with regard to himself; it expresses an attitude of
approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which an individual
believes himself to be capable, significant, successful, and worthy
(Coopersmith in Brown, 2000: 103). Such evaluation is built up through
repeated experiences of success and failure, other peoples impressions, and
the self-appraisals in relation to ideal selves.
Self-esteem is considered as one of the important affective factors
because success or failure of a person depends mostly on the degree of ones
self-esteem. Stevick in Finch (http://www.eslteachersboard.com/egibin/
articles/index.pl?page=3;read=949) states that success depends less on
materials, techniques, and linguistics analysis, and more on what goes on
inside and between the people in the classroom. Indeed, success is not
measured of how much one gains but of how satisfies he is with his work.
Hence, a person should put a high value for his performance and be confident
of his achievement because the judgments he makes are the drive for
mastering proficiency.
Self-esteem plays a crucial role in learning since it is the best
predictors of academic success. It appears that high self-esteem is both a cause
and a consequence of better academic grades (Biggs and Watkins, 1995: 75).
Dickinson also stresses the importance of self-esteem in language learning
(1996: 25). Littlewood (1998: 64) states that a study by Adelaide Heyde found
that self-esteem was associated with second language proficiency. It is the
5
most crucial aspect of the affective factors because all are related or caused by
self-esteem. Educators have long realized that self-esteem plays a crucial role
in learning. Students with high esteem forge ahead academically while those
with low esteem fall behind (Atwater, 1990: 155).
Learners with high self-esteem are less likely to feel threatened when
communicating in a strange language or in an unfamiliar situation. They may
also be more ready to risk making mistakes or projecting a reduced image of
themselves (Adelaide Heyde in Littlewood, 1998: 64). They expect to do well
in their accomplishments, try hard and try to be successful (Atwater, 1990:
155). M eanwhile, students with low esteem tend to expect the worst, exert less
effort on their tasks especially challenging and demanding ones and achieve
less success (Atwater, 1990: 155).
M any researchers agree upon the effect of teachers on building or
harming students self-esteem. Dornyei (2001: 31) suggests some strategies
for ESL/EFL teachers to create a supportive atmosphere in the classroom,
namely: establishing a norm of tolerance; encouraging risk-taking, and having
mistakes accepted as a natural part of learning; bringing in and encouraging
humor, and encouraging learners to personalize the classroom environment
according their taste.
To make the students achieve adequate skill in reading, the writer
applies Teams-Games-Tournament on the consideration that it can improve
the students reading skill and encourage students active role in the teaching-
learning process. She also considers the students self-esteem (high and low)
to know whether Teams-Games-Tournament is suitable for students who have
high self-esteem or those who have low self-esteem, and to know whether
lecture is suitable for students who have high self-esteem or those who have
low self-esteem.
Since students self esteem and the method of teaching applied by the
teachers are important factors in teaching reading, the writer is interested in
conducting a research entitled: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-
GAMES-TOURNAMENT TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM
6
STUDENTS SELF-ESTEEM (An Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade

Students of SMP Batik Surakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010).
B. Problem Identification
Dealing with the background of the study, there are some problems
that can be identified:
1. Why do the students tend to have low reading skill?
2. What factors cause low reading skill?
3. Does teacher professionalism affect students reading skill?
4. Does the technique or the method of teaching used by teachers influence
students reading skill?
5. Is Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) effective to teach reading?
6. Does the students self-esteem influence their reading skill?
7. Is it necessary to consider the method of teaching used in terms of the
students characteristics like, self-esteem?
C. Problem Limitation
The writer realizes that it is impossible to investigate all the problems,
therefore, the writer only limits the problems of the research which are
supposed to influence the students reading skill, namely: the methods used
by the teacher (Teams-Games-Tournament and lecture) and the students self-
esteem (high and low).
D. Problem S tatement
From the background of the study, problem identification, and
problem limitation, there are three problems that are formulated, as follows:
1. Is Teams-Games-Tournament more effective than lecture to teach reading?
2. Do students who have high self esteem have better reading skill than those
who have low self-esteem?
3. Is there any interaction effect between teaching method and students self-
esteem on the students reading skill?
7
E. Objective of the S tudy

This research is aimed to know the influence of teaching method and
students self-esteem on the students reading skill. Particularly, this research
is proposed to know whether or not (1) Teams-Games-Tournament is more
effective than lecture to teach reading; (2) students who have high self esteem
have better reading skill than those who have low self-esteem; and (3) there is
an interaction effect between teaching method and the student s self-esteem
on the students reading skill.
F. Benefit of the S tudy

Hopefully, from this study whether the method of teaching used can
increase students reading skill or not will be significantly known, so the
writer is able to decide the next step in teaching reading. If the self-esteem
also influences students reading skill, it is crucial to have better steps in
improving students self-esteem in order to have better competence in terms
of students who have high self-esteem.
The result of the study can inform the interaction between self-esteem
(high and low) and Teams-Games-Tournament toward students reading skill.
If there is interaction between them, it is necessary to consider the use of
Teams-Games-Tournament, which is appropriate to the students who have
high self-esteem or those who have low self-esteem. It is hoped that the result
of this study can help other researchers who conduct further research at the
same subject and can be reference.
8
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Description
1. Reading
a. Definition of Reading
Reading is a process whereby one looks and understands what has
been written (Williams, 1996: 2). It means that reading is a process of
obtaining meaning from written text. Reading is what hap pens when people
look at a text and assign meaning to the written symbols in that text. Reading
means reacting to a written text as a piece of communication (Wallace, 1996:
4). M eanwhile, Davies (1995: 1) states that reading is private. It is a mental, or
cognitive, process which involves a reader in trying to follow and respond to a
message from a writer who is distant in space and time. Because of this
privacy, the process of reading and responding to a writer is not directly
observable.
Reading is the process of perceiving and deriving meaning from what
has been written (Spolsky, 1999: 653). Reading is the process of combining
textual information with the information a reader brings to a text. In this view,
the reading process is not simply a matter of extracting information from the
text. Rather, it is one in which the reading activates a range of knowledge in
the readers mind that he or she uses, and that, in turn, may be refined and
extended by the new information supplied by the text. Reading is thus viewed
as a kind of dialogue between the reader and the text (Widdowson in Carrell,
et al., 1996: 56).
Reading is the way to get meaning (a message) from a text (Nuttal,
1996: 4 and 7). It means getting out of the text as nearly as possible the
message the writer puts into it. The kinds of assumption one makes about the
world depend on what he/she has got from his/her experiences. A useful way
of thinking about this is provided by schema theory. The schema is a useful
concept in understanding how to interpret texts. The purpose of reading is
8
9
actually grasping the meaning (the message) out from the text. One can do it if
he/she has schemata, the knowledge he/she has got from his/her experiences.
The success of interpretation depends on whether his/her schemata are
sufficiently similar to the writers or not. But the important thing here is that
the schemata are very useful to help him/her to understand and interpret the
text adequately.
Reading is comprised of word recognition and linguistic
comprehension (Catts and Kamhi, 2005: 25). The word recognition
component translates print into linguistic from, and the comprehension
component makes sense of the linguistic information. The process of
recognizing printed words is called as decoding. M eanwhile, the process of
understanding the message that the print convey is called as comprehension.
Therefore, reading involves the reader, the text, and the interaction between
reader and text. The text and the reader are the two physical entities necessary
for the reading process to begin. It is, however, the interaction between the
text and the reader that constitutes actual reading.
Reading is an interactive process, sociolinguistic process, involving a
text, a reader, and a social context within which the activity of reading takes
place (Bernhardt in Celce-M urcia, 2001: 154). In reading, an individual
constructs meaning through a transaction with written text that has been
created by symbols that represent language. The transaction involves the
readers acting on or interpreting the text, and the interpretation is influenced
the readers past experience, language background, and cultural framework, as
well as the readers purpose for reading.
b. What M akes a Reading Text Easy or Difficult

Generally, reading texts are easier if:
1) They contain simple language-the structures and vocabulary familiar to the
students
2) They are short
3) They contain short, simple sentences
10
4) They are clearly organized

5) They are factual
6) They are in standard English
7) The topic is concrete and familiar
8) There is support in the way of layout, titles, pictures, graphs, etc.
(Gower, et al., 1995: 95)
c. Ways of Reading
Grellet (1998: 4) mentions the main ways of reading, as follows:
1) Skimming: quickly running ones eyes over a text to get the gist for it.
2) Scanning: quickly going through a text to find a particular piece of
information.
3) Intensive reading: reading shorter texts, to extract specific information.
This is more an accuracy activity involving reading for detail.
4) Extensive reading: reading longer texts, usually for ones own pleasure.
This is a fluency activity, mainly involving global understanding.
Extensive reading is the practice of reading large amounts of text for
extended periods of time (Celce-M urcia, 2001: 198). Extensive reading
may play a role in developing the capacity for critical thinking (M ikulecky
and Jeffries, 2007: 3).
d. M odels of Reading
There are three main models of how reading occurs (Aebersold and
Field, 2000: 18) as follows:
1) Bottom-up
Reading is viewed as a process of decoding written symbols, working
from smaller units (individual letters) to larger ones (words, clauses, and
sentences (Nunan, 1998: 33). In other words, we use strategies to decode
written forms in order to arrive at meaning.
11
2) Top-down
Top-down theory argues that readers bring a great deal of knowledge,
expectations, assumptions, and questions to the text and, given a basic
understanding of the vocabulary, they continue to read as long as the text
confirms their expectations (Goodman in Aebersold and Field, 2000: 18).
3) Interactive
The interactive theories describe a process that moves both bottom-up and
top-down, depending on the type of the text as well as on the readers
background knowledge, language proficiency level, motivation, strategy
use, and culturally shaped beliefs about reading.
e. Purposes for Reading

In general, there are two reasons for reading as stated by Grellet
(1998: 4), namely: reading for pleasure and reading for information (in order
to find out something or in order to do something with the information the
reader gets).
Celce-M urcia (2001: 187) mentions four purposes of reading, as
follows:
1) To search for information
2) For general comprehension
3) To learn new information
4) To synthesize and evaluate information
f. Types of Reading Task

There are four types of reading tasks which have been identified from
the perspective of reading purpose (Enright, et al. in Qian, 2002: 519), as
follows:
1) Reading to find information or search reading.
Reading to find information involves locating factual information in a text
or a nonprose document (Guthrie in Qian, 2002: 519) and is the most
straightforward type of task among the four.
12
2) Reading for basic comprehension.

