Sakinah*1, Asnawi Muslem1, and Diana Fauzia Sari1

1Syiah

Kuala University, Banda Aceh

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

This study was a quantitative

research about the implementation of Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review

(SQ3R) a strategy for solving specific questions individually and for helping

students to memorize teaching materials, in teaching reading descriptive text.

It was intended to find out whether or not SQ3R strategy could improve

students’ reading comprehension. The subject of this study was all students of

class VIII-5 of SMP Negeri 8 Banda Aceh which was chosen by using simple random

sampling. The reason for conducting this study was due to the fact that

students’ reading comprehension was still low. Moreover, the design used in

this study was one group pre-test post-test design. In this study, the data was

collected through pre-test, treatment and post-test. From the result of the

study, it is found that mean of post-test (60) was higher than mean of pre-test

(30.95). It indicated that the students’ post-test scores were increased from

their pre-test scores Moreover, based on t-test formula, the result of t-score

(7.83) was higher than t-table (2.086). It means that the alternative

hypothesis (Ha) was accepted, while the null hypothesis (H0)

was rejected. Hence, it can be concluded that SQ3R strategy can improve the

students’ reading comprehension in descriptive text.

Key

Words : Reading comprehension, SQ3R, Descriptive text

1. INTRODUCTION

Reading is one of the most important skills

that should be mastered by students in learning English as a foreign language

(EFL). Reading is one important way to improve your general language

skills in English. Reading will help you to think in English, it enlarge your

vocabulary, and improve your reading and writing skill in English (Mikulecky and Jefferies, 1996,

p.1). The most

common goal of reading is text comprehension, the

construction of meaning that in some way corresponds to the author’s intended

meaning (Ruddell,

2005, p.88).

Based on

Curriculum 2013, the goal of teaching reading at eight grade of Junior High

School is the students are expected to comprehend a simple short functional

text in the form of descriptive, recount, and narrative based on its context

(Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2013). It means that the students are expected to comprehend some kinds of

English texts.

Nowadays

many techniques and strategies can

be applied to solve

this problem and increase students’ reading comprehension. One of the

appropriate strategies is SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite,

and Review in reading) as strategy that suggested by Robinson in 1940’s such supposed in Ruddell (2005,

p.264). SQ3R is an effective active reading strategy to better understand written

content, the learning process would be done in five steps, they are survey,

question, read, recite, and review in reading. The main point of this strategy

is the students perhaps have high motivation because they are given a chance to

active in teaching learning process.

Furthermore, SQ3R is a complex strategy; the learners must have cognitive

resources and knowledge before they become experienced (Li, Chen, Fan, &

Huang, 2014, p. 320). In

addition, SQ3R focuses

on improving students’ comprehension when reading complex materials and serves

as a foundation for many reading strategies (Khaghaninejad, Saadabadimotlagh,

& Kowsari, 2015, p. 101). Moreover, SQ3R will help students in reading

process to understand text well step by step. As said by Ghazo (2015, p. 94) SQ3R presents a detailed step by

step outline at what a reader should accomplish while reading.

Based on

explanation above the researcher is interested in conducting the research entitle “Teaching Reading Comprehension through

SQ3R”

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 The

Definition of Reading

Reading is

an essential component of academic learning as well as a foundation for

becoming an informed member of the broader community. Failure to achieve

adequate reading proficiency denies students access to the essential tool for

further learning (Koda and Zehler, 2008, p. 1). Although reading and listening

are often referred to as ‘passive’ or receptive skills, in reality both involve

complex mental processing in order for the listener to make sense of material

(Hurd and Murphy, 2005, p. 80). Reading is a complex process that must be

modelled, taught, practiced, and evaluated on daily basic (Stone, 2009, p. 40).

Furthermore,

McDonough, Shaw, and Masuhara (2013, p. 110) said that as a skill, reading is

clearly one of the most important. Many evidence shows that, reading is the

most important language skills, especially for students have to read their

material for their subject in English. English has also been the main driving

language or dominant language of the internet. People who cannot read will not be

able to acquire new information from written media. According to those views,

it can be inferred reading help people to gain knowledge.

2.2 Descriptive Text

Descriptive

text is a text which describes about the features and characteristics of a

certain thing in detail (a person or a thing). Its purpose is to describe and

reveal a particular person, place, or thing.

The generic structures of descriptive are:

a. Identification

(introduction); the part of paragraph that introduces who, where, or what is being

described the story.

b. Character

description; the part of paragraph that describes the characteristic, parts and qualities of the subject

being described.

The language features of descriptive texts are Pronouns, Nouns, Noun phrases, Adjectives, Preposition, Adverbs, Linking verbs,Present tense, and Attributive has and have.

