the effect of jigsaw 2 technique

8/12/2019 the effect of jigsaw 2 technique

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-jigsaw-2-technique 1/47

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In general, there are four skills that should be developed in teaching learning of

English. They are listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. Reading is an

important skill particularly in English as second or foreign language (ESL/EFL)

learning. Reading is necessary when students want to continue from elementary

school until university level. They need good reading skill for acquiring knowledge

and learning new information. As Krashen (1983:131) states that reading is one of

English language skills which can serve as an important source of comprehensible

input and may take a significant contribution to the development of overall

proficiency.

Furthermore, Bond (1984:10) states that the importance of reading is to obtain

the information which can be used to solve problem and for pleasure, particularly in

the elementary and intermediate levels. Students need reading to confirm their spoken

language and to be able to acquire other skills like listening, speaking and writing. So,

it is clear that reading becomes the essential point that has to be emphasized in

teaching of language in Indonesia.

In addition, to the important of reading for the students, it can help them to

enrich their knowledge about new information which is coming from the outside

because lots of reading material which is coming from another country always written



in English. So that, we are not going to miss the important information. Thus, reading

is essential to success in school and in information driven society (Collins, 1998: 2).

Although the techniques of teaching reading have already been developed by

the experts, but in fact there are still many students who are poor in their reading

achievement. One of the problems lead to the poorness of students‟ reading

achievement is the inappropriate technique that teacher uses in presenting material.

So, the students feel bored in teaching and learning process.

Based on researcher‟s observation in Senior High School 2 Kendari on

Saturday, July 30th

2011, it seemed that the teaching of English reading in that school

is still facing difficulties. The researcher observed that most of students got

difficulties when doing task that related to the reading text. It is supported by

students‟ score in daily test in which the mean score of the result of reading test from

40 students is only 54.2 (see appendix 19) which is categorized low based on criteria

of Sudjana (1984:27).

The factor that causes the problem above is that teacher has not applied

appropriate technique for students when students work in group, not all students

participate in doing a task and the others are passive or only talking. According to

Johnson in Ranti (2010:6), cooperation is not assigned a job to a group of students

where one student does all the work and the others put their names on the paper. In

another time, there is not proportional distribution of students. Students choose their

teammates by their own and group some times consists of smarts students and others

are poor. Consequently, teaching and learning process are dominated by few students



and the others are passive. So, students‟ involvedness in classroom is not good

enough. Students also mostly just keep silent and sit quietly in their seat and did not

understand about the reading text.

Regarding to above explanation, the English teacher has an important role in

teaching learning process. The English teachers have to create or use a model of

teaching and learning process which could involve students‟ activeness as a whole; it

is because of teachers‟ role as cultivator of teaching and learning process that has to

pay attention on students‟ need and students‟ ability. Hence, teacher has to apply

method in teaching that reduce teacher‟s dominant and improve students‟

involvement in the class.

Cooperative learning is one of the learning methods that involve the students‟

activeness in learning or students centered. As stated by Sharan (1994: 326) ,

“cooperative learning is a group-centered and students-centered approach to

classroom teaching and learning”. Thus, it will reduce the teachers‟ dominant in

teaching and learning process and help students to construct their thinking by

working together with their friend.

There are lots of interesting techniques of cooperative learning. One of them

is jigsaw II technique. It is one appropriate technique that can be used in teaching

reading. As Slavin in Wang (2009) states that jigsaw II technique can be used in

teaching; listening, speaking, and reading. In addition, Slavin (2009) explains that

Jigsaw II technique has been effective both for improving the students‟ achievement

and behavior and for increasing their acceptance by their classmates.



Therefore, the researcher believes the using jigsaw II technique in teaching

reading can help students to develop their reading achievement. It is also supported

by Jacobs et al (2002) jigsaw II technique is a challenging where everyone has

responsibility to share their peace to the other member as speaker or listener in

group mates organize their idea as much as well so become understandable,

attractive, high motivation, and meaningful in learning process.

Based on the simple description above, the writer interested to carry out an

investigation concerning to the techniques used in teaching English reading under the

title “The Effect of Jigsaw II Technique on Students‟ Reading Achievement at Class

X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari”.

1.2 Research Question

The research question of this study was “is there any significant effect of jigsaw II

technique in teaching reading on the students‟ reading achievement at class X3 of

Senior High School 2 Kendari?”

1.3 Objective of the Study

The objective of this study was to find out whether there is or not a significant effect

of Jigsaw II technique in teaching English reading on students‟ reading achievement

at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari.



1.4 Significant of the Study

The significances of the study are as follows:

1. Theoretically, to give significant contribution for English teacher in determining

the appropriate method that is used to help the students for improving students‟

reading achievement.

2. Practically, as the source of information for teacher in applying the technique of

Jigsaw II.

3. As one of the reference for the further studies who are interested in carrying out

the similar research.

1.5 Scope of the Study

This study focused on the application of Jigsaw II technique to the students reading

achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari. The reading material

focused on narrative text that taken from English book for grade X based on KTSP

curriculum particularly on the first semester for the tenth grade. The skills under

reading that become the concentration of this study were the detail information of

narrative text, the mind idea of narrative text, word reference in narrative text, the

generic structures of narrative text, kind of tenses that used in narrative text, and the

communicative purpose of narrative text.

1.6 Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this study was “there is a significant effect of jigsaw II technique

on the students‟ reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2 Kendari”.



1.7 Definition of Terms

1.

Cooperative learning is a method of sharing ideas in which students work together

to learn about something and responsible for their team – mate learning as well as

their own ( Slavin, 1990).

2. Jigsaw II technique is a part of cooperative learning technique as team or group

learning procedure developed by Slavin (1990).

3. Reading is grasping meaning in that language through its written representation

( Lado, 1997:223).

4. Reading achievement in this study is the result of reading test that already

achieved by the students that can be seen by the students‟ reading score.



CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter contains the theoretical framework to support this study. It covers;

theory of teaching, reading, schema theory, concept of cooperative learning, jigsaw II

technique in teaching reading, advantages and disadvantages of jigsaw II technique,

reading achievement, and previous study related to technique.

2.1 Theory of Teaching

As the learning concept, teaching should also be comprehended by the teacher.

Teaching and learning process is a nucleus of the comprehension education system

with the teacher as primary role agent. Thus, it is because the teacher comprehension

about teaching will affect their actions in the teaching and learning process. So, it is

very important to present the teaching theories.

In narrow sense, teaching can be defined as delivering knowledge from

teacher to students. Many experts give their definitions about the sense of teaching.