Reading for basic comprehension generally refers to comprehending a
subset of individual ideas mostly related to the thematic content or the
main idea of the text (Enright in Qian, 2002: 519).
3) Reading to learn.
Reading to learn involves the processing of more complex information,
such as causal relationships, comparisons and contrasts, and intentions
(Carver in Qian, 2002: 519). This type of task requires the reader to
reconstruct a coherent mental representation of the text based on the
various types of information the reader has found.
4) Reading to integrate information across multiple texts.
Reading to integrate information is the most challenging among the four
types. This type of task requires the reader to integrate information from
multiple sources, which may include prose, diagrams, charts, or other
forms of presentation (Goldman in Qian, 2002: 519).
g. Component Skills and Content Areas of Reading

Within the complex process of reading, six general component skills
and content areas of reading have been identified. They are as follows:
1) Automatic recognition skills: a virtually unconscious ability, ideally
requiring little mental processing to recognize text, especially for word
identification.
2) Vocabulary and structural knowledge: sound understanding of language
structure and a large recognition vocabulary.
3) Formal discourse structure knowledge: an understanding of how texts are
organized and how information is put together into various genres of text.
4) Content/word background knowledge: prior knowledge of text-related
information and a shared understanding of the cultural information
involved in text.
5) Synthesis and evaluation skills/strategies: the ability to read and compare
information from multiple sources, to think critically about what one
13
reads, and to decide what information is relevant or useful for ones

purpose.
6) M etacognitive knowledge and skills monitoring: an awareness of ones
mental processes and the ability to reflect on what one is doing and the
strategies one is employing while reading.
(Celce-M urcia, 2001: 154)
h. Fluent Readers
Good readers typically do all of the following:
1) Read rapidly for comprehension.
2) Recognize words rapidly and automatically (without seeming to pay any
attention to them).
3) Draw on a very large vocabulary store.
4) Integrate text information with their own knowledge.
5) Recognize the purpose(s) for reading.
6) Comprehend the text as necessary.
7) Shift purpose to read strategically.
8) Use strategies to monitor comprehension.
9) Recognize and repair miscomprehension.
10) Read critically and evaluate information.
(Grabe and Stoller in Celce-M urcia, 2002: 188).
i. M icro Skills for Reading

Brown (2001: 307) proposes fourteen skills the students of English as
a second or foreign language need to have in order to become efficient
readers, namely:
1) Discriminating among the distinctive graphemes and orthographic patterns
of English.
2) Retaining chunks of language of different lengths in short-term memory.
3) Processing writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit the purpose.
14
4) Recognizing a core of words, and interpret word order patterns and their
significance.
5) Recognizing grammatical word classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc.),
systems (e.g. tense, agreement, pluralization), patterns, rules, and elliptical
forms.
6) Recognizing that a particular meaning may be expressed in different
grammatical forms.
7) Recognizing cohesive devices in written discourse and their role in
signaling the relationship between and among clauses.
8) Recognizing the rhetorical forms of written discourses and their
significance for interpretation.
9) Recognizing the communicative functions of written texts, according to
form and purpose.
10) Inferring context that is not explicit by using background knowledge.
11) Inferring links and connections between events, ideas, supporting ideas,
etc., deducing causes and effects, and detecting such relations as main
idea, supporting idea, new information, given information, generalization,
and exemplification.
12) Distinguishing between literal and implied meanings
13) Detecting culturally specific references and interpreting them in a context
of the appropriate cultural schemata.
14) Developing and using a battery of reading strategies, such as scanning and
skimming, detecting discourse markers, guessing the meaning of words
from context, and activating schemata for the interpretation of texts.
Harmer (1998: 8) proposes the following skills in reading:

1) Reading for gist
2) Reading to extract specific information
3) Reading for detailed understanding
4) Reading for information transfer
15
Langan (2002: 582) mentions several important reading skills,

namely:
1) Understanding vocabulary in context
2) Summarizing the selection by providing a title for it
3) Determining the main idea
4) Recognizing key supporting details
5) M aking inferences
Burgess and Head (2005: 29-33) mentions a list of reading skills, as

follows:
1) Understanding the main ideas
2) Finding specific information and detail
3) Recognizing the writers attitude and opinion
4) Identifying the tone
5) Understanding implication
6) Identifying the purpose for which the text was written
7) Understanding text structure and organization
8) Understanding cohesion and coherence
9) Understanding the meaning of specific words in context
Reading involves a variety of skills. The main ones are listed below:
1) Recognizing the script of a language
2) Deducing the meaning and use of unfamiliar lexical items
3) Understanding explicitly stated information
4) Understand information when not explicitly stated
5) Understanding conceptual meaning
6) Understanding the communicative value (function) of sentences and
utterances
7) Understanding relations within the sentence
8) Understanding relations between the parts of a text through lexical
cohesion devices
16
9) Understanding cohesion between parts of a text through grammatical

cohesion devices
10) Interpreting text by going outside it
11) Recognizing indicators in discourse
12) Identifying the main point or important information in a piece of discourse
13) Distinguishing the main idea from supporting details
14) Extracting salient points to summarize
15) Selective extraction of relevant points from a text
16) Basic reference skills
17) Skimming
18) Scanning to locate specifically required information
19) Transcoding information to diagrammatic display
(Grellet, 1998: 4)
In addition, Brindley (1995: 18) mentions the micro-skills for

reading, as follows:
1) Understand literal and implied meaning.
2) Skim for gist
3) Scan to extract specific information.
4) Read for overall comprehension.
5) Decode meaning within reasonable time.
6) Interpret text for attitude and style.
Barret in Brown (1995: 85) and in Alderson and Urquhart (1996: xvi)
distinguishes five skills in reading, namely:
1) Literal comprehension
2) Reorganization
3) Inferential comprehension
4) Evaluation
5) Appreciation
17
j. Reading Strategies
Brown (2001: 306-310) proposes ten reading strategies, namely:
1) Identifying the purpose in reading
2) Using graphemic rules and patterns to aid in bottom-up decoding
(for beginning level learners
3) Use efficient silent reading techniques for relatively rapid
comprehension (for intermediate to advanced level)
4) Skimming the text for main ideas
5) Scanning the text for specific information
6) Semantic mapping or clustering
7) Guessing when you arent certain
8) Analyzing vocabulary
9) Vocabulary analysis
10) Distinguishing between literal and implied meaning
11) Capitalizing on discourse markers to process relationships
Grabe and Stoller (2002: 16) also propose sample reading strategies,
namely:
1) Specifying a purpose for reading
2) Planning what to do/what steps to take
3) Previewing the text
4) Predicting the contents of the text or section of text
5) Checking predictions
6) Posing questions about the text
7) Finding answer s to posed questions
8) Connecting text to background knowledge
9) Summarizing information
10) M aking inferences
11) Connecting one part of the text to another
12) Paying attention to text structure
13) Rereading
18
14) Guessing the meaning of a new word from context

15) Using discourse markers to see relationships
16) Checking comprehension
17) Identifying difficulties
18) Taking steps to repair faulty comprehension
19) Critiquing the author
20) Critiquing the text
21) Judging how well objectives were met
22) Reflecting on what has been learned from the text
k. Types of Classroom Reading Performance

The following are types of classroom reading performance as stated
by Brown (2001: 312):
1) Oral and silent reading
For students at the beginning and intermediate levels, oral reading can
serve as an evaluative check on bottom-up processing skills, double as a
pronunciation check, and serve to add some extra student participation if
the teacher wants to highlight a certain short segment of a reading passage.
For advance levels, oral reading has some disadvantages, namely: oral
reading is not a very authentic language activity; while one student is
reading, others can easily lose attention; and it may have the outward
appearance of student participation when in reality it is mere recitation.
2) Intensive and extensive reading
Silent reading may be subcategorized into intensive and extensive reading.
Intensive reading calls students attention to grammatical forms, discourse
markers, and other surface structure details for the purpose of
understanding literal meaning, implications, rhetorical relationship, and
the like. M eanwhile, extensive reading is carried out to achieve a general
understanding of a usually somewhat longer text, such as book, long
article, or essays, etc. M ost extensive reading is performed outside of class
time and for pleasure.
19
In conclusion, reading skill is a mental process to get meaning from

the text involving activating past experience, language background, and
cultural framework. It includes understanding main ideas, finding specific
information and detail, recognizing the writers opinion, identifying the
purpose for which the text was written, understanding text structure and
organization, and understanding the meaning of specific words in context.
2. Cooperative Learning
a. Definition of Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning is an approach to teaching that makes maximum
use of cooperative activities involving pairs and small groups of learners in the
classroom (Richards & Rodger, 2001: 192). Cooperative learning is group
learning activity organized so that learning is dependent on the socially
structured exchange of information between learners in groups and in which
each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated
to increase the learning of others (Olsen and Kagan in Richards & Rodger,
2001: 192).
Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 205) state that cooperative learning is the
term used to describe instructional procedures whereby learners work together
in small groups and are rewarded for their collective accomplishments. In
cooperative learning, the groups or teams typically number from four to six.
Their usual tasks are either to collectively learn or master content the teacher
has previously presented, or to complete a teacher-assigned project as a team.
Slavin in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis_ 2006.
pdf states that cooperative learning refers to instructional methods involving
small heterogeneous groups working together, usually toward a common goal.
He adds that this approach to learning involves changes to both task structure
and incentive structure. The task structure refers to the ways in which the
teacher or students set up activities designed to result in student learning
where a cooperative structure involves students working together to help one
another. The incentive structure moves away from a competitive one in many
20
classrooms to a cooperative one so that the success of one student is positively

related to the success of others.
Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Norman_
thesis_2006.pdf highlight the importance of how students interact, arguing
that it can affect learning, liking of school and other students, as well as self-
esteem. Abu and Flowers in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis
_ 2006.pdf add to this, stating that cooperative interactions provide students
with the skills needed for working with others outside of the school setting. As
Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis _
2006.pdf, point out, however, it is not enough to just put students in groups
and tell them to work together for cooperative learning to work. How such
groupings are structured will largely determine whether or not they will be
more effective that competitive or individualistic groupings. Cooperative
learning is important for creating inclusive classroom environments that meet
the needs of all students because it takes the heterogeneity into account,
encouraging peer support and connection. Given that most classrooms are
heterogeneous, it only makes sense to use an approach to teaching and
learning which accounts for this heterogeneity.
Cooperative learning refers to a broad range of instructional methods
in which students work together to learn academic content. Research
comparing cooperative learning and traditional methods has found positive
effects on the achievement of elementary and secondary students, especially
when two key conditions are fulfilled. First, groups must be working toward a
common goal, such as the opportunity to earn recognition or rewards based on
group performance. Second, the success of the groups must depend on the
individual learning of all group members, not on a single group product. In
cooperative learning, all can succeed because each has something unique to
contribute to the enterprise (Rivers, 1996: 78).
21
b. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning

All teaching models are characterized, in part, by their task
structures, their goal structures, and their reward structures (Arends, 1997:
110). Task structures refer to the way lessons are organized and to the kind of
work students carry out in the classroom. It encompasses whether the teacher
is working with the class or small groups, what students are expected to
accomplish as well as the cognitive and social demands placed on them as
they work to accomplish assigned learning tasks. Task structures differ
according to the various activities involved in particular teaching approaches.
For example, some lessons require students to sit passively while receiving
information from a teachers talk; other lessons require students to complete
worksheets and still others to discuss and debate.
A lessons goal structure is the amount of interdependence required
of students as they perform their work. Goal structures are individualistic if
achievement of the instructional goal requires no interaction with others and is
unrelated to how well others do. Competitive goal structures exist when
students perceive they can obtain their goals if the other students fail to obtain
theirs. Cooperative goal structures exist when students can obtain their goal
only when other students with whom they are linked can obtain theirs.
The reward structure for various instructional models can also vary.
Just as goal structures can be individualistic, competitive, or cooperative, so
too can reward structures. Individualistic reward struct ures exist when a
reward can be achieved regardless of what anyone else does. The satisfaction
of running a 4-minute mile is an example of an individualistic reward
structure. Competitive reward structures are those in which rewards are
obtained for individual effort in comparison to others. Grading on a curve is
an example of a competitive reward structure as is the way winners are
defined in many track and field events. In contrast, situations in which
individual effort helps others to be rewarded use cooperative reward
structures. Winning at team sports, such as in football, is an example of a
22
cooperative reward system in place, even though teams may compete with
each other.
Lessons organized around direct instruction and most other teaching
models are characterized by task structures where teachers work mainly with a
whole class of students or where students are working individually to master
academic content. The goal and reward structures for direct instruction are
based on individual competition and effort. On the other hand, as its name
implies, the cooperative learning model is characterized by cooperative task,
goal, and reward structures. Students working in cooperative learning
situations are encouraged and/or required to work together on a common task,
and they must coordinate their efforts to complete task. Using cooperative
learning, two or more individuals are interdependent for a reward they will
share if they are to be successful as a group.
M eanwhile, Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 206-207) state that
cooperative learning systems are generally characterized by:
1) The way the groups or teams are made up
According to advocates, including Slavin in Cruickshank, et al.
(1999: 206), groups must be heterogeneous in terms of gender, academic
ability, race, and other traits. Heterogeneity is promoted for at least two
reasons. First, cooperative learning is based partly on the humanistic
school of thought about learning. That school of thought focuses on the
importance of personal and social development. One of its major
objectives is to make students feel better about themselves and to be more
accepting of others. M ixed groups offer a major means of achieving this
goal.
Another reason to form heterogeneous teams is so that each
member will have an equal opportunity to learn, since talent is about
equally distributed to each group. Finally, heterogeneity is fostered
because students with lower abilities are more likely to improve their
achievement in mixed groups than in homogeneous groups. Thus,
23
heterogeneous teams would seem especially beneficial for students who

