A STUDY ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN COMPREHENDING SPOOF TEXTS AT THE SECOND GRADE STUDENTS OF SEKOLAH MENENGAH ATAS PERSATUAN GURU

REPUBLIK INDONESIA (SMA PGRI) PEKANBARU By: Riski Ade Putra rizqytnt@gmail.com

This research was survey design quantitative of research. The object of this research was to find out the ability of students in comprehending spoof texts. There were one variable. The subject of this research was the second grade students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru. Reading Comprehension Reading comprehension is not an easy process. Johns (1997: 99) states that the processing and comprehending a text with a new, difficult information, and vocabulary, particularly in foreign language, is considerably different from processing something on familiar topic in one’s language. It can be conclude that the students in foreign language will get difficulties in comprehending text if the text is not appropriate with their level. Reading and comprehension is one of the first steps towards learning a language. For instance, when it comes to English as a foreign language, reading comprehension is more important. If there is no readings you want know what aspects you do not understand and then you would not seek to understand them, which will hamper your comprehension of the language. There are some components reading comprehension which should be focused on comprehending a reading text. King and Stanley (2004: 8) state that there are five components that may help the students to read carefully: a. Finding Factual Information Factual information requires readers to scan specific details. There are many types of question of factual information such as question type of reason, purpose, result, comparison, means, identity, time, and amount in which most of the answer can be found in the text. b. Finding Main Idea Reading concerns with meaning to a greater extent than it is with form. An efficient reader understands not only the ideas but also their relative significance, as

expressed by the author, in order words, some of the ideas are super ordinate while other subordinate. c. Finding the Meaning of Vocabulary Context Finding the meaning of vocabulary in context means that reader could develop his or her ability in guessing the words which is familiar or not, by relating the close meaning of unfamiliar words to the text and the topic of the text is read. The words have nearly equivalent meaning when it has it or nearly same meaning as another word. d. Identifying Reference In English, as in other language, it would be clumsy and boring to have and to repeat same word or phrase every time a reader uses it. Instead of repeating the same word or phrase several times it has been used, we usually refer to it rather than repeat it. For this purpose, we use reference words most often, the reference expression will refer to a preceding word or phrase. e. Making Inference The important thing needed in reading understands. Writers, however does not write out everything, he expects the reader to understand. Writers use language efficiently and recognize what can be inferred from their sentence. The five components above are indicators in comprehending any passage. This study is to find out the students’ ability in comprehending analytical exposition texts. It means that they also need understand the components of analytical exposition texts as the indicators of understanding analytical exposition texts. 3. Nature of Spoof Text According to Hartono (2005:4), text is a unit of meaning which is coherent and appropriate for its context. In school based KTSP, Senior High School should master 13 types of texts; they are recount, spoof, report, discussion, explanation, new item, anecdote, narrative, procedure, description, review, exposition (hortatory) and exposition (analytical). Grace (2005: 80) says that there are 13 kind of the text; they are recount, report, discussion, review, spoof, explanation, anecdote, and exposition, and procedure, news item, descriptive and narrative. Yulianto (2010:36) Spoof text is a text which tells factual story, happened in the past time with unpredictable and funny ending. Its social function is to entertain and share the story.

Wahidi (2012) Spoof is a text which tells factual story, happened in the past time with unpredictable and funny ending. Its social function is to entertain and share the story. Generic structure of spoof texts: 1. Orientation, sets the scene; 2. Events, the writer tells what happened; 3. Twist, provide the part of the story with an unpredictable ending; Language feature of spoof text includes: 1. Focusing on people, animals or certain things; 2. Using action verb (material processes), e.g. ate, ran, saw: 3. Using adverb of time and place; 4. Told in chronological order; 5. Use of past tense; Social function of spoof text is to retell events for the purpose of informing or entertaining.

Type of the Research In this case researcher have conducted one point in time (Cross-sectional). A Creswell (2005:355) state that, “cross - sectional designs consist of particularly type that matches to this research is related to program evaluation. Program evaluation is a survey that provides useful information to decision makers.” In this study, the performance of a study on the students’ ability in comprehending of analytical exposition text would be reported to the school SMA PGRI Pekanbaru. In a cross – sectional survey design, the researcher collects data at one point in time. This design has advantage of measuring current attitudes or practices. It also provides information in a short amount of time, such as the time required for administering the survey and collecting the information. With regard to the finding of the research it is hoped be an input for the English teacher make such as evaluation in teaching especially, in analytical exposition text according to the curriculum target. Sample Arikunto (2006: 134) suggests that “Apabila subjeknya kurang dari 100, lebih baik diambil semua sehingga penelitiannya merupakan penelitian populasi. Tetapi, jika jumlah subjeknya besar, dapat diambil antara 10 – 15% atau 20 – 25% atau lebih”. Based on Arikunto’s suggestion above, the researcher takes 25 % of the population in this research. Therefore, the total of the sample in this research was 26 students. Based on the statement above, researcher