2.3 SQ3R

SQ3R which

stands for survey, question, read, recite/recall, and review- is a system that

has been practiced for many years (Richardson and Morgan, 2003, p. 361). In

addition, Francis P. Robinson, the education psychology as a creator of SQ3R, spent years teaching both college students and military personnel

how to learn from text books. His system, if used consistently, can still

produce big rewards (Flemming, 2009, p. 2). SQ3R is a step to decrease

forgetting and raise reader comprehension. There are explanations each step of

SQ3R according to Flemming, (2011, p. 2-31)

S = Survey

Survey is the step to get general overview and make predictions.

It has four goals give reader following

1.)

a general overview of material

2.)

a feeling for researcher style and organization

3.)

a sense for what’s important

4.)

an idea of the text natural break or

decisions

Q = Question

Ask and answer question while reading. Raising and answer question

during a study session help you remain mentally active throughout your reading.

Using question to maintain your concentration can also keep your alert to key

points address in the chapter.

R= Read

Read difficult material in sections or chunks. In this step while

reading you may write such as identify main point or list some specific use to

explain the point. It helps you really understand what you read. It also

excellent way to support you in remembers the point.

R = Recall/ Recite

Summarize and repeat to yourself what you have just read and take

notes in your own word. See how much you can recall right after reading. It is

become important because of two reasons:

·

It is a way to monitoring your understanding

before you going to next section

·

It is shows the rate of forgetting and

increase your chance or remembering what the author of text actually said

R = Review

Review right after completing the

assignment. Check the accuracy of your note against the text and connect any

inaccuracies. The goals of this step are:

·

To get sense

of how the parts of a section connect

·

To confirm

or revise you initial predictions about sections content.

3. METHODS

In this study, the researcher will use quantitative research.

According to Arends (2004, p. 495) quantitative research is an approach to

research that assumes a goal reality that studies conducted in an objective way

and uses statistical methods to investigate data. This study used experimental

research design that was intended to answer research problem. The research

employed a pre experimental design. The model of this experiment design was

called one group pretest – posttest design. The

design consists of a pre-test, followed by treatment, and then a post-test.

This research was conducted in SMP Negeri 8 Banda Aceh. Meanwhile, as the sample of this research was

class VIII-5. This class had 21 students which consisted of 11 male students

and 10 female students. This class was selected by using simple random

sampling.

After the result of pre-test and post-test collected, to analyze the

result of the tests, the researcher used the following scoring system:

One correct answer = 10

The sum of the questions = 10

Total score = 10 x 10 = 100

The sum of the student’s score = the correct answer x 10

Additionally, the researcher used quantitative

analysis to analyse the data. First, the researcher calculated the average

score (mean) of the students. Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen and Razavieh (2010, p. 108) have described the formula of

mean as follows:

Where:

= mean ?

= sum of

N = number of students = scores

Then, the researcher used the formula of

standard deviation to investigate the variability of the study. The formula of

standard deviation that has been defined by Ary et al. (2010, p. 177) as follows:

Where:

SD = standard

deviation ?

= sum of

D = difference between pre-test

and post-test scores N = number of students

Finally, the researcher used

t-test to find out the significant difference between pre-test and post-test.

The t-test formula as stated by Ary et al. (2010, p. 177) is:

Where:

t = t ratio ? = sum of

D = difference between pre-test and post-test scores N= number of students

D = mean of D

4.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1

Findings

The

result is about students’ learning outcomes after being taught by using SQ3R.

As explained in the previous chapters, this study aims to determine the

significant effect of SQ3R towards students’ performance in reading

comprehension. To find out the effectiveness of SQ3R, the following sections

elaborate the process of teaching implementation along with the data analysis

of the students’ reading score which was collected through pre-test and

post-test. Then the

results of the research were analyzed by using some statistical analysis.

Moreover, the explanation of the results of the research will be deeply

explained in the following section.

4.1.1 The Result of Pre-test

Before

applying SQ3R in teaching reading, it was necessary to know the students’ ability

in comprehending descriptive text. In the first meeting, pre-test was given to

the students of class VIII-5 to get the data needed. The result of the pre-test

is shown in table 4.1.a

Table 4.1.a The Distribution Frequency of Pre-test Score

Class Interval

(Students Score)

Frequency

(Students)

Percentage of Student (%)

(10 – 19)

4

19

(20 – 29)

2

10

(30 – 39)

7

33

(40 – 49)

5

24

(50 – 59)

2

10

(60 – 69)

1

5

(70 – 79)

0

0

(80 – 89)

0

0

(90 – 90)

0

0

100

0

0

Total

21

100

Moreover, to make it clearer, the researcher presented the data in

figure 4.1.a to illustrate the students’ pre-test scores. The X axis represents

the score of pre-test, while the Y axis represents the number of students.