are at risk of academic failure.
2) The kinds of tasks they do
A second way cooperative learning can be characterized is by the
kinds of tasks teachers typically assign to the teams. The most common
assignment requires each team to master material the teacher presented
previously. For example, M rs. Braggins does a presentation on why the
seasons change. She then asks the teams to review and learn the material
in preparation for a quiz. Another common task is to ask teams to work on
projects. M r. Cruz asks his teams to read about the settling of California
and then to collaboratively compose a letter as if a settler were writing to
relatives in Spain describing the conditions of mission life.
3) The groups rules of behavior
Cooperative learning is characterized by rules of behavior
required of team members: individual responsibility and accountability to
oneself and the team, support and encouragement of team members, peer
helping and tutoring, and, of course, cooperation.
4) Their self-esteem and reward systems.
Cooperative learning is characterized by a unique system of
rewards. Rather than a mark based on personal effort, the individual
receives a mark based on the teams achievement. If the students studied
for and took a quiz on why the seasons change, the teams mark may be
the average score for all team members. In letter-writing assignment, all
team members receive the score the letter earns. Again, we can liken such
a situation to a sport where the team has a collective score and thereby
wins or loses. Of course, this arrangement usually arouses peer pressure to
do well and to help others do well. Thus, we think cooperative learning
also derives some of its ideas from the behavioral school of thought,
particularly operant conditioning and social learning.
24
c. Key Components of Effective Cooperative Learning

Johnson and Johnson in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/
Norman_thesis_2006.pdf outline five key components for effective
cooperative learning; positive interdependence, individual accountability,
promotive face to face interaction, small group skills, and group processing.
1) Positive Interdependence
It is important for students to perceive themselves as
interdependent, sharing a mutual fate which is mutually caused. This
creates a sink or swim mentality where the success of the group is
dependent on the success of all of the group members, ensuring a social
interdependence in the group. Students come to perceive that they are
linked with group mates in such a way that they cannot succeed unless
their group mates do (and vice versa) and/or that they must coordinate
their efforts with the efforts of others in the group to complete a task.
Cooperation allows for positive interdependence where all group members
work together to accomplish shared goals. Thus, individuals seek
outcomes that are both beneficial to themselves and the group members.
Promotive goal interdependence where goals are positively linked in such
a way that the probability of one person obtaining his/her goal is positively
correlated with the probability of others doing so. Reward
interdependence where all members in the group are given the same
reward.
2) Individual Accountability
Slavin in http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Norman_thesis _
2006.pdf argues that when cooperative learning is poorly constructed,
cooperative learning methods can allow for the free rider effect in
which some group members do all or most of the work (and learning)
while others do little or nothing. The key to eliminating this is to create
individual accountability to ensure that all students learn and that no
members in the group are ignored. By having both group goals and
25
individual accountability, students are provided with an incentive to help

each other and to encourage each other to put forth maximum effort.
Norman_thesis_2006.pdf argue that individual accountability can be
achieved through the use of individual assessment which is then used to
determine the success level of the group as a whole. Individual
accountability can be achieved by frequently highlighting the contributions
of each member, assessing who needs more help, and redundancy among
members efforts and identifying unique contributions of each group
member. Teachers need to assess how much effort each member is
contributing to the groups work, provide feedback to groups and
individual students, help groups avoid redundant efforts by members, and
ensure that all members are responsible for the final outcome.
Norman_thesis_2006.pdf highlight key factors for structuring individual
accountability. They are keeping the group size small, giving students
individual tests where they cannot seek help form others, randomly
choosing students to answer questions, observe the group and record the
frequency on contribution of each member, assigning one member to be a
checker who asks other group members to explain the reasoning and
rational underlying group answers, and having students teach what they
learned to someone else.
3) Promotive face-to-face interaction
The physical arrangement of small heterogeneous groups,
encourages students to help, share, and support each others learning. By
working closely together, students can promote each others success
through explanations, teaching, checking for understanding, discussions,
connecting old and new learning.
26
4) Interpersonal and small group skills

Norman_thesis_2006.pdf argue that the more socially skillful students are,
and the more attention teachers pay to teaching and rewarding the use of
social skills, the higher the achievement that can be expected within
cooperative learning groups. Students need to learn interpersonal skills
such as active listening, staying on task, asking questions, conflict
management and resolution and so forth.
5) Group processing
Johnson believes that group processing takes place on two levels,
in small groups and the whole class. To allow for group processing at the
group level, they argued that teachers should allow time and the end of
each class for groups to process how effectively the members worked
together. Doing so, they argued would: Enable learning groups to focus on
maintaining good working relationships among members. Facilitate
learning of cooperative skills. Ensure that members receive feedback on
their participation in the group. Ensure that students think on the
metacognitive as well as cognitive level. Provide a means to celebrate the
success of the group and to reinforce positive behaviors. Processing at the
class level can be done by having the teacher occasionally observe groups,
analyze problems and then provide feedback to the whole class.
Simply, the use of cooperative learning strategies results in
improvements both in the achievement of students and in the qualit y of
their interpersonal relationships (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/ prof150-
d. Definition of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT) is the first of the Johns Hopkins
cooperative learning methods (http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-
155/learning/readings/documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf). Teams-Games-
Tournament (TGT) is a strategy usually used to check for understanding
27
information, for reviewing and test preparation (http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/

pdfs/w/ii/TeachingM asters.doc). It works best for information that is relatively
objective. TGT is one type of cooperative learning which is easy to
implement, involving the activities of all students without a difference in
status, involving the role of students as peer tutors and an element of the game
and reinforcement (http://dudy-adityawan.com/education/team-games-
tournament-method-tgt/)
e. The Procedure of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

There are five main components in Teams-Games-Tournament
(http://dudy-adityawan.com/education/team-games-tournament-method-tgt/):
1) Serving Class
At the beginning, teachers deliver learning materials in the classroom
presentation, usually done by direct instruction or with lectures,
discussions led by teachers. At the same time of presentation of this class,
students should really pay attention and understand the material presented
by the teachers because it helps students perform better at work and at the
game because the game score will determine the score of the group.
2) Group (Team)
Groups usually consist of 4 to 5 students who are members of
heterogeneous views of academic achievement, gender, and race or
ethnicity. The group of the group is to further explore the material with
friends and more specific group to prepare group members to work
properly and optimally at the time of the game.
3) Game
Game consists of questions which are designed to test students knowledge
gained from classroom presentation and study groups. M ost games consist
of simple questions numbered. Students choose a numbered card and try to
answer the questions according to the number. Students who correctly
answer that question will get a score. These scores of students who later
collected for the tournament week.
28
4) Tournaments
Tournaments are usually conducted on weekends or on each unit after the
teacher and the classroom presentation group work on the worksheet. The
teacher divides students into several table tournaments. The three highest
student achievements grouped in table I, three more students on table II
and so on.
5) Team Recognize (Group Award)
Teachers then announce the winning group, each team will receive a gift
certificate or if the average score to meet the specified criteria. Team
earned the nickname Super Team if the average scores of 45 or more,
Great Team when the average reached 40-45, and Good Team if the
average is 30-40.
TGT uses the same teacher presentations and teamwork as in STAD,

but replaces the quizzes with weekly tournaments (Slavin in
http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/documents/
Slavincooplrng.pdf). In these, students compete with members of other teams
to contribute points to their team scores. Students compete at three-person
"tournament tables" against others with similar past records in mathematics. A
"bumping" procedure changes table assignments to keep the competition fair.
The winner at each tournament table brings the same number of points to his
or her team, regardless of which table it is; this means that low achievers
(competing with other low achievers) and high achievers (competing with
other high achievers) have equal opportunities for success. As in STAD, high-
performing teams earn certificates or other forms of team rewards. TGT is
appropriate for the same types of objectives as STAD.
Cruickshank, et al. (1999: 207) also states that the procedure of TGT
follows STAD except that, instead of an individual quiz being given, the
teams compete against one another. It is supported in http://www.csos.jhu.edu/
crespar/techReports/Report11.pdf that TGT is the same as STAD except that
students play academic games with members of the other teams to add points
29
to an overall team score. Instead of quizzes, there are weekly tournament

tables composed of four-member teams, with each member contributing points
to the particular team score. In STAD, students work in four-member,
heterogeneous learning teams. First the teacher provides the lesson content
through direct instruction. Then, students work in their teams to help each
other master the content, using study guides, worksheets, or other material as a
basis for discussion, tutoring, and assessment among students. Following this,
students take brief quizzes, on which they cannot help each other. Teams can
earn recognition or privileges based on the improvement made by each team
member over his or her own past record.
The TGT procedure is: teacher p resentation, teamwork, team-versus-
team competition, scoring, and team reward (Cruickshank,, 1999: 207). In the
team-versus-team competition phase, each member of a team is assigned to a
table where he or she will compete against members from other teams. Low
achievers compete with other low achievers, and high achievers compete with
other high achievers for equal points. Thus, the impact of low achievers is
equal to that of high achievers.
Another source mentions the procedures of TGT, namely:
1) Students work in a Home Teams of three and review the information
learned.
2) They then break into Tournament Groups where one student from each
group gets together with two students, each from one other group.
3) Tournament groups then respond to a number of questions. The questions
are placed on cards with the answers on the back.
4) When they have completed the questions, or the time is up, they return to
their home team and add up their individual tournament scores. The group
with the most points receives an incentive.
(http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/pdfs/w/ii/TeachingM asters.doc).
30
f. The Advantages of TGT