taken 25% of the population in this research. So that, total research sampling is 26 students (8 males and 18 females) of students in the grade second in SMA PGRI Pekanbaru. Instrumentation The instrument of this research is test. Technique of Analyzing Data According to Creswell (2005:182) states that descriptive statistic helps you summarize the overall trends or tendencies in your data. Provide insight into where one score might be, and provide insight into where one score stands in comparison with others. These three ideas are central tendency, variability, and relative standing. The clear description of using this statically method is as in the following diagram:

Descriptive Statistics

Central Tendency

Variability

Relative Standing

Mean Median Mode

Variance Standard Deviation Range

Z-score Percentile ranks

(Creswell, 2005:182) Mean = Median = Half of all scores Mode = the scores that apprerears on the list of the scores Variance (SD2) = Standard Deviation (SD) = Range = Maximum – Minimum Z-score =

A. Sample Based on the statement above, the researcher took 25% of the population in this research. So that, the total research sampling were 27 students (12 males and 15 females) of students in the grade second in SMA PGRI Pekanbaru. The sample of the research can be seen as follows:

Table 3.2 The Sample of the Research

No Population Sample

Students Grade Second Male 49 12 Female 58 15

Total 107 27

B. Findings The researcher has done the test to 27 students at the second grade students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru on May, 30th until 7th June 2012 to find out the students’ ability in understanding spoof text. The test has been given to answer the research question in this research. The question was “How is the ability of the second grade students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru in comprehending spoof texts”. In order to answer this question, the researcher gave some the texts that kind of spoof text. Then the students read the paragraph and identified the generic structures (orientation, event and twist) and language features (focusing on people, animal or certain things, using action verb, using adverb of time and place, told in chronological order, and use of past tense ) of the spoof

After giving the test, the researcher calculated the score of the students from individual correct answer. The more the correct answer they made, the higher their scores would be. On the other hand, the fewer the correct answer they made, the lower their scores would be. The complete description of the scores obtained can be seen in the following table:

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics Scores of the Students’ Ability in Understanding Spoof Text
Students 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total Raw Score 45 46 55 62 62 64 65 66 66 70 71 71 73 73 74 75 76 76 76 77 78 78 80 80 82 84 84 1909 Raw Score – Mean -25,7 -24,7 -15,7 -8,7 -8,7 -6,7 -5,7 -4,7 -4,7 -0,7 0,3 0,3 2,3 2,3 3,3 4,3 5,3 5,3 5,3 6,3 7,3 7,3 9,3 9,3 11,3 13,3 13,3 (Raw Score – Mean) 660,49 610,09 246,49 75,69 75,69 44,89 32,49 22,09 22,09 0,49 0,49 0,09 5,29 5,29 10,89 18,49 28,09 28,09 28,09 39,69 53,29 53,29 86,49 86,49 127,69 176,89 176,89 2715,63
2

Z – score -2,56 -2,46 -1,56 -0.86 -0,86 -0,67 -0,57 -0,47 -0,47 -0,07 0,03 0,03 0,23 0,23 0,33 0,43 0,53 0,53 0,53 0,63 0,73 0,73 0,93 0,93 1,13 1.33 1,33

Percentile Rank 3,70 7,40 11,10 18,51 18,51 22,21 25,91 33,32 33,32 37,02 44,43 44,43 51,84 51,84 55,54 59,24 66,65 66,65 70,35 74,05 81,46 81,46 88,87 88,87 92,57 100 100

Sum Mode Median

= 1909 = 76 = 73 Raw Score 1909 = 70.70 N 27

Mean

=

(Raw Score – Mean) 2 Variance (SD2) = N =

2715,63 = 100,58 27

Standard Deviation (SD) = Raw Score – Mean Z – Score = SD

=

= 10,03

Range: Minimum = 45; Maximum = 84

Based on the table above, it can be seen the ability of the students in understanding Spoof text test. The ability of the second grade students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru in understanding spoof text could be generally categorized into fair. Table 4.1 above shows that the total of the students’ scores in understanding spoof text test is 1909, mode of the students’ scores is 76, median of the students’ scores is 73, variance of the students’ scores is 100,58, and standard deviation are 10.03. The scores range from a low of 45 to a high of 84, a range of 39 points. The average of mean score of the students’ ability in understanding spoof text is 70.70. A. Conclusions Based on the data analysis explained in chapter IV, the researcher will describe some conclusions as in the following: 1. There are 27 students of the second grade students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru who participated in this research. From these 27 students can be seen that the total of the students’ scores in descriptive test is 1909, mode of the students’ scores is 76, median of the students’ score is 73, variance of the students’ score is 100.58, and