Figure 4.1.a The Students’

Pre-test Scores

From table 4.1.a and figure 4.1.a, it can be seen that the

students got various scores in which the lowest score was 10 and the highest

score was 60. In addition, there were four students (19%) who got the lowest

score (10), and there were only one student (5%) who got the highest score

(60). However, most students (33%) got 30 score. So, it can be concluded that

the students’ reading comprehension was still low. Furthermore, it also

revealed that no student could reach KKM which was 75.

4.1.2 The Result of Post-Test

The researcher gave post-test as a final test to determine the

students’ ability in reading comprehension after accomplishing treatment. The

result of the post-test is exposed in table 4.1.b

Table 4.1.b The Distribution Frequency of Post-test Score

Class Interval

(Students Score)

Frequency

(Students)

Percentage of Student (%)

(10 – 19)

0

0

(20 – 29)

1

5

(30 – 39)

2

10

(40 – 49)

3

14

(50 – 59)

3

14

(60 – 69)

5

24

(70 – 79)

0

0

(80 – 89)

3

14

(90 – 90)

3

14

100

1

5

Total

21

100

In addition, to make it clearer, the researcher presented figure

4.1.b to illustrate the students’ post-test scores. The X axis represents the

score of post-test and the Y axis represents the number of students.

Figure 4.1.b The Students’

Post-test Scores

Table 4.1.b and figure 4.1.b show the students’ post-test scores.

Furthermore, it can be seen that the highest score of post-test was 100 that

was obtained by one student (5%). Whereas, 20 was the lowest score of post-test

that was reached by one student (5%). In addition, most students (24%) got 60

which showed that there was an improvement of students’ reading comprehension

compared to pre-test.

However,

referring to the school regulation, there were only seven students that reached

the score of KKM. It means that SQ3R did not significantly help the students to

reach KKM regulated.

4.1.3 Students’ Pre-test and Post-test scores

In this section, the students’ pre-test and post-test scores will

be compared in one histogram, figure 4.1.c. Thus, the comparison of students’

pre-test and post-test scores can be observed in detail. In figure 4.1.c, the X

axis represents the students’ scores of pre-test and post-test, while the Y

axis represents the number of students.

Comparison pre-test result and

post-test result

Figure 4.1.c The Students’

Pre-test and Post-test Comparison Scores

As shown in figure 4.1.c, it can be noted that in general the

post-test scores were higher than the pre-test scores. In addition, the lowest

score of post-test was 20 which rose for about 10 of the lowest score of

pre-test that was 10. Meanwhile, the highest score of post-test was 100 that

rose for about 40 of the highest score of pre-test that was 60.

Besides, the most frequent score in pre-test was 30 that were

obtained by seven students. Otherwise, the frequent score in post-test was 60

that were achieved by five students. Hence, most students’ scores changed

significantly in the post-test.

4.1.4 Mean of Pre-test and Post-test

Mean was necessary to measure the

students’ pre-test scores and the students’ post-test scores. The formula of

mean is total score of the students (?X) divided by total number of the

students (N). Moreover, the mean of pre-test and post-test scores can be

compared to indicate the improvement of students’ reading comprehension.

The

calculation of mean of students’ pre-test scores is as follows:

While, the

calculation of mean of students’ post-test scores is as follows:

Based on

the results of both mean, it can be seen that mean of post-test was higher than

mean of pre-test. The difference between two mean was about 29,05. Hence, in

average, the students’ pre-test scores increased significantly to the students’

post-test scores. This could be concluded that the use of SQ3R could enhance

the students’ reading comprehension.

4.1.5 Standard Deviation

After comparing mean of students’ pre-test

and post-test scores, the researcher calculated the standard deviation. It was used to measure

variability or dispersion of students’ pre-testand post-test

scores. The calculation of standard deviation is as follows:

Based on the calculation above, it can be concluded that the

dispersal or range of students’ pre-test and post-test scores was 17.

4.1.6. T-test

After processing standard deviation,

the researcher calculated t-test in order to find out the hypothesis testing.

The calculation of t-test is as follows:

From the

data calculation of t-test above, it can be seen that t-score was 7.83. In

addition, to test the hypothesis, the t-score must be compared with t-table

(refers to appendix 12). If t-table > t-score, this means the alternative

hypothesis (Ha) is rejected, and the null hypothesis (H0)

is accepted. Otherwise, if t-table 2.086), it

means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted while the

null hypothesis (H0) was rejected. Thus, all these analysis of data

indicated that the implementation of SQ3R improved the students’ reading

comprehension.