The following are the advantages of TGT:
1) TGT is a general cooperative learning method adaptable to most subjects
and grade levels. TGT applies to most subjects and grade levels (Slavin in
http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/ readings/documents/
Slavincooplrng.pdf).
2) In studies of methods like TGT, effects on achievement have been
consistently positive (Slavin in http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof 150 -
3) TGT emphasizes the use of group goals (in this case, recognition) in
which teams can only achieve success if each team member can perform
well on an independent assessment. This motivates team members to do a
good job of teaching and assessing each other. (Fashola, et al. in
http://www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report11.pdf). TGT brings
positive effects on intergroup relations, including follow-ups of intergroup
friendships several months after the end of the studies (Slavin in
http://courses.educ.queensu.ca/prof150-155/learning/readings/
documents/Slavincooplrng.pdf).
4) It increases students self-esteem, motivation, altruism, and respect for
others and decreases prejudice (Spolsky, 1999: 558).
TGT requires interaction among students which is beneficial for them

because it influences students educational aspirations and achievement,
develop social competencies, and encourage taking on perspectives of others
(Johnson, 1996: 112). Furthermore, Orrnstein and Lasley (2000: 323) state
that cooperation among students can help foster: positive and coherent
personal identity, self-esteem, knowledge and trust of others, communication
skills, acceptance and support of others, wholesome intergroup relationships,
and reduced conflicts among students.
31
3. Lecture
a. Definition of Lecture
Lecture is derived from the Latin word legere which means to read
(https://www.csupomona.edu/~jkupsh/instructional/Text_and_Worksheets/
text5.pdf). Lecture is an oral presentation intended to present information or
teach students about a particular subject (http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/
Lecture). Lecture is used to convey critical information, history, background,
theories and equations. It is widely known that lecture is usually applied by
teachers. Good and Brophy (1990: 328) state that lecturing is commonly used
because it is efficient (in brief time, the teacher can expose students to content
that might take them much longer to locate on their own). It can be used with
groups or entire classes rather than just with individuals, it gives the teacher
control over the content, and it is easily combined with other methods and
adjustable to fit the available time, the physical setting and situational
constraints.
b. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Lecture

There are some benefits and weaknesses of lecturing in teaching and
learning process. The strong facts coming from lecture are as follows:
1) Lecture can present large amounts of information.
2) It can be presented to large audiences.
3) It presents little risk for students.
4) It appeals to students whose learn by listening.
(Bonwell in http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/cl/advlec.html).
Further, M oore (1999: 181) mentions the strengths of lecture as

follows:
1) Lecture is an excellent way of presenting background information
2) A short lecture can effectively wrap up unit, an activity, or a lesson.
3) Lecture is time-efficient; that is, p lanning time is devoted to organizing
content, rather than to devising instructional procedure.
32
However, critics point out that lecturing is mainly a one-way method

of communication that does not involve significant audience participation.
Therefore, lecturing is often contrasted to active learning. This passive mode
of lecture although still common in education can easily be transformed into a
more active learning process. Lectures delivered by talented speakers can be
highly stimulating; at the very least, lectures have survived in academia as a
quick, cheap and efficient way of introducing large numbers of students to a
particular field of study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecture).
Some disadvantages of lecture are stated below:

1) Lecture fails to provide instructors with feedback about the extent of
student learning
2) Information tends to be forgotten quickly when students are passive
3) Lecture presumes that all students learn at the same pace and are at the
same level of understanding
4) Lecture emphasizes learning by listening, which is a disadvantage for
students who have other learning style
(Bonwell in http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/doingcl/advlec/ htm).
M oore (1994: 182) states that lecture has several serious flaws,
namely:
1) Lecture fosters passive learning, with very low student involvement.
Students are expected, and even encouraged, to sit quietly, listen, and
perhaps take notes.
2) It is not good for helping students develop skills in thinking, problem
solving, and creativity.
3) Lectures frequently are boring and do not motivate.
4) Because lecture tends to focus on the lowest level of cognition,
understanding and transfer are often limited.
33
5) It may lead to the development of discipline problem. M ost lectures

generate little interest, and students attention soon wanes and turns to
more stimulating and often undesirable activities.
4. Self- Esteem
a. Definition of Self-Esteem
M any experts have the similar perspectives related to what self-
esteem is. Newman and Newman (2009: 259) define self-esteem as an
evaluation of worthiness. Self-esteem is the overall evaluation of ones self-
worth or self-image (Santrock, 2006: 83). Self-esteem is an evaluative
judgment of self-worth (Woolfolk, 2007: 85). It is the evaluative feelings
associated with our self-image (Williams and Burden, 1997: 97). Self-esteem
is the personal judgment we make about our own worth (Atwater, 1990: 154).
Self-esteem is the students evaluations and feelings about themselves
(Woolfolk, 2007: 88). In other words, self-esteem refers to how the students
evaluate and feel about themselves. Such evaluation is built up through
repeated experiences of success and failure, other peoples impressions, and
the self-appraisals in relation to ideal selves.
Further, Woolfolk (2007: 85) states that self-esteem is the value each
of us places on our own characteristics, abilities, and behaviors. It means that
self-esteem is related to characteristics, abilities, and behaviors. Self-esteem
means how positively or negatively we feel about ourselves (Passer and
Smith, 2004: 441). Self-esteem is the component of personality that
encompasses our positive and negative self-evaluations (Feldman, 2005: 334).
In other words, students self-esteem can be either positive or negative.
Students may have either high or low self-esteem.
Lickona in Parsons, et al. (2001: 80) defines self-esteem as a
students sense of mastery or competence. It means that self-esteem is strongly
related to the students judgment about their competence. Self esteem may
reflect a belief about whether someone is intelligent and attractive (Santrock,
2006: 84). Self-esteem is a self-judgment of worth or value, based on feelings
34
of efficacy, a sense of interacting effectively with ones own environment

(Spolsky, 1999: 557). It can be said that the students feeling of efficacy
influences their-judgment of worth.
The term self-esteem has been used to refer to some hypothetical
overall or global level of self-evaluation or self-regard (Corsini, 1994: 361).
Self-esteem is the way one feels about oneself, including the degree to which
one possesses self-respect and self-acceptance (Corsini, 1994: 361). Self-
esteem is the sense of personal worth and competence that persons associate
with their self-concepts (Corsini, 1994: 361). M eanwhile, M altby (1995: 336)
states that self-esteem refers to generalized feelings about the value we place
on our attributes and personality.
Furthermore, Coopersmith in Brown (2000: 103) gives the following
definition:
By self-esteem, we refer to the evaluation which the individual makes
and customarily maintains with regard to himself; it expresses an
attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which
an individual believes himself to be capable, significant, successful,
and worthy. In short, self-esteem is a personal judgment of worthiness
that is expressed in the attitudes that the individual holds towards
himself. It is a subjective experience which the individual conveys to
others by verbal reports and other overt expressive behavior.
b. Sources of Self-Esteem
Newman and Newman (2009: 259) state that self-esteem is based on
three sources, namely:
1) M essages of love, support, and approval from others
Views of the self as being loved, valued, admired, and successful
contribute to a sense of worth. By contrast, views of the self as being
ignored, rejected, scorned, and inadequate contribute to a sense of
worthlessness.
2) Specific attributes and competencies
Information about specific aspects of the self is accumulated through
experiences of success and failure in daily tasks or when particular aspects
of ones competence are challenged.
35
3) The way one regards those specific asp ect of the self in comparison with
others and in relation to ones ideal self
Self-esteem is influenced by the value one assigns to specific competencies
in relation to ones overall life goals and personal ideals.
c. Elements of Self-esteem
Self-esteem includes two important components, namely: a sense of
self-efficacy and a sense of self-respect or worthiness (Branden in
http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem). Self-efficacy is beliefs
in ones capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to
produce given attainment (Bandura in Woolfolk, 2007: 332).
Self-esteem seems to be composed of several elements that contribute
to students sense of worth (Elliott, et al., 2000: 101), namely:
1) A sense of physical safety
Students who feel physically secure arent afraid of being harmed, which
helps to develop feelings of confidence.
2) A sense of emotional security
Students who arent humiliated or subjected to sarcasm feel safe
emotionally, which translates into a willingness to trust others.
3) A sense of identity
Students who know who they are have achieved a degree of self-
knowledge that enables them to take responsibility for their actions and
relate well with others.
4) A sense of belonging
Students who are accepted by others are comfortable in seeking out new
relationships and begin to develop feelings of independence and
interdependence.
5) A sense of competence
Students who are confident in their ability to do certain things are willing
to try to learn to do new things and persevere until they achieve mastery.
36
d. Characteristics of Students Having High and Low Self-Esteem

Self-esteem has a high impact on success in EFL/ESL learning
(http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/andres.html). Self-esteem plays a crucial role
in learning since it is the best predictors of academic success (Biggs and
Watkins, 1995: 75). Littlewood (1998: 64) states that a study by Adelaide
Heyde found that self-esteem was associated with second language
proficiency. Learners with high self-esteem are less likely to feel threatened
when communicating in a strange language or in an unfamiliar situation. They
may also be more ready to risk making mistakes or projecting a reduced image
of themselves.
Atwater (1990: 155) states that the students having high level of self-
esteem are generally pleased with themselves and make inferences about
themselves that are slightly more positive than might be expected. Self-esteem
exerts a powerful influence on students expectations, their judgments about
themselves and others, and their behavior. Students with high self-esteem are
willing to test the validity of their inferences about themselves. Having a high
level of self-acceptance, they tend to be accepting of others, including those
with different opinions than themselves, and enjoy satisfying relationships
with others. They also expect to do well in their accomplishments, try hard
and try to be successful. They are inclined to attribute their success to their
abilities, and to make due allowance for circumstances in interpreting their
failures. As a result, students with high self-esteem generally enjoy a great
deal of self-confidence and have a realistic assessment of their strengths and
weaknesses.
M eanwhile, the students having low self-esteem are generally less
willing to put their ideas about themselves to the test and are never really
convinced of their own self-assessment. Furthermore, students with low level
of self-esteem tend to expect the worst, exert less effort on their tasks,
especially challenging, demanding ones, and achieve less success. Even, when
students having low self-esteem achieve success, they are less apt to attribute
their success to their abilities or to enjoy it. In other words, students with high
37
esteem forge ahead academically while those with low esteem fall behind
(Atwater, 1990: 155).
Dealing with the characteristics of students having high and low self-
esteem, Passer and Smith (2004: 442) state that self-esteem is related to many
positive behaviors and life outcomes. Students with high self-esteem are
happier with their lives, have fewer interpersonal problems, achieve at a
higher and more consistent level, are less susceptible to social pressure, and
are more capable of forming satisfying love relationship. In contrast, students
with low self-esteem are less likely to try to make themselves feel better when
they experience negative moods in response to perceived failures in their lives.
This is may be one reason why they are more prone to psychological
problems, such as anxiety and depression, to physical illness, and to poor
social relationships, and underachievement.
e. Effects of Self-Esteem
Self esteem is one of our most basic psychological needs. The degree
of our self-esteem (or lack of it) impacts every major aspect of our lives. It has
profound effects on our thinking processes, emotions, desire, values, choices,
and goals. Deficit in self-esteem contribute to virtually all psychological
problems (http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem).
M eanwhile, Sprinthall, et al. (1998: 562-563) mentions the effects of
self-esteem, as follows:
1) Effects on academic performance
Since the more academically successful students tend to display higher level of
various affective components, including self-esteem, it might seem to follow
that increasing any students feeling of self-esteem would then be translated
into an increase in academic performance
2) Effects on later success
Closely related to the issue of self-esteem is that students will be more
motivated and work harder in school if they believe that their efforts will lat er
pay off in the job market.
38
f. Strategies for Increasing Self-Esteem

Since self-esteem is crucial, teachers should try to increase students
self esteem. Woolfolk (2007: 89) gives some suggestions for encouraging
students self-esteem, namely:
1) Value and accept all students, for their attempts as well as their
accomplishments.
2) Create a climate that is physically and psychologically safe for students.
3) Avoid destructive comparisons and competition; encourage students to
compete with their own prior levels of achievement.
4) Encourage students to take responsibility for their reaction to events; show
them that they have choices in how to response.
5) Set up support groups in school and teach students how to encourage each
other.
6) Help students set clear goals and objectives; brainstorm about resources
they have for reaching their goals.
7) Highlight the value of different ethnic groups-their cultures and
accomplishments.
Dornyei (2001: 31) suggests some strategies for ESL/EFL teachers to

create a supportive atmosphere in the classroom, namely: establishing a norm
of tolerance; encouraging risk-taking and having mistakes accepted as a
natural part of learning; bringing in and encouraging humor, and encouraging
learners to personalize the classroom environment according their taste.
Here are six strategies that can increase an individuals self-esteem as

stated by Santrock (2006: 86-87):
1) Identify sources of self-esteem and what is causing low self-esteem.
A key first step in improving self-esteem is to determine what is
contributing to low self-esteem.
39
2) Face a problem and try to cope with it.