standard deviation is 10.03. The scores range from a low of 45 to high of 84, a range of 39 points. 2. The average score of the students’ ability in understanding spoof text is 70.70. It means that the students’ ability in understanding spoof text is categorized into fair. 3. The researcher concludes that the findings on students’ ability in understanding spoof text are categorized into fair. B. Implications Referring to the findings and discussion, the implication of the students’ ability in understanding Spoof text can be seen as follows: 1. To the English teacher: a) The teachers know the students’ ability (language features and generic structures) with their understanding spoof text in learning English. b) The teachers know how to teach the reading text in understanding spoof text and know how to teach the students to analyze generic structure and language feature of spoof text well. c) as information for the teacher about the ability of the second years students of SAM PGRI Pekanbaru in comprehending spoof texts. 2. To the students: a) The students will know the importance of spoof text, especially in generic structures and the language features. b) The students will really understand about information of given texts and their ability in understanding spoof texts. 3. To the researcher herself: a) The researcher hopes that this research will give significant contribution to the students where have problem with their understanding spoof text. b) The researcher hopes the students’ understand more improve after this research is completed and the students will be more active involving in learning process. c) Finally, the researcher hopes this research result is very useful for whoever teacher in teaching English especially in understanding spoof text.

C. Suggestions Concerning the above conclusions, it is necessary for the researcher will to give some suggestions as in the following:

1. The students of SMA PGRI Pekanbaru are expected to increase their knowledge, particularly spoof text. 2. The students should concern on generic structure and language feature of spoof text in understanding reading. 3. The teacher should give more explanation about text with spoof text. 4. It is also hoped that all findings, conclusions, implication, and suggestions of this research will give a valuable contribution to both teachers and students especially the students of the second grade at SMA PGRI Pekanbaru. 5. It is better for the next researchers to take some references in this research to be used in their research.

References Siskandar, Aidon. 2011. A Study on the Students’ Reading Comprehension of Recount Text at the Grade Eight of SMPN 015 Pekanbaru: Lancang Kuning University. Unpublished thesis. Arikunto, S. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian; Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta. Burnes, Don. 1998. Insight and Strategies for Teaching Reading. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanich Group. Creswell, John W. 2005. Educational Research Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New York:. Merrill Prentice Hall. Gay, L. R. 2000. Educational Research Competences for Analysis and Application. Sixth Edition. Peter Airasian: New York: Boston College. Hartono, R. 2005. Genres of Text. Semarang: Semarang State University. Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman, Inc. Hayati, A. Majid. 2011. Using Humorous Texts in Improving Reading Comprehension of EFL Learners. Retrieved on May 15, 2011 from, http://itselj.org/Techniques/Texts in Improving Reading Iwai, Yuko. 2007. Developing ESL/EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension of Expository Texts. Retrieved June 30, 2011 from, http://itselj.org/Techniques/Iwai_Expository Muharomadhan. 2010. A Study on the Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement of the Second Year Students at M. A Hasanah Pekanbaru. Pekanbaru:Islamic University of Riau. . Unpublished thesis. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology a Text. Book of Teacher. New York: Pretice Hall. Inc. Nuttal, C. 198. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Cambrigde University. Elvita, Reni. 2011. A Study on Ability of Tenth Grade Students at SMA N I Tambang in Understanding Descriptive Text, Pekanbaru: Lancing Kuning University. Unpublished thesis. Safrion. 2008. A Study on the Ability of the Second Year Students of SMP 4 Teluk Kuantan in Understanding Descriptive Text, Pekanbaru: Riau University. Unpublished thesis. Sudijono, anas. 2010. Pengantar statistic pendidikan. Jakarta: PT. raja grafindo persada.

Syaputri. 2009. An Analysis of the Second Years Students in Writing Spoof at SMA PGRI Pekanbaru: Islamic University of Riau. Unpublished thesis. Yulianto, puguh. 2010. Genre of the text for senior high school. Retrieved on May 05, 2012 from http://document.issuu.com. Ziegler, Johannes C. 2005. Reading Acquisition, Development Dyslexia, and Skilled Reading Across Language: A Psycholinguistic Grain Size Theory. University of Cambridge. Vol. 131. American Psychological Association. Retrieved on March 2011, From http://www.scribd.com.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful