Article Sidebar

Submitted
April 21, 2020
Accepted
December 28, 2020
Published
December 31, 2020
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 4 Download : 35

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to examine the effect of using interactive compensatory model (ICM)-based integrated thematic learning tools to improve students' reading comprehension of information text comprehension for fifth grade elementary school. This research was conducted in three stages. The first phase of the preliminary study included a literature study, field surveys and expert-validated initial product preparation. The second stage of development included limited trials and extensive trials through experimental methods. The third stage was product testing and socialization of the results to try out its efficacy. Data were obtained through observation, interviews, questionnaires and test (pre-test and post-test). This study used a sample of 504 grade fifth students in 12 elementary schools in Bandung Regency. The results of this study indicate that the use of ICM-based integrated thematic learning tools has a significant effect on students' improvement for reading comprehension on information text for fifth grade elementary school. This is evidenced by the difference in students' reading comprehension ability before and after learning using ICM-based integrated thematic learning tools. This research has implications for the ease with which teachers can achieve learning objectives with the support of teaching materials, media, worksheets and interesting and practical activities that can stimulate students to improve their reading comprehension skills.

Keywords

Interactive Compensatory Model Instructional Devices Integrated-Thematic Informational Text Reading Comprehension

Article Details

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Author Biographies

Ryan Dwi Puspita, IKIP Siliwangi

Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar/FKIP

Susanti Agustina, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM)

Faculty of Information Management

Asep Deni Gustiana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Fakultas Ilmu Pendidikan