Burner in his book “toward at Theory of Instruction “cited in Usman (2000:5) states

that teaching is a presentation of idea, problem, or knowledge in the simple form in

order the students can understand it. He explains, “to sim ply the teaching matter, the

teacher can use enactive, iconic, and symbolic presentation mode. Enactive is the

presentation of teaching material by using kinetic form. Iconic is the presentation of

teaching matter by using graph or picture. Symbolic is the presentation of teaching



matter by using a language and its presentation follow the children‟s development”

(p.5).

In addition, Usman (2000: 6) states that teaching is to give the students a

lead in the teaching and learning process or teaching is an effort or organizing of

learning environment and learning matter in order to create the students‟ learning

process. This opinion implies that the teachers are demanded to play a role as the

organizer in students‟ learning activity. So, the students can use this condition well.

Besides that, Firdayanti (2000:7) states that teaching is an activity that needs moral

responsibility. It is an effort to organize the environment in relating to the teaching

and learning process which skill going on.

Based on the above definitions, we may say that teaching is an effort which is

done by teacher in organizing of the teaching and learning process in order to create

the students‟ learning condition well.

2.2 Reading

Many experts give their definitions about reading. Their definitions are different each

other. Finochiaro and Bromo in Tarigan (1987: 8) point out that “reading is bringing

meaning to and getting meaning from printed or written materials”. Finochiaro

emphasizes at the output of reading that is getting meaning.

Thus, reading is grasping meaning in that language through its written

representation ( Lado, 1997 : 223) . Reading in the content is not just reading as kind

of transfer for written symbols to a sound like reading aloud, but reading establishes



with understanding the meaning of words, sentences, and paragraph sensing

relationship among the ideas.

Another definition of reading which sound similar to the expression above is

given by Nunan in Marhumi (2001: 28) who says that “reading is an interactive

process between what the reader already knows about given topic or subject and what

the writer writes”.

Reading also can be seen as an “interactive” process between a reader and a

tex t wh ich leads to automatic or (reading fluency) (Alyousef, 2006:64). Nurnia

(1998:56) adds that “At present, reading is viewed as an interactive process that the

reader not only uses information from the text but also use their prior knowledge to

interpret a message text conveys”.

Furthermor e, Tarigan (1987) states that “membaca adalah suatu proses

dilakukan serta dipergunakan oleh pembaca untuk memperoleh pesan yang hendak

disampaikan oleh penulis melalui kata-kata atau bahasa tulisan”. This mean that

reading is a process and used by the teacher to grasp message being delivered by the

writer in the medium of the word or written language.

Based on the explanation above, we may say that reading is a process that

used by the reader to grasp message in the medium words or written language. Thus,

reading is not only to identify or spell words or looking at the books but also to have

better comprehension on ideas coming from the words. Hence, someone is considered

to success in reading when she or he has an ability to extract or to comprehend the

writer‟s massage.



2.3 Schema Theory

Many reading researchers intend to subcategories the term schema. Qian (2004)

points out that generally there the most popular categorization are three major types

of schemata, as follow: „Linguistic Schemata‟ (language proficiency), Content

Schemata‟(background knowledge of the world including universal and cultural

specific knowledge) and „Formal Schemata‟ (prior knowledge of discourse structures

and text organization). The three essential types of schemata will be discussed one by

one.

1. Linguistic Schemata

Qian (2004) states that linguistic or language schemata refer to readers‟ existing

language proficiency in vocabulary, grammar and idioms. They are the foundation of

other schemata. Without certain related linguistic schemata, it is impossible for the

reader to decode the language in the text, let alone to activate the content, discourse

schemata by making use of the context clues to comprehend the text fully. Of course,

if the reader has adequate knowledge of the content, discourse schemata of text, they

can help the reader to predict or infer what will happen in the following part, which to

certain extent, can compensate for certain linguistic deficiencies.

2. Content Schemata

Content schemata refer to background knowledge of the content (Qian, 2004). If

readers are quite familiar with the topic under discussion, they can figure out most of

the meaning of the text even by reading just the title and the beginning part of the



text. Based on Liberto (1989) in Singhal, content schema, which refers to a reader‟s

background or word knowledge, provides readers with a foundation, a basis for

comparison. Generally speaking, the familiarity of the topic has a direct influence on

reader‟s comprehension. The more topics readers know about, the more reading

efficiency they can gain. Thus is one wants to be an efficient reader, one needs to read

widely including various topics such as philosophy, psychology, geography,

chemistry, biology, zoology and so on.

Bracey in Tsuguhiko (2007) states that students‟ lack of content knowledge or

prior knowledge (pertainning to the topic of the text) is become apparent, as

measured by such reading comprehension assessment or reading achievement. In this

case, prior knowledge has a great effect to the reading achievement and teacher also

helpful in build the student‟s scheme.

It is evident that readers‟ content schema are as important as their language

ability in being able to extract meaning from a text (Qian, 2004). Appropriate text

should include material that involves readers in cognitive processes using their

knowledge of the language as well as what they know about the subject matter so that

they can make predictions when encountering unfamiliar vocabulary and structures.

Proficient readers rely as much on what they know about the topic as they do on the

actual text provided to them.



3. Formal Schemata

Formal schemata refer to the organizational forms and rhetorical structures of the

written text, i.e. how pieces of textual information will relate to each other and in

what order details will appear (Carrell, 1987 in Qian). Formal schemata are higher

order structures containing knowledge of rhetorical organization structures, including

knowledge of the general properties of the text types and differences in genre (Carrel

and Eisterhold, 1988 in David). Formal schema, often known as textual schema,

refers to the organizational forms and rhetorical structures of written texts. It can

include knowledge of different types of texts types and genres, and also includes the

understanding that different types of text use text organization, language structures,

vocabulary, grammar, level of formality/register differently. Schooling and culture

play the largest role in providing one with a knowledge base of formal schemata.

Formal scheme, often known as textual schema, refers to the organizational forms

and rhetorical structures of written texts (Singhal, 1998). It can include knowledge of

different text types and genres, and also includes the understanding that different

types of texts use text organization, language structures, vocabulary, grammar, level

of formality/register differently.

Readers use their schematic representations of the text (narrative,

compare/contrast, cause/effect, newspapers, magazines, journals, textbooks, research

books, library books, menus, directions etc) to help them interpret the information in

the text. For example, in a detective story, a reader could expect the following chain

of event: a crime occurs, possible suspects are identified, evidence is uncovered, and



the perpetrator is apprehended. Various studies in both L1 and L2 show that

knowledge of different text types and genres also facilitates reading comprehension.

