CHAPTER IV

DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 The Data Description

The data of students’ achievement in reading comprehension from every

interaction between reading strategies and students’ curiosity which obtained the

highest and lowest score, range, median, mode, standard deviation and variance.

The values are presented in table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Summary of Research Data Description

Statistical A1 A2 B1 B2 A1B1 A1B2 A2B1 A2B2

Values
N 38 38 38 38 19 19 19 19
Highest 37 34 96 66 37 29 34 29
Score
Lowest 20 19 68 48 27 20 19 20
Score
Mean 28.08 26.58 78.28 69.07 31.63 24.53 27.05 25.95
Median 28.00 27.50 37.62 19.47 31.00 25.00 28.00 27.00
Mode 28 29 32.6 29.67 30 28 22 25
SD 4.558 4.131 81.95 7.44 2.733 2.932 5.233 2.953
Variance 20.77 17.06 9.05 55.48 7.468 8.596 27.386 8.719
7 1
Note:

A1 : Group of students taught by using INSERT Strategy

A2 : Group of students taught by using DRTA Strategy

B1 : Group of students with high curiosity

B2 : Group of students with low curiosity

A1B1 : Group of high curiosity taught by using INSERT Strategy

A1B2 : Group of low curiosity taught by using INSERT Strategy

A2B1 : Group of high curiosity taught by using DRTA Strategy

A2B2 : Group of low curiosity taught by using DRTA Strategy

4.1.1 Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement taught by Using

INSERT Strategy.

The score of students’ achievement in reading comprehension on 38

students at SMA Methodist Lubuk Pakam taught by using INSERT strategy can

be explained that the highest score is 37 and the lowest score is 20. The

calculation indicated that mean is 28.08. The score are shown in table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Frequency Distribution Score of Students taught by using INSERT

Strategy.

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 20 – 22 6 15.79
2 23 - 25 5 13.16
3 26 – 28 9 23.68
4 29 – 31 9 23.68
5 32 – 34 6 15.79
6 35 – 37 3 7.90
Total 38 100
Table 4.2 indicates that the average score of the students taught by using

INSERT are in interval 28 – 30 with 9 students or 23.68%. Students who got

score below the average are 21 students or 52.63% and students who got above

the average are 9 students or 23.69%.

Clear description of the scores distribution on students taught by using

INSERT strategy is presented in figure 4.1.

4.1.2 Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement Taught by Using

DRTA Strategy

Score on students’ achievement in reading comprehension on 38 students

at SMA Methodist Lubuk Pakam taught by DRTA strategy can be explained that
the highest score is 34 and the lowest score is 19. The calculation indicates that

mean is 26.58. The scores are shown in table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Frequency Distribution of the Score of Students Taught by Using

DRTA Strategy

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 19 – 21 4 10.53
2 22 - 24 8 21.05
3 25 – 27 7 18.42
4 28 – 30 12 31.59
5 31 – 33 5 13.16
6 34 – 36 2 5.26
Total 38 100

Table 4.3 indicates that the average scores of students taught by using DRTA

strategy are in interval 25 - 27 with 7 students or 18.42%. Students who got scores

below the average are 12 students or 31.58% and 19 students 50% got scores

above the average score.

Clear description are presented in Figure .4.2

4.1.3 Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement of Group of Students

with High Curiosity

Based on the data, the score on students’ achievement in reading

comprehension that has high curiosity can be explained that the highest score is

37 and the lowest score is 19. The calculation of scores indicated that mean is

29.34. The scores are shown in Table 4.4

Table 4.4 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with High

Curiosity

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 19 – 21 3 7.89
2 22 – 24 5 13.16
 3 25 – 27 0 0
4 28 – 30 12 31.58
5 31 – 33 11 28.95
6 34 – 36 6 15.79
7 37 – 39 1 2.63
Total 38 100

Table 4.4 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension with high curiosity are interval 29 – 34 with 12 students

or 31.58%. From 38 students, 8 students or 21.05% got scores below the average

and 18 students or 47.37% got scores above the average score. Clear description

of the scores distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure

4.3

4.1.4 Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement of Students with Low

Curiosity

Based on the data, the score on students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with low curiosity can be explained that the highest score is 29

and the lowest score is20. The calculation of scores indicated that mean is 25.24.