Self-esteem is often increased when individuals try to cop e with a problem
rather than avoiding it (Bednar, et al. in Santrock , 2006: 86). Facing
problems realistically, honestly, and nondefensively leads to favorable
thoughts about one self, which lead to self-approval and higher self-
esteem.
3) Seek emotional support.
Emotional support and social approval have a positive influence on self-
esteem. However, some individuals experience little emotional support or
social approval because their families are filled with conflict or their
romantic relationships are marred by hostility. In some cases, alternative
sources of emotional support can improve self-esteem. Quality friendships,
counseling, or therapy can sometimes compensate for shortcomings in
other sources of emotional support.
4) Take responsibility for your self-esteem.
To increase self-esteem, one should assume that he/she has the ability to
improve his/her self-esteem and takes the initiative to do so (Crocker and
Park in Santrock, 2006: 86)
5) Look for opportunities to achieve.
Achievement can also improve self-esteem (Baumeister, et al. in Santrock,
2006: 86).
6) Explore sources to improve your self-understanding.
M any individuals with low self-esteem dont know themselves well. To
improve their self-esteem, they should increase their self-understanding.
In conclusion, self-esteem is the evaluation which the individual

makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself; it expresses an
attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which an
individual believes himself to be cap able, significant, successful, and worthy.
Self-esteem is composed of several elements, namely: a sense of physical
safety, a sense of emotional security, a sense of identity, a sense of belonging,
40
and a sense of competence. Students with high self-esteem are happier with
their lives, have fewer interpersonal problems, achieve at a higher and more
consistent level, are less susceptible to social pressure, and are more capable
of forming satisfying love relationship. In contrast, students with low self-
esteem are less likely to try to make themselves feel better when they
experience negative moods in response to perceived failures in their lives.
They are more prone to psychological problems, such as anxiety and
depression, to physical illness, and to poor social relationships, and
underachievement.
B. Rationale
1. The Difference Between Teams-Games-Tournament and Lecture
The Teaching method applied by teachers is one of the important
factors influencing students reading skill. Therefore, a teacher must give a
wise decision in choosing the appropriate teaching method in order to teach
reading successfully. As stated before, the methods compared in this study are
lecture and Teams-Games-Tournament.
Lecture is an oral presentation intended to present information to
teach students about particular subject. The activity in lecture is teacher-
centered. Lecture encourages one-way communication. Students just become
the followers and depend on the teacher during the teaching-learning process.
Lecture is supposed not to motivate students and make them passive in joining
the learning process. The information tends to be forgotten quickly when
students are passive.
M eanwhile, Teams-Games-Tournament requires different way in
teaching learning process. It makes the students work cooperatively which will
develop their ability in their social and human relation. In Teams-Games-
Tournament, students not only learn and receive whatever the teacher teaches
in the teaching and learning process, but also learn from other students. In
other words, they are more active in joining the learning process.
41
In short, Teams-Games-Tournament is supposed to be more effective

than lecture.
2. The Difference Between the Students Who Have High Self -esteem and the
Students Who Have Low Self-esteem.
The students having high level of self-esteem expect to do well in
their accomplishments, try hard and try to be successful. They are inclined to
attribute their success to their abilities, and to make due allowance for
circumstances in interpreting their failures. As a result, students with high
self-esteem generally enjoy a great deal of self-confidence and have a realistic
assessment of their strengths and weaknesses.
On the other hand, the students having low self-esteem tend to expect
the worst, exert less effort on their tasks, especially challenging, demanding
ones, and achieve less success. Even, when students having low self-esteem
achieve success, they are less apt to attribute their success to their abilities or
to enjoy it.
Therefore, the students who have high self-esteem are supposed to
have better reading skill than the students who have low self-esteem.
3. Interaction Between Teaching M ethod and Student Self-esteem

It is undeniable that teaching method which is used by the teacher in
the class gives a big influence for the success of the teaching and learning
process. Unlike lecture, which places the students in a passive learning role,
Teams-Games-Tournament requires the students to be more active in
acquiring the academic content without neglecting their social and human
relation with others unconsciously. The teacher not only concerns with
teaching academic content, but also considers making the students develop
their social and human relation with others.
Self-esteem is quite important factor to acquire reading skill because
understanding of the text requires self-esteem. The students having high level
of self-esteem expect to do well in their accomplishments, try hard and try to
42
be successful. In the teaching-learning process, they usually have better

attitudes. They have high desire to pay attention to the teacher. They are active
in joining the teaching-learning process. They like demanding activities in the
teaching-learning process. Therefore, TGT is supposed to be more effective
for students having high self-esteem.
Lecture seems to be suitable for students having low self-esteem
since it possesses characteristics which make the students passive during the
activity. In lecture, the students usually get knowledge only from their teacher.
They are not demanded to elaborate their ideas, thoughts, and feelings. It
means that they dont need to be active. In fact, students having low level of
self-esteem tend to exert less effort in learning. In other words, they prefer
being passive in the teaching-learning process. That is why, lecture is
supposed to be more effective for students having low self-esteem.
Therefore, Teams-Games-Tournament and self-esteem are supposed
to have interaction effect toward students reading skill.
C. Hypothesis
Based on the theoretical description and rationale, the hypotheses can
be formulated as follows:
1. Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than lecture to teach reading
at the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta.
2. The students who have high self-esteem have better reading skill than
those who have low self-esteem at the seventh grade students of SM P
Batik Surakarta.
3. There is an interaction between teaching methods and students self-
esteem on the reading skill of the seventh grade students of SM P Batik
Surakarta.
43
CHAPTER III
RES EARCH METHODOLOGY
A. The Place and Time of the S tudy

The research is held at SM P Batik Surakarta, located at Jl. Slamet
Riyadi number 447 Surakarta in the academic year of 2009/2010.
Table 1. The Time Schedule for the Research
Oct Nov Des Jan Feb March April May June July
Activities
2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010
Proposal
Reviewing
Literatures
Developing
Instruments
Doing Treatment
Collecting and
Analyzing the
Data
Writing the
Report
Submitting the
Document
43
44
B. The Method of Research

The research method used in this study is experimental study.
Experimental study is the kind of studies in which the researcher is interested
in learning about the effects of certain conditions (independent variables) on
other conditions (dependent variables) in controlled study (M ason and
Bramble, 1997: 93). Experimental study can be defined as the technique,
which attempt to ferret out cause and effect relationships. Through
experimentations, cause and effect relationship can be isolated (Christensen,
2007: 39).
The research design used for the research is a simple factorial design
2x2. It can be seen in the following figure:
Teaching M ethod
Teams-Games- Lecture
Self-Esteem Tournament
High
Low
Figure 2. Factorial Design 2x2

45
C. The S ubject of the Research

1. Population
Population is a group of individuals who comprises the same
characteristics (Creswell, 2008: 644). The population of the research is the
seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta in the academic year of
2009/2010. It consists of 9 classes. In order to make the teaching learning run
as usual, the writer uses two classes which she teaches.
2. Sample
Sample is a subgroup of the target population that the researcher
plans to study for the purpose of making generalizations about the target
population (Creswell, 2008: 646). In this study, the writer takes two classes of
the population as the sample.
3. Sampling
Sampling is the process of drawing a sample from a population
(Johnson and Christensen, 2000: 156). To draw a sample from a population,
the writer uses cluster random sampling because it has some advantages, such
as: it can be used when it is difficult or impossible to select a random sample
of individuals, it is often far easier to implement in schools, and it is
frequently less time consuming (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2000: 139).
Each class is divided into two groups, students who have high self-
esteem and those who have low self-esteem. One of the two classes is taught
by using Teams-Games-Tournament and another class is taught by using
lecture. Therefore, there are four groups: (1) students having high self-esteem
who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament; (2) students having high
self-esteem who are taught by using lecture; (3) students having low self-
esteem who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament; (4) students
having low self-esteem who are taught by using lecture.
46
D. Technique of Collecting the Data

The way to get the data in a research is usually known as a method of
collecting data. In this research, the writer uses a test and a questionnaire to
get the data. The questionnaire is used to get the data of the students self-
esteem and the test is used to get the data of the students reading skill.
1. Questionnaire
The questionnaire is used to get the data of the students self-esteem.
Johnson and Christensen (2000: 127) state that a questionnaire is a self-report
data-collection instrument that each research participant fills out as part of a
research study.
The type of questions of questionnaire can be divided into two: open and
close ended questions. Open ended questions enable respondents to give their own
answer, while close ended questions require respondents to choose from a limited
number of predetermined responses or to select one of the alternative answers
given (Christensen, 2007: 56). The writer uses close ended questions. The form of
the items is objective. It is used to make the students easier to answer. The
questionnaire is used to classify students into two groups: the students who have
high self-esteem and those who have low self-esteem.
The questionnaire is in multiple-choice form of four alternatives based
on the Likert Scale type. Likert Scale is a scale with a number of points or spaces,
usually at least three but not more than seven (Wiersma, 2000: 305). There is no
right or wrong answer because the students responses are based on their real
conditions.
2. Test
A test can be defined as a systematic procedure for observing ones
behavior and describing it with the aid of numerical devices or category system
(Cronbach in Syakur, 1999: 5). The test is used to get the data of the students
reading skill. The reading test is in the form of objective test with four options.
47
3. Try-Out of the Instruments

An instrument is said to be good if it is valid and reliable. Before the
instruments are used, they must be tried out. It is intended to find the level of
validity and reliability of the instruments. The try -out is conducted at the seventh
grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta in the academic year of 2009/2010 who do
not belong to the two groups.
a. The Validity of the Instrument
An instrument is valid if it is able to measure what the
researcher is going to measure (Suharsimi, 2002: 160). Further,
Suharsimi explains that there are two kinds of validity according to
the way it is measured, namely internal and external validity. In this
study, the writer uses internal validity since the writer analyses the
items of instruments whether or not they are appropriate to use.
After conducting the try -out test, the results are computed to
find out their validity. To measure the validity of the questionnaire,
the writer uses the following formula:
rit
x x i t
( x )( x
2
i
2
t )
If ro is higher than rt, the item is valid.
The formula that is used to know the validity of the reading

test is as follows:
st
x 2
Xi Xt p1
ro
st q1
If ro is higher than rt, the item is valid.
The result of the try-out indicates that forty -eight out of sixty
items of self-esteem questionnaire are valid. The valid items are
number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25,
48
26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 48,
49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60. Forty -five items are used to
get the data. The computation of the validity of self-esteem can be
seen in Appendix 4 page 247.
The result of the try -out also indicates that forty -six out of
sixty items of reading test are valid. The valid items are number1, 2,
3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31,
32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54,
56, 57, 58, 60. Forty -five items are used to get the data. The
computation of the validity of reading test can be seen in Appendix 8
page 277.
b. The Reliability of the Instrument