References

  1. Akbar, S. (2013). Instrumen Perangkat Pembelajaran. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
  2. Alivernini, F., & Manganelli, S. (2015). A Multilevel Structural Equation Model Testing the Influences of Socio-Economic Status and Pre-Primary Education on Reading Literacy in Italy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 205, 168–172. https://doi.org /10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.09.051
  3. Amiryousefi, M. (2014). Interactive Compensatory Model of ESP Reading Comprehension. The Iranian EFL Journal, 228, 324. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0903.15
  4. Bruner, J. S. (2009). The Process of Education. Harvard University Press.
  5. Borg, W. R and Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational Research: An Introduction 4th Edition. London: Longman Inc.
  6. Dharamshi, P. (2019). I Remember being Aware of How I was being Positioned by my School: How Early experiences with Deficit Views of Education Influence The Practices of Literacy Teacher Educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.09.015
  7. Forgaty, R. (1991). The Mindful School: How to Integrate the Curicula. Palatine, Illnois: IRI. Skylight Publishing, Inc.
  8. Fry, E. (1977). Fry’s Readability Graph: Clarifications, Validity, and Extension to Level 17. Journal of Reading, 21(3), 242–252.
  9. Gamboa González, Ã. M. (2017). Reading Comprehension in an English as a Foreign Language Setting: Teaching Strategies for Sixth Graders Based on the Interactive Model of Reading. Folios, 45(1), 159–175. https://doi.org/10.17227/01234870.45folios159.175
  10. Gunobgunob-Mirasol, R. (2015). The relative Effect of Glossing Instruction on College Students Reading Comprehension. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 208, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.183
  11. Hamra, A., Syatriana, E. (2012). A Model of Reading Teaching for University EFL Students: Need Analysis and Model Design. English Language Teaching, 5(10), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n10p1
  12. Harahap, D. I. (2016). The Effect of Miscue Analysis and Interactive Compensatory Model on Improving Students Inferential Reading Comprehension. MELT Journal. 1(1), 34–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.22303/melt.1.1.2016.34-55
  13. Hellekjaer, G. O. (2009). Academic English Reading Proficiency at The University Level: A Norwegian Case Study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(2), 198-222. Retrieved from https://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/October2009/articles/hellekjaer.pdf
  14. Hermawan, A. (2014). Konsep Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Jurnal QATHRUNÂ. 1 (1), 84-98. Retrieved from http://jurnal.uinbanten.ac.id /index. php/ qathruna/article/view /247
  15. Ismail, M., & Shah, A. (2019). The Interactive Roles of Lexical Knowledge and Reading. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 4(1), 273–299. https://doi.org/10.24200/ jonus.vol4iss1pp273-299
  16. Ismail, S. A. M. M., Petras, Y. E., Mohamed, A. R., & Eng, L. S. (2015). Compensatory Reading among ESL Learners: A Reading Strategy Heuristic. English Language Teaching, 8(8), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n8p46
  17. Kadir, A., Ashrohah, H. (2015). Pembelajaran Tematik. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
  18. Kamgar, N., & Jadidi, E. (2016). Exploring the Relationship of Iranian EFL Learners Critical Thinking and Self-regulation with their Reading Comprehension Ability. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 776–783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.105
  19. Kikas, E., Silinskas, G., Jõgi, A.-L., & Soodla, P. (2016). Effects of Teacher’s Individualized support on Children’s Reading Skills and Interest in Classrooms with Different Teaching Styles. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 270–277. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.015
  20. Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2009). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman.
  21. Masdiana, M., Budiarsa, I. M., & Lamba, H. A. (2014). Penerapan Pembelajaran Tematik untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar IPA Materi pada Lingkungan Siswa Kelas I SDN 018 Letawa Kecamatan Sarjo Kabupaten Mamuju Utara. Jurnal Kreatif Online, 3(2). Retrieved from http://jurnal.untad.ac.id/jurnal/ index.php/JKTO/article/view/ 2879/1967
  22. McNeil, L. (2012). Extending the Compensatory Model of Second Language Reading. System, 40(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.01.011
  23. Munawaroh, I. (2010). Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Tematik Untuk Mengembangkan Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis Siswa SD Kelas Rendah. Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Pendidikan UNY, 3(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpipfip.v0i0.4626
  24. Musthafa, B. (2014). Literasi Dini dan Literasi Remaja: Teori, Konsep, dan Praktik. Bandung: Crest.
  25. Nuttall, C. (2015). The Best Way to Improve Your Knowledge of a Foreign Language is to Go and Live among Its Speakers. The Next Best Way is to Read Extensively in it. Second Language Acquisition for Mizo Learners at the Elementary Level, 188.
  26. Ogle, D. M. (1986). KWL: A Teaching Model that Develops Active Reading of Expository Text. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564–570.
  27. Piaget, J. (1965). The Stages of The Intellectual Development of The Child. Educational Psychology in Context: Readings for Future Teachers, 63(4), 98–106.
  28. Prastowo, A. (2013). Pengembangan Bahan Ajar Tematik. Yogyakarta: Diva Press.