For different text types often use different forms of text organization, linguistic

structure. Students can be trained to take advantage of text organization and discourse

structures to enhance reading comprehension. Nevertheless, compared with the

linguistic and content schemata, the formal schemata offers less power in the reading

process.

To sum up, the three schemata activated in the reading process can be shown

as follows:

input frominference interpretation of text

text s skills

2.4 Concept of Cooperative Learning

Stahl in Muslim (2007:14) claims that, “the using of cooperative learning model is as

the approach in the teaching and learning process which needs the member group

participation. Cooperative learning can increase the students‟ motivation to learn”.

Vocabulary meaninglinguisticschemata Grammatical meaning or syntax

recognition skills

content schemata

Formal text organization

schemata discourse structures



Slavin in Jacobs (1996:26) points out that, “ all cooperative learning methods

share the idea that students work together to learn and are responsible for their

teammates‟ learning as well as their own”.

Panitz (1996) states that, “cooperative learning is defined by a set of processes

which help people interact together in order to accomplish a specific goal or

developed an end product which is usually content specific”.

Furthermore, Sharan (1994:336) states, “cooperative learning is a group

centered and students centered approach the classroom teaching and learning. Group

center learning is facilitated by learning students‟ group practice in regulating their

own activities in the classroom including conducting of learning”.

Beside that, Kagan (1994:25) states that cooperative is a successful teaching

strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a

variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of subject. Each member

of a team is responsible for not only learning that is taught but also for helping

teammates learn, this creating an atmosphere of achievement. Similarly, Johnson and

Johnson (1986) say that cooperative learning is the using of small groups of students,

which the students work together with their teammates after given instruction.

Students work through the assignment until all group members successfully

understand and complete it.

In line with above definitions, we may say that there are four features in

applied of learning through cooperative learning. They are forming of group, work

together, get experience, and attainment of learning goal.



2.4.1 Components of Cooperative Learning

Teaching English by using cooperative learning mode can encourage the students‟

motivation in learning because the students are more dynamic in the teaching and

learning process. Kagan and Kagan cited in Susilawati (2007: 16) point out that there

are five components of cooperative learning: they are (1) simultaneous interaction, (2)

positive interdependence, (3) face to face interaction, (4) equal participation, and (5)

individual accountability. These components will be explained more in the following

section.

Simultaneous I nteraction . In a teacher fronted instructional mode, normally

only one person, either the teacher or a student the teacher has called upon ,is taking

at any one time, however, when group activities are do, one person per group is,

hopefully, speaking, e.g. if 40 students working in a group of 4. They are talking

simultaneously, greatly increasing the amount of interaction in which student directly

take part. In this same way, among group, including pairs increases the amount of

simultaneous interaction.

Positive I nterdependence . Positive interdependence is the feeling among

group of students that, what helps any member of group help every one in the group

and what hurts any member of group hurt every one in the group members feel that

they “sink or swim together”

To achieve positive interdependence among students just putting them in

group and telling them to work together may not be sufficient. The way of promoting



positive interdependence in a group include: goals reward, roles, resources and

identity.

Face to Face I nteraction . Face to Face Interaction may be defined as students

being in close physical proximity involved in communication as they work together

and talk through the task they are doing ( Jonhson and Jonhson and Holubec) cited in

Susilawati (2007 : 17) points out that group work can promote each others‟ learning

by helping, questioning, suggesting, sharing information/ material, and encouraging

each other‟s efforts to learn.

I ndividual Accountability . One of the most commonly heard objections to

having students work in the group is that some group members will end of doing all

the work. This can occur because the others want to do everything. Thus, might

encourage every one to fell that they are individually accountable of their group.

There are many way to structure group activities so as to promote this feeling

of individual accountability. Some of these are as follows: (1) each student

individually takes a quiz, complete a task, or write an essay on the material studied.

(2) Group members are called on random to answer a question and/or to explain an

answer. (3) Each group member has a designed role, which they are to perform.

These roles can rotate. For examples, a reading passage can be divided into sections.

Members of pair each read the first silently. Then, one person is to summarize the

section and other materials the class has studied or with aspects of their live. These

role rotate for the next section of reading passage.



Equal Participation . Too often one or two group do most of the learning,

while others do little and show little progress. To encourage each member to play an

important role in the group and benefit from the group effort, cooperative learning

seeks to equalize participation. This encourages all students to be active learners.

Jacob et al (1996: 17-21) point out that cooperative learning has five

components: (1) positive interdependence; (2) collaborative skills; (3) processing

group interaction; (4) heterogeneous grouping and (5) individual accountability.

Based on the above explanation, we may say that cooperative learning method

helps the students or the learners to share the ideas and working together and there are

responsible for their group mates learning as well as their own. And the objective of

cooperative learning is to guide the students to work together and share their ideas.

2.4.2 Characteristics of Cooperative Learning

The characteristic of cooperative learning is as a behavior which appears and become

a habit or character from of cooperative learning activities. Slavin (1995: 37) points

out that cooperative learning has amount of certain characteristics. They are as

follows:

a. Refers to the group’s success. Groups‟ success is the winning of the group

in the computation in the learning material. Through the success of the group make

the members of group to become a high motivation to learn the material. They realize

that the unity of groups as the key of groups‟ success.



b . Member’s role emphasized. Every group member has a task and function

clearly. It means that every member of group has a role as the giving motivation,

accelerator, activator, and as the decision maker.

c. Individual’s accountability. The winning of the group depend on

individual‟s result study. It means that the individual‟s comprehension toward the

material is as the basic of the groups. So that, every member of group has a

responsibility to guide his group mates to comprehend the material.

d. Individual’s interaction. Interaction of individual in the group of study is

as the kinds of communication which always appear. It means that without interaction

between the group members the success of group will be beyond hope. It indicates

that all member of group should be mutual interaction and help each other in learning

materials.

e. Leader together . Every member of group has a right to speak. Beside of

that he/she has individual responsibility about the group‟s progress. It indicates that

every group member is as the leader in their group.

2.5 Jigsaw II Technique in Teaching Reading

Johnson and Johnson (1991: 121) states that “cooperative learning is the instructional

use of small groups so the students work together to maximize their selves and each

other learning”. Moreover, Nunan (1992:35) supports that cooperative learning

group are deliberately heterogeneous and consist of two to four members. In jigsaw II



technique, students are form heterogeneous group into four students in one group and

it allows students to work together to maximize their selves and each other learning.