Reliability refers to the consistency of the scores obtained
how consistent they are for each individual from one administration of
an instrument to another and from one set of items to another
(Fraenkel and Wallen, 2000: 176). To know the reliability of the
questionnaire, the writer uses the following formula:
k si x x
2 2 2
rkk= 1 2 , where si2 i

, st
t
k 1 st
n n
If ro is higher than rt, the item is reliable.
The coefficient of reliability of self-esteem questionnaire is

0.920. It is higher than r-table for N = 40 at 5 % level of significance
(0.312). It means that the questionnaire is reliable. The computation of
reliability of self-esteem questionnaire can be seen in Appendix 5
page 259.
To know the reliability of the test, the writer uses the
following formula:
49
k pq
rkk = 1
k 1 st2
The item is reliable if ro is higher than rt.
The coefficient of reliability of reading test is 0.921. It is

higher than r-table for N = 40 at 5 % level of significance (0.312). It
means that the reading test is reliable. The computation of reliability
of reading test can be seen in Appendix 9 page 288.
The valid and reliable items are used to get the data of the
experimental and control class. Then, the instruments are administered
to 27% of upper group (high self-esteem group) and 27% of lower
group (low self-esteem group) from both classes, so there are twenty-
two students from the experimental class and twenty -two students
from the control one (27% x 40 = 11 for upper group, 27% x 40 = 11
for lower group) (Anas, 2007: 398-400).
E. Technique of Analyzing the Data

The technique used in analyzing the data is descriptive analysis and
inferential analysis. Descriptive analysis is used to know the mean, median,
mode, and standard deviation of the scores of the reading test. To know the
normality and the homogeneity of the data, the writer uses normality and
homogeneity test. The normality and homogeneity tests are done before
testing the hypothesis. Inferential analysis used is multifactor analysis of
variance 2 x 2. H o is rejected if F o is higher than F t. If H o is rejected, the
analysis is continued to know which group is better using Tukey test. The
design of multifactor analysis of variance is as follows:
50
Teaching
M ethod (A) Teams-Games-Tournament Lecture
(A1) (A2)
Self-esteem (B)
High (B1) A1B1 A2B1 B1
Low (B2) A1B2 A2B2 B2
A1 A2
Figure 3. The Design of M ultifactor Analysis of Variance
Note:
A1B1 : the mean score of reading test of students having high self-esteem who
are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament.
A2B1: the mean score of reading test of students having high self-esteem who
are taught by using lecture.
A1B2: the mean score of reading test of students having low self-esteem who
are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament.
A2B2 : the mean score of reading test of students having low self-esteem who
are taught by using lecture.
A1 : the mean score of reading test of experimental class which is taught by
using Teams-Games-Tournament.
A2 : the mean score of reading test of control class which is taught by using
lecture.
B1 : the mean score of reading test of students having high self-esteem.
B2 : the mean score of reading test of students having low self-esteem.
51
The data are analyzed using the following ways:

1. The total sum of square
X 2
x X N
2 t
t t
2. The sum of squares between groups
X X X X X
2 2 2 2 2
x n n n n N
2 1 2 3 4 t
b
1 2 3 4
3. The sum of squares within groups
x 2
w xt2 xb2
4. The between-columns sum of squares
X X X
2 2 2
x
2 c1 c2 t
bc
nc1 nc 2 N
5. The between-rows sum of squares
X X X
2 2 2
x
2 r1 r2 t
br
n r1 nr 2 N
6. The sum-of-squares interaction
x 2
int xb2 xbc
2
xbr2
7. The number of degrees of freedom associated with each source of

variation:
a. df for between-columns sum of squares = C -1
b. df for between-rows sum of squares = R 1
c. df for interaction (C 1) (R 1)
d. df for between-groups sum of squares = G - 1
e. df for within-columns sum of squares = n 1
f. df for total sum of squares = N 1
Note:
C = the number of columns
52
R = the number of rows

G = the number of groups
n = the number of subjects in one group
N = the number of subjects in all groups
8. Tukey test is used to know which teaching method is more effective or

better to teach reading
X c1 X c 2
a. Between column q =
error var iance n
X c1 r1 X c 2 r1
b. Between column (HI) q =
error var iance n
X c1 r2 X c 2 r2 X c2 r2 X c1 r2
c . Between column (LI) q = or q =
error var iance n error var iance n
9. The statistic test is found by dividing the difference between the means by
the square root of the ratio of the within group variation and the sample
size.
Xi X j
ST : q =
s w2 n
53
CHAPTER IV
THE RES ULT OF THE S TUDY
This chapter presents the result of the study. It is divided into four parts,
namely: the description of the data, normality and homogeneity test, hypothesis
test, and the discussion of the result of the study.
A. Description of the Data
The data described are the result of the reading test. It includes the
mean, mode, median, standard deviation, and frequency distribution followed
by histogram and polygon. Based on the group analyzed, the descriptions of
the data are divided into eight groups, namely:
1. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having high self-
esteem who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament (A 1B1)
2. The data of the reading test of the students or the group having low self-
esteem who are taught by using lecture method (A 2B1)
5. The data of the reading test of the students or the groups who are taught by
using Teams-Games-Tournament (A 1)
using lecture method (A 2)
7. The data of the reading test of the students or the groups who have high
self-esteem (B1)
8. The data of the reading test of the students or the groups who have low
self-esteem (B2)
53
54
The data of each group are presented as the following:

Descriptive analysis of the data A 1B1 shows that the score is 73 up
to 87. The mean is 79.7, the mode is 77.3, the median is 78.9, the standard
deviation is 3.7, the range is 14, the number of classes is 5, and the interval
is 3. The frequency distribution of the data of A 1B1 is in Table 2, histogram
and polygon are presented in Figure 4.
Table 2. Frequency Distribution of Data A1B1

Class Limit fi Xi fiXi
73 - 75 1 74 74
76 - 78 4 77 308
79 - 81 2 80 160
82 - 84 3 83 249
85 - 87 1 86 86
Sum 11 400 877
5
4
4
3
3
Frequency
2
2
1 1
1
0
72.5 75.5 78.5 81.5 84.5 87.5
Interval
Figure 4. Histogram and Polygon of Data A1B1

55
Descriptive analysis of the data of A 1B2 shows that the score is 53
up to 67. The mean is 60.3, the mode is 62.7, the median is 60.8, the
standard deviation is 3.7, the range is 14, the number of classes is 5, and
the interval is 3. The frequency distribution of the data of A 1B2 is in Table
3, histogram and polygon are presented in Figure 5.
53 - 55 1 54 54
56 - 58 3 57 171
59 - 61 2 60 120
62 - 64 4 63 252
65 - 67 1 66 66
Sum 11 300 663
4
4
3
3
Frequency
2
2
1 1
1
0
52.5 55.5 58.5 61.5 64.5 67.5
Interval
56
esteem who are taught by using lecture (A 2B1)
up to 73. The mean is 63.7, the mode is 62.2, the median is 63, the

56 - 59 2 57.5 115.0
60 - 63 4 61.5 246.0
64 - 67 3 65.5 196.5
68 - 71 1 69.5 69.5
72 - 75 1 73.5 73.5
Sum 11 327.5 700.5
4
4
3
3
Frequency
2
2
1 1
1
0
55.5 59.5 63.5 67.5 71.5 75.5
Interval

57
up to 73. The mean is 67.3, the mode is 69.3, the median is 68, the

60 - 62 2 61 122
63 - 65 1 64 64
66 - 68 3 67 201
69 - 71 4 70 280
72 - 74 1 73 73
Sum 11 335 740
4
4
3
3
Frequency
2
2
1 1
1
0
59.5 62.5 65.5 68.5 71.5 74.5
Interval

58
using Teams-Games-Tournament (A 1)
Descriptive analysis of the data of A 1 shows that the score is 53 up
deviation is 10.5, the range is 34, the number of classes is 6, and the
interval is 6. The frequency distribution of the data of A 1 is in Table 6,
histogram and polygon are presented in Figure 8.
Table 6. Frequency Distribution of Data A1
53 - 58 4 55.5 222.0
59 - 64 6 61.5 369.0
65 - 70 1 67.5 67.5
71 - 76 3 73.5 220.5
77 - 82 6 79.5 477.0
83 - 88 2 85.5 171.0
Sum 22 423 1527
7
6 6
6
5
Frequency
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0 52.5 58.5 64.5 70.5 76.5 82.5 88.5

Interval
Figure 8. Histogram and Polygon of Data A1

59
using lecture method (A 2)
Descriptive analysis of the data of A 2 shows that the score is 56 up
is 3. The frequency distribution of the data of A 2 is in Table 7, histogram
.
Table 7. Frequency Distribution of Data A2
56 - 58 2 57 114
59 - 61 2 60 120
62 - 64 6 63 378
65 - 67 5 66 330
68 - 70 2 69 138
71 - 73 5 72 360
Sum 22 387 1440
6
6
5 5
5
Frequency
3
2 2 2
2
0
55.5 58.5 61.5 64.5 67.5 70.5 73.5
Interval
Figure 9. Histogram and Polygon of Data A2
60
7. The data of the reading test of the students or the groups who have high
self-esteem (B1)
Descriptive analysis of the data of B1 shows that the score is 56 up
is 6. The frequency distribution of the data of B1 is in Table 8, histogram
Table 8. Frequency Distribution of Data B1
56 - 61 3 58.5 175.5
62 - 67 6 64.5 387.0
68 - 73 3 70.5 211.5
74 - 79 4 76.5 306.0
80 - 85 5 82.5 412.5
86 - 91 1 88.5 88.5
Sum 22 441 1581
7
6
6
5
5
Frequency
4
4
3 3
3
1
1
0
55.5 61.5 67.5 73.5 79.5 85.5 91.5
Interval
Figure 10. Histogram and Polygon of Data B1
61
8. The data of the reading test of the students or the groups who have low
self-esteem (B2)
Descriptive analysis of the data of B2 shows that the score is 53 up
is 4. The frequency distribution of the data of B2 is in Table 9, histogram
Table 9. Frequency Distribution of Data B2
53 - 56 3 54.5 163.5
57 - 60 4 58.5 234
61 - 64 6 62.5 375
65 - 68 4 66.5 266
69 - 72 4 70.5 282
73 - 76 1 74.5 74.5
Sum 22 387 1395
7
6
6
5
Frequency
4 4
4
4
3
3
1
1
0
52.5 56.5 60.5 64.5 68.5 72.5 76.5
Interval
Figure 11. Histogram and Polygon of Data B2

62
B. Normality and Homogeneity Test

Before analyzing the data using inferential analysis, normality and
homogeneity test must be done. The normality test is to know that the sample
is in normal distribution and the homogeneity test is to know t hat the data are
homogeneous.
1. Normality Test
The sample is in normal distribution if Lo (L-obtained) is lower than Lt (L-
table) at the level of significance () = 0.05. L stands for Lilliefors.
Table 10. The Normality Test
The L-
No Data Number of obtained L-table Alfa Distribution of
Sample (Lo) (Lt) () Population
1 A1B1 11 0.114 0.249 0.05 Normal
2 A1B2 11 0.112 0.249 0.05 Normal
3 A2B1 11 0.182 0.249 0.05 Normal
4 A2B2 11 0.090 0.249 0.05 Normal
5 A1 22 0.163 0.190 0.05 Normal
6 A2 22 0.080 0.190 0.05 Normal
7 B1 22 0.126 0.190 0.05 Normal
8 B2 22 0.080 0.190 0.05 Normal
2. Homogeneity Test
Homogeneity test is done to know that the data are homogenous. If
77o2 is lower than t2 (0.05) , it can be concluded that the data are
homogeneous.
Table 11. The Homogeneity Test
Sample df 1/df si2 log s i2 (df) log s i2
1 10 0.1 16.05 1.206 12.06
2 10 0.1 27.56 1.440 14.40
3 10 0.1 17.36 1.240 12.40
4 10 0.1 15.82 1.199 11.99
40 0.4 50.85
63
2 = 2.3026{B ( log Si x (n-1))}