The scores are shown in Table 4.5

Table 4.5 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with Low

Curiosity

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 20 – 22 10 26.32
2 23 – 25 10 26.32
3 26 – 28 12 31.58
4 29 – 31 6 15.78
Total 38 100

Table 4.5 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension with low curiosity are interval 26 – 28 with 12 students or

31.58%. From 38 students, 20 students or 52.54% got scores below the average
and 6 students or 15.78% got scores above the average score. Clear description of

the scores distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure 4.4

4.1.5 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has high curiosity

and taught by using INSERT

Scores of students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has high

curiosity and taught by using INSERT strategy can be explained that the highest

score is 37 and the lowest score is 27. The calculation of scores indicated that

mean is 31.63. The scores are shown in Table 4.6

Table 4.6 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with High

Curiosity and taught by using INSERT

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 27 – 28 2 10.53
2 29 – 30 6 31.58
3 31 – 32 4 21.05
4 33 – 34 4 21.05
5 35 – 36 2 10.53
6 37 – 38 1 5.26
Total 19 100

Table 4.6 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension with high curiosity are interval 31 – 32 with 4 students or

21.05%. From 38 students, 8 students or 42.11% got scores below the average and

7 students or 36.84% got scores above the average score. Clear description of the

scores distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure 4.5

4.1.6 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low curiosity

and taught by using INSERT

Scores of students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low

curiosity and taught by using INSERT strategy can be explained that the highest
score is 29 and the lowest score is 20. The calculation of scores indicated that

mean is 24.53. The scores are shown in Table 4.7

Table 4.7 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with Low

Curiosity and taught by using INSERT

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 20 – 21 4 21.05
2 22– 23 3 15.08
3 24 – 25 4 21.05
4 26 – 27 4 21.05
5 28 – 29 4 21.05
Total 19 100

Table 4.7 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension with low curiosity are interval 24 – 25 with 4 students or

21.05%. From 38 students, 7 students or 36.85% got scores below the average and

8 students or 42.10% got scores above the average score. Clear description of the

scores distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure 4.6

4.1.7 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has high curiosity

and taught by using DRTA

Scores of students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has high

curiosity and taught by using DRTA strategy can be explained that the highest

score is 34 and the lowest score is 19. The calculation of scores indicated that

mean is 27.05. The scores are shown in Table 4.8

Table 4.8 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with

HighCuriosity and taught by using DRTA

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 19 – 21 3 15.79
2 22– 24 5 26.32
3 25 – 27 0 0
4 28 – 30 4 21.05
 5 31 – 33 5 26.32
6 34 – 36 2 10.52
Total 19 100

Table 4.8 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension taught by DRTA with high curiosity are interval 25 – 27

is 0%, 8 students or 42.11% got scores below the average and 11 students or

47.89% got scores above the average score. Clear description of the scores

distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure 4.7

4.1.8 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low curiosity

and taught by using DRTA

Scores of students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low

curiosity and taught by using DRTA strategy can be explained that the highest

score is 29 and the lowest score is 20. The calculation of scores indicated that

mean is 27.05. The scores are shown in Table 4.9

Table 4.9 Frequency Distribution of the Scores of Students with Low

Curiosity and taught by using DRTA

No. Interval Clas Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency (%)

1 20 – 21 2 10.53
2 22– 23 2 10.53
3 24 – 25 5 26.31
4 26 – 27 2 10.53
5 28 – 29 8 42.10
Total 19 100

Table 4.9 indicates that the average scores of students’ achievement in

reading comprehension taught by DRTA with low curiosity are interval 26 – 27 is

2 students or 10.53%, 9 students or 47.37% got scores below the average and 8
students or 42.10% got scores above the average score. Clear description of the

scores distribution on students with high curiosity are presented in Figure 4.8

4.2 Requirement of Data Analysis

4.2.1 Normality of the Test

Normality test aims to show that the sample data of the population is in

normal distribution. The technique used Lilifors-test. Based on the calculation

result, the data obtained for normality test is presented in Table 4.6

The table above shown that Lobserved values from each group was lower than

Ltable. Thus, it could be concluded that scores of students’ achievement in reading

comprehension for each group distributed normally. After normality test

calculated, the further stage is homogeneity test.

4.2.2 Homogeneity Testing

The homogeneity test aims to find out whether the variance of the data is

homogeneous. With the test criteria F observed ≤ F table indicated population is

homogeneous. In this study, the homogeneity test was to compare variance of the

data on students’ reading comprehension between INSERT and DRTA strategy. It

was also to compare between high and low curiosity. Homogeneity test of

variance was calculated by using F-tests for reading strategies (INSERT and

DRTA) and students’ curiosity and Barlett-test is for the interaction groups. The

result of variance calculation on groups interaction is summarized in Table 4.7

4.2.2.1 Groups of teaching techniques and curiosity

 Homogeneity test of each group of teaching technique; INSERT and

DRTA, and also each group of high and low curiosity shown in table 4.8

Based on the table above shown that the comparison of the treatment of

INSERT and DRTA was F observed= …. The comparison of curiosity that F observed

=… for the level of significance α = 0.05with the degree of freedom = ….. , F table=

….. Thus, F observed ¿ F table and it can be concluded that the variance of the sample

were homogenous.