Jigsaw II technique is well-known as cooperative learning technique. This

technique is team or group learning procedure (Slavin, 2009). This technique is

modification of the original jigsaw which is called as Jigsaw I that has been proposed

by Elliot Aronson. In this matter, Slavin modifies original jigsaw become Jigsaw II in

order to overcome the weakness of original jigsaw itself. As Slavin in Jacobs

(1996 : 7) states that one thing that is important to keep in mind is that jigsaw I only

works if each piece of the text is understandable on its own. Thus, for example, the

technique probably would not work well with a short story, because it would be

difficult to understand the middle if we had not read the beginning of the story first.

An alternative is jigsaw II in which everyone in the home team has all the text pieces.

Jigsaw II has been used in second language teaching using print

(Johnson & Johnson, 1998) and spoken texts, Harmer in Wang (2009). Based these

points, choosing Jigsaw II enables students to experience active reading and speaking

to share what they have learned with their group members. It is supported by Arend

in Emildadiany (2010) states that jigsaw II helps students reinforce and internalize

important concept-related information based on lectures or textbook material. In other

hand, it could be able to make the students more active and explores their opinion in

peer teaching activity of reading class.



Cooperatively jigsaw II technique is the part that has challenging activity.

Which the learner has positive interdependent to achieve groups goal. As Slavin in

Jacobs et al (1990) positive interdependence simply means that the group members

feel sink or swim together. In other words, helps one group member helps them all,

and what hurts one group member hurts everyone in the group.

In jigsaw II technique has the main positive interdependence. It supported by

As Jacobs et al, (2002) states that jigsaw II technique highlights three types of

positive interdependent. First type is goal interdependent that has simply means that

the group members themselves as sharing a common goal or goals. In this case the

goal is to learn their peaces in order to share the information with group mates so that

the group can do their task well relate to the objectives of the lesson. Second type is

resources positive interdependent means that every each group has unique resources

that they must share in order for group succeed. Third type is celebration or reward

positive interdependent. In this case the individual students receive such as grade or

praise depends on group mates receive.

According to Slavin in Jacob et al (2002) there are some steps of jigsaw II in

teaching reading. They are; Students‟ original groups of four are called home teams.

The activity in this step is reading with team members. Students work in

heterogeneous teams. Reading could occur during the first part of the period, as

homework, or during a class activity. All students are assigned the reading and are

given an “Expert Sheet” that contains different sections. Each team members is

assigned a specific section to focus on when reading.If there are 4 topics and



a 5-member team, assign two students the same expert topic. Assigning could be

random, but predetermined would be preferable. With predetermined assignments, be

sure to mix the ability levels of the expert groups. Then, the students leave their home

team and form Expert group discussion: After everyone has read the material,

students from different teams with the same section meet in expert groups and then,

they are given some questions related to their section. In order to keep the expert

groups (6-8 members), have two expert groups per section. It is helpful to assign a

discussion leader (not necessarily the most able student) to facilitate and to see that

everyone participates. Each student should take notes on important and agreed upon

points to share. Students are motivated to become experts, as they are responsible for

teaching that information. After that, the team reports where the students return to

their teams. Each expert shares their information with the teammates by turns. It is

important that the students know that they are to be good teachers and good listeners

and that the reports should be well organized, concise, and to the point. Then, the

given test; each student is required to take the test independently. The test can be

essay or another forms for each section. Students may exchange papers to check

answers or the teacher may want to collect the tests to grade. As with STAD,

students are assigned base scores, so improvement points are also used in determining

the team score. Alternative methods of exhibiting knowledge learned such as oral or

written reports or projects (e.g., visual cognitive organizer) are also acceptable. If an

alternative method is used, all students must participate. Finally, Team recognition:

the teacher gives appreciation such as rewards to the three the best groups they are



super, great, and good team. The kinds of rewards such as certificates, newsletters,

recognition, or tangible rewards could be used to recognize high-scoring teams.

In the other hand, the technique used categorizing and awarding point that

same in STAD technique. The point used to assign the three best groups. They are

supper team, great team, and good team. These categorizing have function to create

the competition among group and motivate every group to do the best among them.

As Jacobs et al (1996) explaines that one point to keep in mind when constructing

Jigsaw II activities that students be motivated in teaching and learning process

because of the awards that gotten by students, such as good team, great team, and

super team. In addition, Slavin (2009) states that the given categorizing and awarding

to three the best group is to motivate the students achieve the goal of learning

process. The categorizing is as follows;

Table 2.1 Recognition Points and Awarding Recognition

AWARDING POINTS AWARDING RECOGNITION

Quiz Score Team Points Average Points Award

10 points bellow to 1

point bellow pastaverage

5 15 Good team

Same or Past average to

10 points above past

average

20 20 Great team

More than 10 pointsabove past average

30

25 Super teamPerfect paper(regardless

of past average)30

(Slavin, 2009)



For more clearly the researcher provides graph about the moving of students‟

group form. It is cited from Arend in Emildadiany (2010). The graph is about the

moving of home team and expert team in teaching reading.

`

Graph 2.1 Moving of students in home team and expert team in jigsaw IItechnique.

2.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of Jigsaw II Technique

2.6.1 Advantages of Jigsaw II Technique

There are some advantages of jigsaw II technique. It has been stated by Slavin (1990)

are as follows; (1) It is an efficient way to learn the material, (2) Builds a depth of

knowledge, (3) Discloses student‟s own understanding and resolves

misunderstanding, (4) Develops team work and cooperative working skills, (6) Easier

to use of textbooks and readily materials used without any adaption.

TOPIC

C

D

TOPIC

C

D

TOPIC

C

D

TOPIC

C

D

A A

A

B B

B

B B

C C

C

C C

D D

D

D D

A B

C D

B

C D

A B

C D

A B

C D

A B

C D

HomeTeam

Expert Team



In the other hand, Broward in Parker (2010) states that there are some

advantages of jigsaw II technique, they are; it is an efficient way to learn the material,

builds a depth of knowledge, and discloses a student's own understanding and

resolves misunderstanding, builds on conceptual understanding, develops teamwork

and cooperative working skills.

2.6.2 Disadvantages of Jigsaw II Technique

There are some disadvantages of jigsaw II technique are as follows:

1) Forming heterogeneous group disturb the group members.

2) Uneven time in expert groups.

3) Students must be trained in this technique of learning.

4) Classroom management can become a problem.

2.7 Reading Achievement

The American Heritage Dictionary in Darta (2001: 20) points out that “achievement

is the act or accomplishing or finishing something especially by means of exertion,

skill practice or preserving”.