= 2.3026 (51.33 50.85)
= 1.12
Based on the result of the calculation above, it can be seen that the o2
(1.12) is lower than t2 at the level of significance () 5% = 7.81. o2 < t2
(1.12 < 7.81), so the data are homogeneous.
C. Hypothesis Test
Hypothesis test can be done after the results of normality and
homogeneity test are fulfilled. The test is done by using multifactor analysis
of variance 2 x 2. H o is rejected if F o > Ft. It means that there is a significant
difference and there is an interaction effect. If H o is rejected, the analysis is
continued to know which group is better using Tukey test. The multifactor
analysis of variance 2 x 2 and Tukey test are described as the following:
1. Summary of a 2 x 2 M ultifactor Analysis of Variance

Table 12. M ultifactor Analysis of Variance
Source of Variance SS df MS Fo Ft (0.05) Ft (0.01)
Between columns 209.455 1 209.455 10.91 4.08 7.31

Between rows 704.000 1 704.000 36.67 4.08 7.31
Columns by rows 1443.273 1 1443.273 75.17 4.08 7.31
(interaction)
Between groups 2356.727 3 785.576 - - -
Within groups 768.000 40 19.200 - - -
Total 3124.727 43 - - - -
64
The table shows that:

a. Because F o between columns (10.91) is higher than F t at the level of
significance = 0.05 (4.08) and F t at the level of significance = 0.01
(7.31), the difference between columns is significant. It can be concluded
that teaching methods differ significantly from one another in their effect
on the performance of the subjects in the exp eriment.
b. Because F o between rows (36.67) is higher than F t at the level of
(7.31), the difference between rows is significant. It can be concluded
that students having high self-esteem and those having low self-esteem
are significantly different in their reading skill.
c. Because F o interaction (75.17) is higher than F t at the level of
(7.31), there is an interaction effect between teaching methods and the
degree of self-esteem toward students reading skill. It means that the
effect of teaching methods on reading skill depends on the degree of self-
esteem.
2. Summary of Tukey Test

The finding of q is found by dividing the difference between the
means by the square root of the ratio of the within group variation and the
sample size.
Table 13. Summary of Tukey Test
Between qo qt (0.05) qt (0.01) Significance M eaning
Groups
A1 A2 4.67 2.95 4.02 Significant A1 > A2

A1B1 A2B1 11.97 3.11 4.39 Significant A1B1 > A2B1
A2B2 A1B2 5.37 3.11 4.39 Significant A2B2 >A1B2
B1 B2 8.56 2.95 4.02 Significant B1 > B 2
65
a. Because qo between A 1 and A 2 (4.67) is higher than qt at the level of

significance = 0.05 (2.95) and qt at the level of significance = 0.01
(4.02), Teams-Games-Tournament differs significantly from the
lecture method for teaching reading. The mean score of students who
are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament (69.91) is higher than
that of those who are taught by using lecture (65.55), so Teams-
Games-Tournament is more effective than the lecture method for
teaching reading.
b. Because qo between A 1B1 and A2B1 (11.97) is higher than qt at the level
of significance = 0.05 (3.11) and qt at the level of significance =
0.01 (4.39), Teams-Games-Tournament differs significantly from the
lecture method to teach reading for students having high self-esteem.
The mean score of students having high self-esteem who are taught by
using Teams-Games-Tournament (79.64) is higher than that of those
who are taught by using lecture (63.82), so Teams-Games-Tournament
is more effective than lecture method to teach reading for students
having high self-esteem.
c. Because qo between A 1B2 and A 2B2 (5.37) is higher than qt at the level
of significance = 0.05 (3.11) and qt at the level of significance =
0.01 (4.39), lecture method differs significantly from Teams-Games-
Tournament to teach reading for students having low self-esteem. The
mean score of students having low self-esteem who are taught by using
lecture (67.27) is higher than that of those who are taught by using
Teams-Games-Tournament (60.18), so lecture is more effective than
Teams-Games-Tournament to teach reading for students having low
self-esteem.
d. Because qo between B1 and B2 (8.56) is higher than qt at the level of
significance () = 0.05 (2.95) and qt at the level of significance () =
0.01 (4.02), students having high self-esteem differ significantly from
those having low self-esteem in their reading test. The mean score of
students having high self-esteem (71.73) is higher than that of those
66
having low self-esteem (63.73), so students having high self-esteem

have better reading skill than those having low self-esteem.
D. Discussion of the Result of the S tudy

1. Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than lecture method to teach
reading.
In Teams-Games-Tournament, students not only learn and receive
whatever the teacher teaches in the teaching-learning process, but also learn
from other students. In other words, students are demanded to be more active
in joining the learning process. Teams-Games-Tournament requires student
groups to work cooperatively (Johnson, 1996: 114). Further, it is stated in
http://cit.duke.edu/resources/teaching _ learningpresenting.html that people
learn best in interactive, student-centered environments.
On the other hand, lecture is less effective to improve students
reading skill since lecture less motivates students to involve in the teaching-
learning process. Lecture fosters passive learning with very low student
involvement (M oore, 1999: 182). Students just become the followers and
depend on the teacher during the teaching learning process.
Based on multifactor analysis of variance 2 x 2 and Tukey test, the
results show that F o between columns (10.91) is higher than F t at the level of
significance = 0.05 (4.08) and F t at the level of significance = 0.01 (7.31)
and qo between A 1 and A 2 (4.67) is higher than qt at the level of significance
= 0.05 (2.95) and qt at the level of significance = 0.01 (4.02). It means that
Teams-Games-Tournament differs significantly from the lecture method. The
mean score of students who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament
(69.91) is higher than that of those who are taught by using lecture (65.55). It
means that Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than the lecture
method to teach reading.
67
2. The students who have high self-esteem have better reading skill than those
who have low self-esteem.
Students having high self-esteem have high aspiration, great effort,
more persistent, believe themselves to be capable, successful, and worthy.
Students with high self-esteem are challenged to be the best as they can be
(http://www.mindspirit.org/women_selfesteem.htm). The students having high
level of self-esteem expect to do well in their accomplishments, try hard, and
tend to be successful (Atwater, 1990: 155). They are inclined to attribute their
success to their abilities, and to make due allowance for circumstances in
interpreting their failures. Greater self-esteem leads to greater effort and
persistence in the face of setbacks, so even if one is interrupted in his/her
reading, he/she is likely to return to the task (Woolfolk, 2007: 333).
M eanwhile, the students having low self-esteem have the opposite
characteristics. They tend to expect the worst, exert less effort on their tasks,
especially challenging and demanding ones, and achieve less success
(Atwater, 1990: 155). Even, when students having low self-esteem achieve
success, they are less apt to attribute their success t o their abilities or to enjoy
it. In other words, students with high self-esteem forge ahead academically
while those with low self-esteem fall behind.
results show that Fo between rows (36.67) is higher than F t at the level of
significance = 0.05 (4.08) and F t at the level of significance = 0.01 (7.31)
and qo between B1 and B2 (8.56) is hig4her than qt at the level of significance
() = 0.05 (2.95) and qt at the level of significance () = 0.01 (4.02). It means
that students having high self-esteem differ significantly from those having
low self-esteem on their reading skill. The mean score of students having high
self-esteem (71.73) is higher than that of those having low self-esteem (63.73).
It means that students having high self-esteem have better reading skill than
those having low self-esteem.
68
3. There is an interaction effect between teaching methods and students self-

esteem on the students reading skill.
Teaching method which is used by the teacher influences the
success of the teaching and learning process. Unlike lecture, which places the
students in passive learning role, Teams-Games-Tournament requires the
students to be active in the learning process. Teams-Games-Tournament
demands student involvement in the learning process (http://
www.cust.educ.ubc.ca/cust565 - 05/seeds/2006/213 _ 06/CADIZ/TXT/
M icroteachingTGT.pdf).
Self-esteem is also crucial to acquire reading skill. The students
who have high self-esteem are active in joining the teaching-learning process.
Bandura in Cloninger (2009: 355) states that high self-esteem leads to effort
and persistence at a task and setting higher goals. The stronger the self-
esteem, the more likely are persons select challenging task and persist at them
(http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efftalk.html). In other words, students having
high self-esteem like demanding activities. Therefore, Teams-Games-
Tournament is suitable for students having high self-esteem.
M eanwhile, lecture is suitable for students having low self-esteem

since it possesses characteristics which make the students passive during
teaching-learning process. In lecture, students usually get knowledge from
their teacher. They are not demanded to elaborate their ideas, thoughts, and
feelings. In lecture, teacher is more active and students are passive
(http://www.cemca.org/braou/subject01/ldmtext.htm). In fact, students having
low self-esteem tend to be passive in the teaching-learning process. They
exert less effort on their tasks, especially challenging and demanding ones
(Atwater, 1990: 155). In other words, they prefer being passive in the
teaching-learning process. That is why, lecture is more effective for students
having low self-esteem.
69

results show that Fo interaction (75.17) is higher than F t at the level of
significance = 0.05 (4.08) and F t at the level of significance = 0.01 (7.31);
qo between A 1B1 and A 2B1 (11.97) is higher than qt at the level of significance
= 0.05 (3.11) and qt at the level of significance = 0.01 (4.39); and q o
between A 1B2 and A 2B2 (5.37) is higher than qt at the level of significance =
0.05 (3.11) and qt at the level of significance = 0.01 (4.39). It means that
Teams-Games-Tournament differs significantly from lecture method to teach
reading for students having high self-esteem and lecture method differs
significantly from Teams-Games-Tournament to teach reading for students
having low self-esteem. The mean score of students having high self-esteem
who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament (79.64) is higher than
that of those who are taught by using lecture (63.82). It means that Teams-
Games-Tournament is more effective than lecture method to teach reading for
students having high-self-esteem. The mean score of students having low self-
esteem who are taught by using lecture (67.27) is higher than that of those
who are taught by using Teams-Games-Tournament (60.18). It means that
lecture is more effective than Teams-Games Tournament to teach reading for
students having low self-esteem.
Therefore, there is an interaction effect between teaching methods
and self-esteem toward students reading skill. Teams-Games-Tournament is
more effective than lecture method to teach reading for students having high
self-esteem. In other words, Teams-Games-Tournament is suitable for
students having high self-esteem. M eanwhile, lecture is more effective than
Teams-Games-Tournament to teach reading for students having low self-
esteem. In other words, lecture is suitable for students having low self-esteem.
70
CHAPTER V
CONCLUS ION, IMPLICATION, AND S UGGES TION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the study in Chapter IV, the writer can conclude
that the research findings are:
1. Teams-Games-Tournament is more effective than the lecture method to
teach reading.
2. The students who have high self-esteem have better reading skill than
those who have low self-esteem.
3. There is an interaction effect between the two variables, teaching methods
and the degree of self-esteem. It means that the effect of teaching methods
depends on the degree of self-esteem.
Based on the research findings, it can be concluded that in this
experimental research Teams-Games-Tournament is an effective method to
teach reading at the seventh grade students of SM P Batik Surakarta.
B. Implication
Since Teams-Games-Tournament is proved to be effective, the use of
Teams-Games-Tournament is recommended in teaching reading. Teams-
Games-Tournament must be applied well in the teaching-learning process.
Each lesson in Teams-Games-Tournament should include five basic
elements, namely: (1) positive interdependence-students must feel they are
responsible for their own learning and other members of the group; (2) face
to face interaction-students must have opportunity to explain what they are
learning to each other; (3) individual accountability -each student must be
held accountable for mastery of the assigned work; (4) social skills-each
students must communicate effectively, maintain respect among group
members, and work together; and (5) group processing-group must be
assessed to see how well they are working together and how they can
improve.
70
71
The procedures of Teams-Games-Tournament are: (1) the teacher