  29. Puspita, R. D. (2017). Pengembangan Perangkat Pembelajaran Tematik Terpadu Berbasis Model Interactive-Compensatory (Ttmic) Untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Membaca Pemahaman Teks Informasi: Penelitian dan Pengembangan pada Siswa Kelas 5 Sekolah Dasar di Kabupaten Bandung [PhD Thesis]. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
  30. Puspita, R. D., Sunendar, D., Musthafa, B., & Agung, R. (2017). Improving Students Reading Comprehension Ability Through Integrated Thematic Learning With School Literacy Movement Support. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 5(3), 99–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/um030v5i32017p099
  31. Puspita, R. D., Sunendar, D., Musthafa, B., & Yudiantara, R. A. (2017). The Use of Interactive-Compensatory Model Based-Learning Material to Improve Informational Text Reading Comprehension Ability of 5th Grade Elementary School in Bandung Regency Indonesia. Advanced Science Letters, 23(11), 10952–10954. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.10195
  32. Puspita, R. D., & Yudiantara, R. A. (2017). Penggunaan Lembar Kerja KWL pada Pembelajaran Tematik Terpadu Untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Membaca Pemahaman Teks Informasi Siswa Kelas 5 SD di Kabupaten Bandung Indonesia. Golden Age: Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.29313/ga.v1i1.2684
  33. Rieben, L., & Perfetti, C. A. (2013). Learning to read: Basic research and its implications. Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com/Learning-To-Read-Basic-Research-and-Its-Implications/Rieben-Perfetti/p/book/9781138979659
  34. Schraw, G., & Gutierrez, A. P. (2015). Metacognitive Strategy Instruction that Highlights The Role of Monitoring and Control Processes. In Metacognition: Fundaments, applications, and trends (pp. 3–16). Springer. Retrieved from https://www.springer.com/gp /book/9783319110615
  35. Setiawan, H., Sadijah, C., & others. (2017). Pengembangan Instrumen Asesmen Autentik Kompetensi pada Ranah Keterampilan untuk Pembelajaran Tematik di Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 2(7), 874–882. http://dx.doi.org /10.17977/jptpp.v2i7.9602
  36. Setyawan, W. W., & Mustadi, A. (2015). Pengembangan SSP Tematik-Integratif untuk Membangun Karakter Disiplin dan Kreatif Siswa Kelas I SD. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 3(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpe.v3i1.4072
  37. Sholichah, A. S. (2018). Teori-teori Pendidikan dalam Al-Quran. Edukasi Islami: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 7(01), 23–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.30868/ei.v7i01.209
  38. Silinskas, G., Kiuru, N., Tolvanen, A., Niemi, P., Lerkkanen, M.-K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2013). Maternal Teaching of Reading and Children’s Reading Skills in Grade 1: Patterns and Predictors of Positive and Negative Associations. Learning and Individual Differences, 27, 54–66. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.011
  39. Simpson, G. B., Lorsbach, T. C., & Whitehouse, D. (1983). Encoding and Contextual Components of Word Recognition in Good and Poor Readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 35(1), 161–171. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/0022-0965(83)90076-0
  40. Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an Interactive-Compensatory Model of Individual Differences in The Development of Reading Fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 32–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/747348
  41. Stanovich, K. E. (1984). The Interactive-Compensatory Model of Reading: A Confluence of Developmental, Experimental, and Educational Psychology. Remedial and Special Education, 5(3), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F074193258400500306
  42. Sukmadinata, N. S. (2005). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. UPI&PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
  43. Tollefson, J. W. (1996). System for Improving Teachers Questioning. Teacher Development Making the Right Moves, Thomas Kral (Ed) Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
  44. Tompkins, G. E. (1998). Language arts: Content and teaching strategies. ERIC.
  45. Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2017). Lenses on Reading: An Introduction to Theories and Models. Guilford Publications. Retrieved from https://cmc.marmot.org/Record/.b42333775
  46. Vygotsky, L. (1930). Mind in Society (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, E. Souberman, Trans. 1978) Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
  47. Waridah, W., & Aman, A. (2015). Pengembangan Perangkat Pembelajaran Tematik-Integratif Tema Menghargai Jasa Pahlawan Berbasis Sosiokultural di Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 3(2), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpe.v3i2.6465
  48. Yussof, Y. M., Jamian, A. R., Roslan, S., Hamzah, Z. A. Z., & Kabilan, M. K. (2012). Enhancing Reading Comprehension through Cognitive and Graphic Strategies: A Constructivism Approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.018
  49. Yusuf, H. O. (2015). Interactive Activities and its Impact in Students Performance in Reading Comprehension in Senior Secondary Schools in Kaduna, Nigeria. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 523–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.698
  50. Zuhana, M. Z., Wong, B. E., & Shaneem, R. -G. (2014). Critical Reading Ability and its Relation to L2 Proficiency of Malaysian ESL Learners. 3L: Language Linguistics Literature, Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 20(2), 43-54. https://ejournal.ukm.my /3l/article/view/4635/3400