Furthermore, Negoro (1984:196) points out that “achievement is a successful

activity; it refers to someone‟s ability which has obtained”. In terms of reading,

Usman (2000:39) states that “Achievement is the result of activity which has been

done by someone. It is usually showed by the values or mark which is given by the

teacher”. In this case, reading achievement which is made by the students will result

in some, change will visible become attainment or achievement through question or



measurement that has been given by teacher on the reading test form. Thus, the tests

must be flexible to respond the particular goals and needs of the students in a

language program. Mulyasa (2004:104) states that “ penilaian di kelas dilakukan oleh

guru untuk mengetahui kemajuan dan hasil belajar peserta didik , mendiagnosa

kesulitan belajar, memberikan umpan balik untuk perbaikan proses pembelajaran dan

penentuan kenaikan kelas”. So, that is why reading achievement is very important to

evaluate students‟ development in learning process.

2.8 Previous Study Related to Technique

The study of applying this technique in teaching and learning process had been

conducted for several times. The researcher found at least four researchers. In this

case, those researchers applied in different design and skills. Firstly was Fullu Azka

(2005). He applied his study by using a comparative study of the teaching of

Mathematic especially for teorema Pythagoras of students at Junior High School 10

Semarang. He compared among Jigsaw II, students team achievement division

(STAD), and Conventional. He conducted the research with using true experimental

design for 230 populations of students and took sample were 115 students by using

random sampling technique. The finding of the study, he found that jigsaw II

technique more effective than STAD and conventional. The secondly was Gina

(2005). She applied her study by using the effective of jigsaw II technique for reading

motivation and achievement for EFL. The participants were 44 grade five students in

a private school in Lebanon. The students were randomly assigned to control and



experimental conditions and a post-test only control group design was employed. The

finding was indicated that Jigsaw II had a significant effect on students‟ reading

achievement, students‟ self concepts as reader, and their reading motivation. The

thirdly was Sahin (2010). He investigated the effects of jigsaw II technique on

academic achievement and attitudes to written expression course at Atatürk

University, Turkey. His study aims to explore the effects of a cooperative technique

Jigsaw II as experimental class and instructional teacher-centered teaching method as

control group on Turkish language teacher education department students‟ attitudes to

written expression course academic achievement, retention, and their views, in 2009

to 2010 academic year. In his research, the pre-test and post-test with control group

experimental design was used. The data was collected through Attitudes to Written

Expression Scale (ATWES) and Written Expression Achievement Test (WEAT),

Students‟ View Form (SVF). The result used statistical analyses and revealed that

there were significant differences between the experimental and control groups in

terms of their attitudes, academic achievement, and retention in favor of the

experimental group. In addition, It was determined that the experimental class by

applying jigsaw II technique had positive significance effect towards students‟

written expression course. The last was Sri Fita Rahmawati. She applied the research

in an action research design at speaking skill. She applied at class XI IA-3 of Senior

High School 6 Kendari. The total subjects were 32 students. She applied for three

cycles. Result of her study showed that jigsaw II technique can improve students‟



speaking achievement. Where there are 26 students or 81.6% who passed the target of

the research namely 65 of 70% of total number students.

Based on the finding of the previous study, it had shown that there is a

significant improvement to the students‟ achievement after implementing Jigsaw II

technique. Nevertheless, comparing four studies which were presented by the

researcher in this section, three of them found significant improvement to the

students‟ achievement in terms of mathematic, writing ability and speaking, but

according Slavin in Wang (2009) that jigsaw II technique can be used in teaching;

listening, speaking, and reading. in addition, Slavin (2009) explains that Jigsaw II

technique has been effective both for improving the students‟ achievement and

behavior and for increasing their acceptance by their classmates. These theories are

also supported by one of previous researcher that conducted by Gina (2005) who

investigated the effectiveness of jigsaw II technique for reading motivation and

achievement for EFL in Lebanon and the finding was indicated that Jigsaw II had a

significant effect on students‟ reading achievement, students‟ self concepts as r eader,

and their reading motivation.

Hence, from the theoretical framework and the previous researcher that

conducted by Gina (2005) which has been presented above, it created a hypothesis

that would be examined by the researcher. The hypothesis of this study was there is a

significant effect of jigsaw II technique on students‟ reading achievement at class X3

of Senior High School 2 Kendari.



CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

This chapter aims to provide methodology of the study. This chapter is divided into

the following subsections: design of the study, subject of the study, instrument of the

study, marking scheme, pilot study, technique of data collection, teaching procedures,

observer, and technique of data analysis.

3.1 Design of the Study

The design of this study was Quasi Experimental Design that consists of control class

and experimental class. Ary, et al (1979:260) define that quasi-experimental design

as the design that would provide as much control class as possible under the existing

situation and it is used when the experimental design is not feasible. Control group

reffered to the group that given the usual set of conditions, while experimental group

reffered to the group that given the more unusual. In this matter, Control group was

taught under explicit instruction technique, while experimental group was taught

under jigsaw II technique. The design of this study can be seen in the following

scheme.

Table 3.1 The Scheme of Quasi – Experimental Design

Group Pretest Independent variable Postest

E Y1 X Y2

C Y1 - Y2

Ary, et al (1979:260)





homogenate. In addition, by testing homogeneity, it was found X3 had low variance

and X4 had big variance (for more clearly see appendix 13). So, by considering these

data, the researcher chose directly X3 as experimental class and X4 as control class.

3.3 Instrument of the Study

The instrument of this study was reading test. The test consisted of 40 items in form

of multiple choices based on the reading test. The instrument of the pre-test and post-

test were the same questions. The test that used in this study was taken from

Interlanguage English for Senior High School Students X by Joko Priyana, et al,

Published by Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional ,2008, and Look

Ahead an English Course for Senior High School Students Year X by Sudarwati,

Th.M,et al, published by Erlangga, 2007.

3.4 Marking Scheme

The marking scheme in this study was 1(one) for the correct answer and 0 (zero) for

the incorrect answer. Then, score was made to be grated by using the formula as

follows:

Mark

Where:

X = Score (Total of correct answer)

n = Total number of question

Arikunto, (2009: 69)



To determine the students‟ reading achievement, the researcher used the

following criteria:

Table 3.2 Criteria of students’ reading achievement

R Categories

86 – 100

70 – 85

56 – 69

36 – 55

0 – 35

Very high

High

Moderate

Low

Very low

(Sudjana, 1984:27)

3.5 Pilot Study

The researcher conducted pilot study as the first step in this study. It was divided into

two activities: The instrument of the study and Jigsaw II technique.