explains the material; (2) the students work in a group of four; (3) each
member of a group plays a game in the given tournament table with members
from other groups; (4) the students go back to their groups to add up their
individual tournament scores; (5) the teacher announces the winning group
and gives certificates to groups based on specified criteria.
Hopefully, by applying the suitable teaching method, that is Teams-
Games-Tournament, the students are able to obtain an optimum result in
reading achievement.
C. S uggestion
1. For Teachers
a. Teachers can use Teams-Games-Tournament to teach reading to
improve students reading skill.
b. Teachers have to consider that self-esteem plays a crucial role in
learning.
2. For Students
a. Students must be more active in the teaching and learning process in
order to improve their reading skill.
b. Students having low self-esteem should encourage themselves and
realize the importance of active involvement in the teaching learning
process.
3. For Other Researchers
a. Other researchers can use this result of the study as the starting point to
continue the next study.
b. They are also able to do a better study by developing another research
with different attributive variables, such us students risk-taking,
intelligence, or language attitude.
72
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aebersold, Jo Ann and Field, M ary. 2000. From Reader to Reading Teacher:
Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Alderson, J. Charles and Urquhart, A. H. 1996. Reading in a Foreign Language.

London: Longman.
Andres, Veronika de. 2002-2003. The Influence of Affective Variables on

EFL/ESL Learning and Teaching. The Journal of the Imagination in
Language Learning and Teaching. Volume VII: http://www.njcu.edu/
CILL /vol7/andres.html.
Arends, I. Richard. 1997. Classroom Instruction and Management. New York:

M cGraw-Hill.
th
. 2004. Learning to Teach. 6 ed. New York: M cGraw-Hill.
Atwater, Eastwood. 1990. Psychology of Adjustment: Personal Growth in a

Changing World. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bennett, Barrie and Rolheiser, Carol. 2001. Teaching Masters: Adapted from
Beyond Monet, The Artful Science of Instructional Integration. Jan
Kielven: http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/pdfs/w/ii/T eachingMasters.doc.
Biggs, John and Watkins, David. 1995. Classroom Learning: Educational

Psychology for the Asian Teacher. London: Prentice Hall.
Brindley, Geoff. 1995. Language Assessment in Action. Sydney: National Centre

for English Language Teaching and Research.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New

York: Longman.
. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An3 Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy. New York: Longman.
Brown, James Dean. 1995. The Element of Language Curriculum: A Systematic

Approach to Program Development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle
Publishers.
Burgess, Sally and Head, Katie. 2005. How to Teach for Exams. Essex: Longman.
72
73
Carrell, Patricia L, et al. 1996. Interactive Approaches to Second Language

Reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Catts, Hugh W. and Kamhi, Alan G. 2005. The Connections Between Language
and Reading Disabilities. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc.
Celce-M urcia, M arianne. 2001. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning.
Christensen, Larry B. 2007. Experimental Methodology. 10th ed. London: Allyn

and Bacon, Inc.
Corsini, Raymond J. 1994. Encyclopedia of Psychology. 2nd ed. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Creswell, John W. 2008. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and

rd
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. 3 ed. New Jersey:
M errill Prentice Hall.
nd
Cruickshank,, Donald R., et al. 1999. The Act of Teaching. 2 ed. New York:
M cGraw- Hill College.
Davies, Florence. 1995. Introducing Reading. England: Penguin Books.
Dornyei, Zoltan. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. New

York: Cambridge University Press.
Elliott, Stephen N., et.al. 2000. Educational Psychology: Effective Teaching,

Effecting Learning. 3rd ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill
Fashola, et al. 1997. Effective Programs for Latino Students in Elementary and
Middle Schools. University of California at Santa Barbara
Feldman, Robert S. 2005. Understanding Psychology. 7th ed. New York: The
M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Fraenkel, Jack R. and Wallen, Norman E. 2000. How to Design and Evaluate
th
Research in Education. 4 ed. New York: M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Good, Thomas L. and Brophy, Jere E. 1990. Educational Psychology: A Realistic

Approach. New York: Longman.
Gower, Roger, et al. 1995. Teaching Practice Handbook. Oxford: Heinemann.

74
Grellet, Franqoise. 1998. Developing Reading Skills: A Practical Guide to

Reading Comprehension Exercises. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of

English Language Teaching. Essex: Longman.
http://dudy-adityawan.com/education/team-games-tournament-method-tgt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Lecture.
http://www.adprima.com/teachmeth.htm.
http://www.centerforconsciousliving.com/selfesteem.
https://www.csupomona.edu/~jkupsh/instructional/Text_and_Worksheets/ text5.
pdf.
http://www.eslteachersboard.com/egibin/ articles/index.pl?page=3;read=949
http://www.finchpark.com/arts/
http://www.njcu.edu/CILL/vol7/ andres.html
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/cll/cl/advlec.html
Johnson, Burke and Christensen, Larry. 2000. Educational Research: Quantitative

and Qualitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Johnson, David W., et al. 2000. Cooperative Learning Methods: A Meta-Analysis.

M innesota: http://www.co-operation.org/pages/cl-methods.html.
Johnson, Karen E. 1996. Understanding Communication in Second Language

Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Langan, John. 2002. English Skills with Reading. 5th ed. Boston: M cGraw Hill.
Littlewood, William T. 1998. Foreign and Second Language Learning. New

York: Cambridge University Press.
M altby, Florence, et al. 1995. Educational Psychology: An Australian and New

Zealand Perspective. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
75
M ason, Emanuel J. and Bramble, William J. 1997. Research in Education and the
Behavioral Sciences: Concepts and Methods. London: Brown and
Benchmark Publishers.
M ikulecky, Beatrice S. and Jeffries, Linda. 2007. Advanced Reading Power:

Extensive Reading, Vocabulary Building, Comprehension Skills, Reading
Faster. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
M oore, Kenneth D. 1999. Middle and Secondary School Instructional Methods.

2nd ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill College.
Newman, Barbara M . and Newman, Philip R. 2009. Development Through Life: A

Psychosocial Approach. 10th ed. New York: Wadsworth Cengage
Learning.
Norman, G. Dion. 2005. Using STAD in an EFL Elementary School Classroom in

South Korea: Effects on Student Achievement, Self-esteem, and Attitude
Toward Cooperative Learning. University of Toronto.
Nunan, David. 1992. 1998. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nuttal, Christine. 1996. Teaching Reading Skill in a Foreign Language. London:

Heinemann Educational Books.
Orrnstein, Allan C. and Lasley, Thomas J. 2000. Strategies for Effective Teaching.
3rd ed. Boston: M cGrawHill.
Parsons, Richard D., et al. 2001. Educational Psychology: A Practitioner-

Researcher Model of Teaching. London: Wadsworth.
Passer, M ichael W. and Smith, Ronald E. 2004. Psychology: The Science of Mind
and Behavior. New York: The M cGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Qian, David D. 2002. September. Investigating the Relationship Between

Vocabulary Knowledge and Academic Reading Performance: An
Assessment Perspective. A Journal of Research in Language Studies:
Language Learning. 52 (3), 513.
Richards, Jack C and Rodgers Theodore S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in

nd
Language Teaching. 2 ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivers, Wilga M . 1996. Communicating Naturally: Theory and Practice in

Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
76
Santrock, John W. 2006. Human Adjusment. Boston: M cGraw-Hill.
Silberstein, Sandra. 1994. Techniques and Resources in Teaching Reading.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spolsky, Bernard. 1999. Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics.

Oxford: Elsevier.
Sprintal, Richard C., et al. 1998. Educational Psychology: A Developmental

Approach. 7th ed. Boston: M cGraw-Hill.
Sudjana. 2002. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: PT Tarsito Bandung.
Suharsimi Arikunto. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek.

Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
Wallace, Catherine. 1996. Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wiersma, William. 2000. Research Methods in Education: An Introduction. 7 th

ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Williams, Eddie. 1996. Reading in the Language Classroom. Hertfordshire:

Phoenix ELT.
Williams, M arion and Burden, Robert L. 1997. Psychology for Language

Teachers: a Social Constructivist Approach. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Woolfolk, Anita. 2007. Educational Psychology. 10th ed. New York: Pearson
Education, Inc.

73

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

73

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAMS-GAMES-TOURNAMENT

TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM

(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik

S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)

ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY

IZAH FARHANI. The Effectiveness of Teams-Games-Tournament to Teach

This research is aimed at finding out whether: (1) Teams-Games-

This thesis has been approved by the consultants to be examined by the

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd. Dr. Abdul Asib, M . Pd.

The Head of English Education Department

Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.

Board of Examiners Signature

The Director of Graduate School The Head of Graduate School of

Prof. Drs. Suranto, M . Sc., Ph. D Dr. Ngadiso, M . Pd.

This is to certify that I myself write this thesis, entitled The

Surakarta, July, 2010

Verily, my prayer, my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allah

The writer would like to say alhamdulillaahirabbil aalamiin to Allah

Surakarta, July, 2010

TO TEACH READING VIEWED FROM

(An Experimental S tudy at the S eventh Grade S tudents of S MP Batik

S urakarta in the Academic Year of 2009/2010)

ENGLIS H EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

S EBELAS MARET UNIVERS ITY

A. Background of the S tudy

M ethod of teaching is one of the important factors in the teaching-

Teams-Games-Tournament is one type of cooperative learning which

Affective factors in reading can be attitude, motivation, self-esteem,

STUDENTS SELF-ESTEEM (An Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade

E. Objective of the S tudy

F. Benefit of the S tudy

b. What M akes a Reading Text Easy or Difficult

4) They are clearly organized

e. Purposes for Reading

f. Types of Reading Task

2) Reading for basic comprehension.

g. Component Skills and Content Areas of Reading

reads, and to decide what information is relevant or useful for ones

i. M icro Skills for Reading

Harmer (1998: 8) proposes the following skills in reading:

Langan (2002: 582) mentions several important reading skills,

Burgess and Head (2005: 29-33) mentions a list of reading skills, as

9) Understanding cohesion between parts of a text through grammatical

In addition, Brindley (1995: 18) mentions the micro-skills for

14) Guessing the meaning of a new word from context

k. Types of Classroom Reading Performance

In conclusion, reading skill is a mental process to get meaning from

classrooms to a cooperative one so that the success of one student is positively

b. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning

heterogeneous teams would seem especially beneficial for students who

c. Key Components of Effective Cooperative Learning

individual accountability, students are provided with an incentive to help

4) Interpersonal and small group skills

d. Definition of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

information, for reviewing and test preparation (http://www.yrdsb.edu.on.ca/

e. The Procedure of Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT)

TGT uses the same teacher presentations and teamwork as in STAD,

to an overall team score. Instead of quizzes, there are weekly tournament

f. The Advantages of TGT

TGT requires interaction among students which is beneficial for them

b. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Lecture

Further, M oore (1999: 181) mentions the strengths of lecture as