4.2.2.2 Groups of interaction

The result of calculation on groups’ interaction shown in the table 4.9 as

follows:

The result of variance calculation on groups of interaction was

summarized in the table 4.10 as the following:

Based on the table above the value of X 2 observed was = …… and it was

lower than X 2 table was = …., and it can be concluded that the data on score of

students’ achievement in reading comprehension have homogenous variances.

Thus, all research samples have normally distributed data and homogenous

population. Therefore, the requirement the test had been fulfilled and continued to

hypotheses test that used two-way ANOVA.

4.3 Testing of Hypotheses

The research hypotheses were tested by using two-way ANOVA 2 x 2

factorial designs. The data description is presented in table 4.11.

 The complete calculation of two-way ANOVA with 2 x 2 factorial designs

can be seen in the following table 4.12

Based on the table 4.15 can be described the testing hypotheses as follows:

4.3.1 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by

using INSERT is higher than by using DRTA

The statistical hypothesis:

Ho : µA1 = µA2

Ha : µA1 ¿ µA2

Based on the result of data analysis shown that students’ achievement in

reading comprehension that was taught by using INSERT got average = …. And

students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by using DRTA

got average score = …. The data was presented in table 4.13 indicated that F-

observed = …. And F-table = ….. The result indicated the F-observed ˃ F-table so

null hypothesis (Ho) has been rejected and it can be concluded that the first

hypotheses of the research which stated that the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension that was taught by using INSERT got higher score in reading

comprehension than the students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was

taught by using DRTA was really true.

4.3.2 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has high curiosity

is higher than that have low curiosity

The statistical hypothesis:

Ho : µB1 = µB2

Ha : µB1 ¿ µB2
 Based on the result of data analyses shown that students’ achievement in

reading comprehension that has high curiosity got average score = …. and

students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low curiosity got

average score = …. The data was presented in table 4.13 indicated that F-observed

=…. And F-table = …. The result indicated the F-observed ˃ F-table so null

hypothesis (Ho) has been rejected and it can be concluded that the second

hypotheses of the research which stated that the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension that has high curiosity got higher scores in reading comprehension

than students’ achievement in reading comprehension that has low curiosity was

really true.

4.3.3 Interaction between teaching strategies and curiosity on students’

achievement in reading comprehension.

The statistical hypothesis:

Ho : µA x µB = 0

Ha : µA x µB ≠ 0

The summary of ANOVA calculation in table 4.15 indicated that F-

observed = … and F-table = ……. Based on the result of data analyses shown that

the F-observed ˃ F-table so null hypothesis (Ho) has been rejected and it can be

concluded that the third hypothesis of the research which stated that there was

significant interaction between teaching strategies and curiosity in influencing

students’ achievement in reading comprehension was really true.

Based on the hypothesis testing of the research, it can be shown that the

interaction between teaching strategies and curiosity on students’ achievement in

reading comprehension can be seen in figure 4.9

 In figure 4.9, X students’ curiosity that having higher and lower curiosity.

Y were the average of students’ achievement in reading comprehension suitable

with the teaching strategies variable that were INSERT and DRTA. The

comparison between the line of INSERT and DRTA was the interaction pattern

between teaching strategies and curiosity that describing the estimation of the

average value of students’ achievement in reading taught by using INSERT and

DRTA that didn’t equal but cross each other.

The figure 4.9 above showed that students’ lower curiosity suitable to be

taught by using DRTA and students’ higher curiosity suitable to be taught by

using INSERT. Since there were interaction between teaching strategies and

curiosity on students’ achievement in reading, so it would important to make

Tuckey test to know the average of students’ achievement in reading that have

same amount sample in each group. To know the interaction could be examined

based on pairs of average score on students’ achievement in reading

comprehension by using Tuckey test can be seen in table 4.16

The criteria of accepting the hypothesis if Q observed ˃ Q table, so there were

significance differences to the level of significance α = 0.05. Based on the result

of double comparison by using Tuckey test, it can be described that the

comparison sample group were:

a. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with high curiosity taught by using INSERT and with low

curiosity taught by INSERT, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

b. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with high curiosity taught by using INSERT and with high

curiosity taught by DRTA, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

c. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with high curiosity taught by using DRTA and with low

curiosity taught by DRTA, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

d. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with low curiosity taught by using DRTA and with low

curiosity taught by INSERT, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

e. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with high curiosity taught by using INSERT and with low

curiosity taught by DRTA, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

f. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with low curiosity taught by using INSERT and with high
 curiosity taught by DRTA, it can be shown by the score of Q observed =

…. > Q table = …..

g. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension taught by using INSERT and taught by INSERT, it can be

shown by the score of Q observed = …. > Q table = …..

h. There were differences between the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension with high curiosity and with low curiosity, it can be shown

by the score of Q observed = …. > Q table = …..