3.5.1 Result of Pilot Study of the Instrument

Before the instrument was used to both experimental class and control class, it was

piloted to the other class, namely X6 in the same school. This class was still

categorized had the same level with X3 and X4. The researcher conducted pilot study

on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 started from 08.30 – 10.00 a.m.

The main objectives of try out were as follows: (1) to find out the validity and

reliability of the test. Validity means to know the instrument measurement what

should be to be measured and the reliability means the instrument can be applied

anytime and anyplace (consistency) give the constant result. (2) To check the duration

of the time when students are doing the test. This is related to eligibility of the test.



The result of try-out of reading test showed that the time needed to answer the

questions during the try-out was 90 minutes. This time was enough in answering the

test. In determining the time, the researcher added the time used of the students who

finished early in answering the test and the time used of the students who finished

latest, then divided by two ( 80 + 100 minutes :2) = 90 minutes.

Thus, in analyzing items validity of the test, the researcher used Product

Moment Correlation with the formula as follows:

r xy =

√ { – }

Where: r xy : Coefficient of correlation

X : Score of each item

Y : Total score of students

n : Total of respondent

(Arikunto, 2009: 72)

Then, to interpret the value of the coefficient correlation ( rxy) on each items,

the researcher compared between rxy-count and r-table of product moment with

criteria as follows:

- If r xy > r table it means that the item of the test is valid

- If r xy < r tabel it means that the item of the test is invalid

After computing the item validity of reading test ( see appendix 3) then

examined by using the above criteria using r-table, the researcher found that there

were 10 items of reading test which categorized as invalid criteria ( see appendix 3).



They were items number 11, 12, 19, 28, 30, 32, 40, 41, 49, and 50. These had r-count

< r- table. All the invalid criteria items were not used as the instrument of this study.

While to know the reliability of the test , the researcher used formula of KR-

21 by Kuder and Richardson as follows:

r 11 =

(Isaac, 1983: 87)

Where:

K = number of item test

M = mean score

S2

= Variance

The criteria used to determine the degree of the reliability of the tests are as

follows:

Table 3.3 Reliability of category

Reliability Categories0,80 – 1,00

0,60 – 0,79

0,40 – 0,59

0,20 – 0,39

0,00 – 0,19

Very high

High

Moderate

Low

Very low

(Arikunto,1996:157)

Based on the analysis of the test reliability, the result of tried out for test

reliability of reading test was 0.84. Based on the criteria of coefficient correlation of

reliability provided by Arikunto (1996:157), the value 0.84 was categorized as “very



high” reliability. Therefore, the test fulfills the criteria to be used as the instrument of

this study.

3.5.2 Pilot Study of the Technique

Jigsaw II was piloted to see the students‟ response and to minimize the students‟

difficulties (whether there was or not weakness in each aspect of the implementation

of Jigsaw II technique) and the researcher herself was more well-trained in applying

the technique before entering the main class. It was conducted at class X6 on

Monday, 24 October 2011 started from 08.30 – 10.00 a.m as the teacher‟s

consideration. In piloting the technique, the researcher controlled the allocation of

time and evaluated the activities during teaching and learning process of each steps of

Jigsaw II technique.

At the first time, the researcher gave a brief explanation about Jigsaw II

technique and all its steps which include in it to the students. Then, the researcher

provided them the reading text entitled “Durna‟s trap”. At the time, the researcher led

the students the teaching and learning process as procedure of Jigsaw II technique in

lesson scenario.

After tried out Jigsaw II technique, the researcher found some problems.

Firstly, in forming heterogeneous of four, some students did not want to cooperate

with their groups which were based on their past achievement. To solve the problem,

the researcher would explain the benefits of learning to work with others. Secondly,

most of students found difficulty to understand the reading text because they were



lack of vocabulary. So, to solve this problem, the researcher would provide some

unfamiliar words in their worksheet. Thirdly, there were many groups‟ discussion and

it was difficult for the researcher to control one by one. So, to solve this problem, the

researcher would point the captain in each group for both home team and expert team

to control group discussion. The last, the researcher could not calculate the students‟

point at the time because the number of students were large. So, to solve the problem,

the researcher would collect and count it at home and it would be informed to the

students in next meeting who become three the best groups; super , great, and good

teams.

3.6 Technique of Data collecting

In collecting data of this study, the researcher used the following procedures:

1. Pre-test

The researcher performed pre-test in both of classes to find out the students‟ reading

achievement before conducting the treatment and pre test scores were used to

calculate the homogeneity of variance from subject that used. In addition, pre-test

scores in this study were also used in determining group formation in terms of high,

average, and low ability and as their base score. Pre-test was conducted in both of

classes once in the first meeting.

2. Treatment

During the treatment, the researcher taught the students in both of classes. In

experimental class, the researcher taught by using jigsaw II technique while in control



class, the researcher taught by using explicit instruction technique. The researcher

chose explicit instruction technique to be used in control class was because this

technique was commonly used by the teacher in Senior High School 2 Kendari

especially in teaching English reading. The researcher conducted the presentation of

material five times. To reduce the intervening variables that might appear, in this

study the researcher used the same instrument, allocation of time and the researcher

acted as teacher in both of classes. The detailed schedule of conducting treatment can

be seen in table 3.4

Table 3.4 Schedule of conducting treatment

Activities /

Meeting

Time in Experimental

Class

Time in Control

Class

Topics

Pretest 07.00-08.30,

29 October 2011

08.30-10.00,

29 October 2011

_

First 08.30-10.00,

1 November 2011

07.45-09.15,

31 October 2011

Blind Listening

Second 07.00-08.30,

5 November 2011

08.30-10.00,

5 November 2011

Three foolish Sons

Third 08.30-10.00,

8 November 2011

07.45-09.15,

7 November 2011

Thumbelina

Four 07.00-08.30,

12 November 2011

08.30-10.00,

12 November 2011

The Fortune Teller

Fifth 08.30-10.00,

15 November 2011

07.45-09.15,

14 November 2011

An Indian and His Pet

Fish

Posttest 07.00-08.30,

19 November 2011

08.30-10.00,

19 November 2011

_

Note : The topics presented were the reading text that taken from Developing English Competencies for Senior

High School Grade X ( Joko Priyana, et al, 2006), and Look Ahead an English Course for Senior HighSchool Year X ( Sudarwati, Th.M, et al, 2007).



3. Post-test

Post test was given to know the students‟ reading achievement after teaching and

learning process in experimental class and control class. It was conducted at the last

meeting.