4.2. Hypothesis Testing

In analysing the hypothesis, it is referred to the t- table at

level significance ? 0.05. The testing criterion used for hypothesis result is;

if t-test > t-table, it means that the difference is significance and the

alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected.

Furthermore, the t-table with the level significance of ? 0.05 of freedom (df)

n-1= 21-1=20 is 2.086.

4.3 Discussion

The researcher would like to

discuss about hypothesis testing. In this research, the researcher used level

of significant ? = 0.05. Moreover, for the testing criterion of the hypothesis:

if t-score >t-table this means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha)

is accepted, and the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected, while if

t-table>t-score this means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha)

is rejected, and the null hypothesis (H0) is accepted.

Furthermore, the researcher would

like to present the statistical data of the improvement of students’ pre-test

and post-test scores in table 4.3

Table 4.3The Improvement of Students’

Pre-test and Post-test Scores

Test

Total score

Mean

Standard

Deviation

T-Test

T-Table

Pre-test

650

30.95

17

7.83

2.086

Post-test

1260

60

Based on the table 4.3, it can be concluded that pre-test to post-test score had an improvement. It could

be seen from mean of both tests. The mean of pre-test was 30.95, while in post-test was 60. If we compare the

two means of the tests, it was seen that the mean of post-test was higher than pre-test. It proved that the

treatment by using SQ3R could improve students reading comprehension.

5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

After completing this study, the

researcher illustrated some conclusions and suggestions in terms of the use of

Survey, Question, Read, Recite, and Review (SQ3R) strategy in improving the

students’ reading ability in comprehending text. The data obtained in second grade students of

SMP Negeri 8 Banda showed that using SQ3R improve students’ achievement. Furthermore, the improvement of

students’ reading comprehension can be seen from some statistical data. First,

the mean of post-test was higher than pre-test (60 >30.95). This indicated

that there was significant difference among two mean scores. In addition, based

on the t-test analysis, the t-test score of the students was 7.83, while the

table was 2.086. Because t-test (7.83) was higher than the t-score measurement

table (2.086), it can be concluded that the result was significant which means

that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted and the null

hypothesis (H0) was rejected. In

short, SQ3R was effective to improve students’ ability in reading

comprehension.

Regarding to teach reading comprehension by Survey, Question,

Read, Recite, and Review (SQ3R), the researcher gives some suggestions teachers

and the students as follows.

a. For the teacher

The teacher must be creative to

used SQ3R strategy in order that students are interested and are not bored in

the teaching and learning process.

b. For the

student

Students should be brave and

active in reading text because it is one of the best practices that can improve

students’ reading comprehension.

REFERENCES

Arends, R. L. (2004). Learning to Teach Sixth Edition. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C.,

& Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction

to research in education (8th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Flemming, L. E. (2009). Reading for thinking (6th ed). Boston, CA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Publishing Company.

Flemming, L. E. (2011). Reading for results (11th ed).

Boston, CA: Wadsworth.

Ghazo, A. A. (2015). The Effect of SQ3R and Semantic Mapping

Strategies on Reading Comprehension Learning Among Jordanian University

students. English and Education,

4(3), 92-106.

Hurd, S., &

Murphy, L. (2005). Success with Languages.

Madison Ave: Routledge.

Khaghaninejad, M. S., Saadabadimotlagh, H., & Kowsari,

S. (2015). Examining the Effects of Strategy-Based Instruction of Reading

Passage to Iranian Undergraduate EFL Learners. English Language and Literature Studies, 4(2), 96-110.

Koda, K. & Zehler, A. M. (2008).

Learning to Read Across Language:

Cross-Linguistic Relationships in First- and Second-Language Literacy

Development. Madison Ave: Routledge.

Li, L.-Y., Chen, G.-D., Fan, C.-Y., Huang, D.-W. (2014). The

Effects of the E-Book System with the Reading Guidance and the Annotation Map

on the Reading Performance of College Students. Educational Technology &

Society, 17 (1), 320–331.

McDonough, J., Shaw, C., Masahura, H. (2013). Materials and methods

in ELT: A teacher’s guide. (3nd

ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Mikulecky, B. S., & Jeffries, L. (1996). More Reading Power. New York : Longman,

Ltd.

Richardson, J. S., Morgan, R. F.,

Fleener, C. (2009). Reading to Learn in

the Content Areas. Wadsworth. Cengage Learning.

Ruddell, R. M.(2005). Teaching Content Reading and Writing. (4thed.). United

State of America: John Willey & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Stone, R. (2009). Best Practices for Teaching Reading: What

Award-Winning Classroom Teachers Do. California: Crowin Press.