4.4 Research Findings

After analyze the data, the problem statements mentioned in the previous

chapter were successfully tested and research findings can be formulated as

follows:

1. INSERT and DRTA significantly affect the students’ achievement in

reading comprehension. The mean score of the students’ achievement in

reading comprehension taught by using INSERT is significantly higher

than that of the students taught by using DRTA

2. The students’ curiosity significantly affects the students’ achievement in

reading comprehension. The students with high curiosity have higher

achievement in reading comprehension than the students with low

curiosity.

3. There is significant interaction between teaching strategies and curiosity

on students’ achievement in reading comprehension. Students’

 achievement in reading comprehension is influenced by teaching strategies

and curiosity. The students those have high curiosity showed significant

effect on their achievement in reading comprehension if they were taught

by using INSERT while students those have low curiosity showed

significant effect on their achievement in reading comprehension if they

were taught by using DRTA.

4.5 Discussion

4.5.1 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that was taught by

using INSERT is higher than by using DRTA.

Based on the result that both INSERT and DRTA significantly affect

students’ achievement in reading comprehension. Thus, it can be concluded that

both INSERT and DRTA are effective to generate ideas in pre-reading stage of

reading comprehension process. The total mean shows that the students’

achievement taught by using INSERT is significantly higher than students that

taught by using DRTA. This is because INSERT develop comprehension………

While DRTA were suggested ….

4.5.2 Students’ achievement in reading comprehension that have high

curiosity is higher than that have low curiosity

The result of Two Way ANOVA computation shows that curiosity

significantly affects students’ achievement in reading comprehension. The total

mean indicates that the students’ achievement with high curiosity is higher than

students those have low curiosity. The total mean indicates that the students with
high curiosity get higher achievement than the students with low curiosity. It is

because the students with high curiosity tend to be more active in learning, more

enthusiastic with the tasks given by teacher, and never feel bored to retry in their

attempt to achieve maximal result in reading comprehension.

On the other hand, the students with low curiosity attempt less than the

students with high curiosity. They involve less in the learning process, do not like

challenging actions and teaching learning process that needs much thinking

action. They do less attempt in achieving the maximal result in learning reading

comprehension. This condition can be observed directly during the teaching

learning process. As matter of result of their curiosity, they get lower achievement

in reading comprehension than those have high curiosity. The group of students

with high curiosity has higher achievement than the group of students with low

curiosity. The students with high curiosity get better result in reading than the

students with low curiosity. Thus, it is clear that the different level of students’

curiosity affect the students’ abilities in reading comprehension.

4.5.3 The Interaction between teaching Strategies and Curiosity on Students’

Achievement in Reading Comprehension.

The result of Two Way ANOVA calculation indicates that there is

significant difference of the interaction between teaching strategies and curiosity.

Teaching strategies and curiosity are two of several important factors that

influence learning achievement. Thus, Tuckey-test was calculated in order to

know which sample interaction has better achievement in reading comprehension

among the cells. It indicates the students that were taught by using INSERT with

high curiosity and the students that were taught by using INSERT with low
curiosity have the most significant difference among others. The students that

were taught by using DRTA with high curiosity have higher achievement in

reading comprehension than the students that were taught by using DRTA

strategy with high curiosity. On the other hand, the students with low curiosity get

higher achievement in reading comprehension if they were taught by using DRTA

than if they were taught by using INSERT.

4.6 Limitation of Research

Although this research was conducted by good preparation and control of

the treatment, but it still had some weakness it meant that this research had some

limitations. These limitations include:

1. Teachers who teach in the classroom are not a treatment study, but

teachers of English studies at school, who have been provided guidance

and direction on implementation procedures of INSERT strategy and

DRTA strategy in accordance with the lesson plans that will be

implemented and in doing the treatments, the researcher is not in the

classes so the researcher cannot control every teacher is doing the

treatment. However, do not close the possibility that existing procedures in

the plans are not implemented fully.

2. Implementation of this research carried out on two classes according to the

schedule who had previously scheduled, the implementation was not the

same. Because the implementation was not at the same time, it did not rule

will be biased.
3. The activities of the sample of the study were not controlled outside the

school so it was presumed that their learning achievement in school was

affected by their knowledge obtained from outside such as English course.

4. This study only focuses on the aspect of curiosity. Meanwhile there are

many aspects that can influence students’ achievement in reading

comprehension. Thus, future researcher should examine other personality

variables.

5. This study was done at half of semester and just done in eight meeting by

giving the treatment to students by using teaching strategies that were

different with the beginning of the semester. It was probably not

conducted well enough to influence the students’ achievement in reading

comprehension totally.

6. The other facilities such English books and dictionary rarely found in the

library, so the students have difficulties to solve the tasks was given.