3.7 Teaching Procedures

3.7.1 Procedure of Teaching Reading through Jigsaw II Technique

There are some steps of jigsaw II technique that is developed by Slavin in Jacobs et

al (2002). These steps are as follows:

a. Step 1. Students‟ original groups of four are called home teams. The activity

in this step is reading with team members: Students work in heterogeneous

teams. Reading could occur during the first part of the period, as homework,

or during a class activity. All students are assigned the reading and are given

an “Expert Sheet” that contains different sections. Each team member is

assigned a specific section to focus on when reading. For example, the generic

structures of narrative text are orientation, complication, resolution, and

reorientation. So, in this case, the student with head number A is responsible

to master orientation, head number B is responsible to master complication,

head number C is responsible to master resolution, and head number D is

responsible to master reorientation. If there are 4 sections and a 5-member

team, assign two students the same section. Assigning could be random, but



predetermined would be preferable. With predetermined assignments, be sure

to mix the ability levels (high, middle, and low) of the expert groups.

b. Step 2. Students leave their home team and form expert group discussion:

After everyone has read the material, students from different teams with the

same section meet in expert groups and there are given some questions related

to their section. In order to keep the expert groups (6-8 members), have two

expert groups per section. It is helpful to assign a discussion leader (not

necessarily the most able student) to facilitate and to see that everyone

participates. Each student should take notes on important and agreed upon

points to share. Students are motivated to become experts, as they are

responsible for teaching that information.

c. Team reports: Students return to their teams. Each expert shares their

information with the teammates by turns. It is important that the students

know that they are to be good teachers and good listeners and that the reports

should be well organized, concise, and to the point.

d. Test: Each student is required to take the quiz independently. The test can be

essay or another forms for each section. Students may exchange papers to

check answers or the teacher may want to collect the tests to grade. As with

STAD, students are assigned base scores, so improvement points are also used

in determining the team score. Alternative methods of exhibiting knowledge

learned such as oral or written reports or projects (e.g., visual cognitive



organizer) are also acceptable. If an alternative method is used, all students

must participate.

e. Team recognition: Certificates, newsletters, recognition, or tangible rewards

could be used to recognize high-scoring teams.

3.7.2 Procedure of Teaching Reading through Explicit Instruction Technique

Researcher applied the explicit instruction technique in control class. It was usually

used by the English teacher at Senior High School 2 Kendari. The Procedures of

teaching reading through explicit instruction technique are in the following:

a. Delivering the objectives of instruction.

b. Explaining the material about the topic that will be mastery.

c. Asking the students to read the text.

d. Asking the students to answer the questions based on the text individually.

e. Teacher asked students to exchange their paper to his/her partner.

f. Inform the correct answers of the questions.

g. Collect the students‟ worksheet.

3.8 Observer

In this study, the researcher used an observer to check the consistency of the

researcher in teaching both of classes. The observer is the English teacher of the tenth

year at Senior High School 2 Kendari. In observing process, the researcher will use

the observation sheets that consist of two parts, they are: (1) observation sheet for

jigsaw II technique, and (2) observation sheet for explicit instruction technique.



Based on the technique applied, the observer commented that the technique

had been applied consistently according to the criteria of those techniques.

3.9 Technique of Data Analysis

There were two techniques in analyzing the data. They were descriptive statistic and

inferential statistic. Descriptive statistic analysis was used to describe the maximum

and minimum scores, mean, and deviation standard, while the inferential statistic

analysis was used to test the hypothesis.

Before the hypothesis test was done, it was conducted the homogeneity test

and normality test of the data as the condition for testing the hypothesis.

1. homogeneity test was used to know the homogeneity of variance of subjects

(Sugiyono, 2008: 275). The formula is:

Fcount =

iancelittle

iancebig

var

var

(Riduwan, 2004: 178)

With the criteria:If Fcount Ftable, it means that the variance is not homogeneous,

and If Fcount Ftable, it means that the variance is homogenous.

2. normality test was used for knowing the normality of data distribution in both of

classes.

The formula that can be used is Chi-square test with the formula:

[( ) ]

( Riduwan, 2004: 179)



Where:

χ2 = the value of chi-square

f o = the observed frequency in each cell

f e = the expected frequency in each cell

With the criteria: If χ 2

count χ 2

table, it means that the data is not distributed normally

and If χ 2

count

χ 2

table, it means that the data is distributed normally.

In testing the hypothesis of this study, the researcher used two-tailed test (ttest)

with formula as follows:

t =

nn

X X

B A

B A

S 11

Where: XA = the mean score of the first class (experimental class)

XB = the mean score of the second class (control class)

S = the deviation standard of both classes

nA = the total respondent of the first class

nB = the total respondent of the second class

The testing hypothesis criteria are as follows:

1. If t test > ttable, it means that there is a significant effect of jigsaw II on

students‟ reading achievement at class X3 of Senior High School 2

Kendari (H0 is refused and H1 is accepted).



2. If ttest < t table, it means that there is not a significant effect of jigsaw II on

students‟ reading achievement at the class X3 of Senior High School 2

Kendari. (H0 is accepted and H1 is refused).

Moreover, To measure how large the effect of treatment by using jigsaw II

technique, the researcher calculated the effect size as follows:

Effect size: (Mean of experimental group – mean of control group)

Deviation Standard

The criteria to determine the effect size based on Cohen‟s criteria (Cohen, 1988) as

follow:

0.0-0.2 : Small

0.2-0.5: Moderate

0.6-0.8: Large



REFERENCES

Alyousef, Hesham Sulaiman. 2006. Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Lerners. Riyadh: Albaya Intermediate Scholl.

Arikunto, S. 2009. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan . Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Arikunto, S. 1996. Prosedure Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek . Jakarta: Rineka

Cipta.

Ary, D.,Lucy C Jacobs & Asghar R.1979. Introduction to Research in Education.USA: Holt, Rinerat and Winston.

Azka, Fullu. 2005. Keefektivan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD dan Jigsaw II Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Pokok Bahasan Teorema

Pythagoras Pada Siswa Kelas II Semester 1 SMPN 10 Semarang Tahun

Pelajaran 2004/2005.Thesis.UNNES.2005. Retrieved January 25th

, 2010,from http://scmariani-unnes.blogspot.com/2008/11/pembelajaran-kooperatif-

jigsaw-ii.html.

Bedir, Hasan. 1992. Cultural Significance in Foreign in Foreign Language Learning

and Teaching with Special Emphasis on Reading Comprehension Through

Cultural Schema. Unpublished MA thesis. ADANA: Cukurova University.

Bond, G. 1984. Reading Difficulties. Their Diagnosis and Correction. New Jersey

:Practice Hall, Inc.

Brown. H. Douglas.2001. Teaching by principles : An Interactive Approach

Pedagogy. New York . Addison Wesley. Longman, Inc.

Cohen, J.1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavior Science (2nd

ed ). New

Jersey : Lawrence Elbaum.

Collins, David and Ann Collins.1998. Advancing Reading Achievement, becoming

Effective Teacherd of Reading through Collective Study. U.S. Department of

Educational . Last Visited : Juli 1st, 2009.

Darta, Darmiati. 2001. The Effect of Jigsaw Technique on Students’ Reading

Achievement at the Third Year of SLTP Negeri 3 Kolaka” Kendari: FKIP

Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

http://scmariani-unnes.blogspot.com/2008/11/pembelajaran-kooperatif-jigsaw-ii.html






Doddy, Achmad, dkk. 2006. Developing English Competencies for Senior HighSchool Grade X. Jakarta : Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan

Nasional.

Emildadiany, Novi. 2010. Concentration, Jigsaw II Group Activity & Attention

Training .Retrieved.October5th

,2010,from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Dycus-

Jigsaw.html.

Firdayanti.2000. The Effect of ETR Technique in The Teaching Reading

Comprehension at the Second Year of SMU Negeri 2 Kendari” Kendari:

FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Gina, Al-Badawi. 2005. The Effect of Jigsaw II versus Whole Class Instruction on EFL Students’ Reading Motivation and Achievement . Thesis. American

university of Beirut. Retrieved January 25th, 2011, from

http://ghinathesis.blogspot.com.

Issac, S., & William, B. 1983. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Jacobs, M G, Gan Siowek, and Ball Jasica.1996. Learning Cooperative : Learning

Via Cooperative Learning ( A Sourcebook of Lesson Plans for Teacher

Education on Cooperative Learning) . Singapore : SEAMEO Regional

Language Center.

.Jacobs, M.G, Michael A, Loh Wann Inn. 2002. The Teacher’s Sourcebook for

Cooperative Learning (Practical Technique, Basic Principles, and frequentlyAsked Questions) . California : Corwin Press Inc.

Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in the Classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec. 1986. Circles of Learning . Retrieved August, 25,2010. From hhtp:// literacynet.org/icans/chapter01/traditional.html.

Kagan, S. 1994. Cooperative Learning. San Juan Capistrano : Kagan CooperativeLearning (KCL).

Krashen, S.1983.The Natural Approach. Language Acquisition in the Classroom.

Sanfransisco: Alemany Press.

http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Dycus-Jigsaw.html


http://ghinathesis.blogspot.com/2008/06/american-university-of-beirut-effect-of.html



http://ghinathesis.blogspot.com/









Lado, Robert.1997. Language Teaching a Scientific Approach. New York: Mc GrawHill Inc.

Marhumi. 2001. A Correlation Stud y between Students’ Vocabulary S ize and Their

Reading Comprehension Achievement at Second Year of SMU 5 Kendari” Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Mulyasa. 2004. Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Muslim, W. 2007. The Effect of STAD Technique on the Reading Achievement of the

Year Two Students of Senior high School Negeri 2 Bau-Bau” Kendari: FKIP

Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Negoro. Adi. 1984. Aspirasi Pendidikan di Lingkungan Sosial Hubungannya Dengan Prestasi Belajar Murid. Jakarta: Bulan Bintang.

Nunan, D. 1992. Colaborative Language Learning and Teaching. New York.

Cambrige University Press.

Nurnia. 1998. Fostering Reading Comprehension Using K-W-L Technique.

imiotika Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni FKIP. Unhalu. October

Ed., 1998 .

Panitz, T. 1996. A Definition of Colaborative vs Cooperative Learning. Retrieved

June,152010.From:http://www.city.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/collab.lea

rning/panitz2.html.

Priyana, Joko. 2008. Interlanguage English for Senior High School Students X .

Jakarta : Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

Qian, Jifang. 2004. Schemata and Their Interactive Application in English Reading .

Zhejiang University of Sciences.

Ranti. 2010. Teaching Reading Comprehension Through Students Team Achievement

Divisions (STAD) Technique at the Second Year Students of SMP Negeri 3

Lainea.” Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Riduwan. 2004. Metode dan Teknik Menyusun Tesis. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Sahin, Abdullah.2010. Effects of Jigsaw II Technique on Academic Achievement and

Attitudes to Written Expression Course. ISSN 1990-3839 ©2010 Academic Journals. Vol. 5(12), pp. 777-787.



Sharan, S,1994. Handbook of Cooperative Learning Methods. London: Wesport

Connectinut, Green Wood Press.Silberman, L Melvin. 1996. Active Learning: 101 Strategies To Teach any Subjects.

Boston.

Slavin, E Robert. 2009. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice.

Bandung: Nusa Media, Ujungberung.

Slavin, Robert Charles.1995. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice.

Second Edition. Massachhusetts. Allyn and Bacon Publisher.

Slavin, E Rober. 1990. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice.

Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice-Hall.

Sudarwati, Th.M. 2007. Look Ahead an English Course for Senior High SchoolStudents Year X . Jakarta : Erlangga.

Sudjana, Nana.1984. Metode Statistik . Bandung: Tarsito.

Sugiyono. 2008. Metode Penelitian ( Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D).

Bandung: Cv ALFABETA.

Susilawati.2007. The Improvement of Students’ Reading Comprehension under

Jigsaw Technique at the First Year of SMA Negeri 1 Poleang timur .”Kendari: FKIP Unhalu Unpublished Undergraduate thesis.

Tarigan, H.G .1987. Membaca Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan. Bandung: PT. Angkasa.

Tsuguhiko, 2007. Content Knowledge- The Real Reading Crisis. Online

( http://findarticle.com/p/articles/mi qa3614/is /ai n1943822) Retrived on 1st

July 2009..

Usman, Moh. Uzer. 2001. Upaya Optimalisasi Kegiatan Belajar Mengajar . Jakarta:

Debdikbud.

Wang, Tzu-Pu. 2009. Applying Slavin’s Cooperative Learning Techniques to aCollege EFL Conversation Class: The Journal of Human Resource and

Adult Learning Vol. 5, Num. 1, June 2009.

Yule, G. 1985. The Study of Language, Oxford : Oxford University Press.

http://findarticle.com/p/articles/mi%20qa3614/is%20/ai%20n1943822

http://findarticle.com/p/articles/mi%20qa3614/is%20/ai%20n1943822



Documents

the effect of jigsaw 2 technique