Fan and Pick 1
Fan and Pick 1
Fan and Pick 1
1
(Student of Magister Program of English Education of Pascasarjana UNS)
([email protected])
2
(Teacher of English Education of Pascasarjana UNS)
2
(Teacher of English Education of Pascasarjana UNS)
ABSTRACT
The objective of the research are: (1) to prove whether or not fan-n-pick method is more
effective than grammar translation method in teaching reading comprehension, (2) to prove
whether or not students who have high self-confidence have better reading skill than those
who have low self-confidence, and (3) to prove whether or not there is an interaction between
teaching methods and students’ self-confidence on the students’ reading skill.
The research was conducted at SMPN 2 Kejobong, Purbalingga. The research belongs to
experimental study. The population was the eighth grade students of SMPN 2 Kejobong in the
academic year of 2012/ 2013. The technique used to get the sample was cluster random
sampling. Test (reading test) and non test (self-confidence questionnaire) techniques were used
to collect the data. They were tried-out to be a valid and reliable instrument. The data of
reading test were analyzed by using multifactor analysis of variance 2 x 2. Then, they were
analyzed by using Tukey test.
The result of inferential analysis of the data shows that fan-n-pick method is more effective
than grammar translation method to teach reading. Second, the students having high self-
confidence have better reading skill than those who have low self-confidence. Third, there is
an interaction effect between the teaching methods used and students’ self-confidence in
teaching reading. Fan-n-pick method is more effective than GTM for teaching reading for
students having high self-confidence and GTM is more effective than fan-n-pick method for
teaching reading for students having low self-confidence.
Based on the research findings, it can be concluded that fan-n-pick method is an effective
method to teach reading, and the effectiveness of this method is affected by the level of the
students’ self-confidence.
126
ENGLISH TEACHING
Vol. I, Issue 1 (2012), PP 121-131
http://jurnal.pasca.uns.ac.id
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION score is 62 up to 74, the mean is 69.5, the
The description of the data is based on mode is 69.17, and the standard
the groups which are divided into eight deviation is 3.415; (7) descriptive analysis
as follows: (1) descriptive analysis of the of the data of reading test of the students
data of reading test of the students as having low self-confidence as
experimental group taught by using fan- experimental group taught by using fan-
n-pick method (A1) shows that score is 58 n-pick method (A1B2) shows that score is
up to 84., the mean is 73.3, the median is 58 up to 74, the mean is 68.3, the mode
73.5, the mode is 70.83, and the standard is 69.50, and the standard deviation is
deviation is 6.338; (2) descriptive analysis 4.658; and (8) descriptive analysis of the
of the data of reading test of the students data of reading test of the students
as control group taught by using GTM having low self-confidence as control
(A2) shows that score is 62 up to 78, the group taught by using GTM (A2B2) shows
mean is 70.8, the median is 70.50, the that score is 62 up to 78, the mean is
mode is 69.5, and the standard deviation 72.0, the mode is 72.70, and the standard
is 3.837; (3) descriptive analysis of the deviation is 4.221.
data of reading test of the students Then, based on the result of
having high self-confidence (B1) shows normality test it was found that the
that score is 62 up to 84, the mean is sample was on normal distribution
73.9, the median is 74, the mode is 72, because Lo (L obtained) is lower than Lt (L
and the standard deviation is 5.688; (4) table) at the level of significance α = 0.05.
descriptive analysis of the data of The data were homogenous because χo2 is
reading test of the students having low lower than χt2 at the level of significance α
self-confidence (B2) shows that score is 58 = 0.05. Furthermore, the Ho was rejected
up to 78, the mean is 70.2, the median is because Fo was higher than Ft (Fo > Ft).
71.28, the mode is 72, and the standard Based on the above result it can be
deviation is 4.669; (5) descriptive analysis stated that (1) Fan-n-pick method is more
of the data of reading test of the students effective than GTM to teach reading. Fan-
having high self-confidence as n-pick is one of the cooperative methods
experimental group taught by using fan- that can make the students more
n-pick method (A1B1) shows that score is enjoyable in learning activity. Reading
70 up to 84, the mean is 78.33, the mode activity is more fun if it uses this
is 77.75, and the standard deviation is method. One of the characteristics of
3.729; (6) descriptive analysis of the data cooperative methods is that there is a
of reading test of the students having group discussion during learning activity.
high self-confidence as control group It makes the students more active in the
taught by using GTM (A2B1) shows that classroom. According to Skidmore (2008:
127
ENGLISH TEACHING
Vol. I, Issue 1 (2012), PP 121-131
http://jurnal.pasca.uns.ac.id
117), fan-n-pick is a method that helps all information sharing in answering the
students in the learning process. Fan-n- questions related to the content of the
pick uses a set of cards for each group of text they read. Richards (2001: 5-6) also
four students. These cards consist of says that this method approaches the
some questions about the content of the language first through detailed analysis
text the students read. The students are of its grammar rules, followed by
asked to answer the question on the card application of this knowledge to the task
one by one in their group. Although it is of translating sentences and texts into
frightening to answer the question of the and out of the target language. It can be
text orally in front of the class, it is easy said that the method requires students to
for students to talk with a supportive translate whole texts word-for-word. It
teammate. It can build their self- just focuses on grammar pattern and
confidence. And it can be said that fan-n- translation, not the content of the text
pick is used to check the students’ the students read. Questions and answer
understanding about the content of the during learning activity are also very
text they read, to introduce a new topic, limited. The answer of the questions is
review material that has been delivered not various and it is almost the same
by the teacher, increase the students’ because the teacher gives the correct
mastery of reading skills, thinking skills, answer just based on the text. The
communication skills, and information students cannot express their opinion
sharing. According to Kagan (1994: 15- freely in answering the question because
17) there are some advantages of fan-n- they are not given a chance to discuss
pick method. Fan-n-pick method gives with other during learning activity. It
the students new venues to express makes reading a boring activity in the
themselves, practice self-control, learn in classroom. Based on the explanation
different ways and master and retain the above, it can be concluded that fan-n-pick
lessons they have learned. Another method is more effective than GTM to
method that can be used to teach reading teach reading especially to eighth grade
is grammar translation method (GTM), students; (2) Students who have high self-
but it is an old method. According to confidence have better reading skill than
Richards (2001: 5-6), there are some those who have low self-confidence.
characteristics of grammar translation Having high self-confidence is necessary
method. One of the characteristics of this for students. Confident students trust
method is that the teacher has authority their own abilities, have a general sense
in the classroom. It makes the students of control in their lives, and believe that,
more passive in learning activity. There is within reason, they will be able to do
no group discussion, so there is no what they wish, plan, and expect. If they
128
ENGLISH TEACHING
Vol. I, Issue 1 (2012), PP 121-131
http://jurnal.pasca.uns.ac.id
have high self-confidence, they will be answers without giving any comments or
able to perform their personal attributes different answers. Based on the
such as assertiveness, optimism, explanation above, it can be concluded
enthusiasm, affection, pride, that the students who have high self-
independence, trust, the ability to handle confidence are more active in reading
criticism and emotional maturity. activity than those who have low self-
Students who have high self-confidence confidence. When they are active in
pay more attention in class, get along reading activity, their reading skill will be
better with their peers and generally have better. That is why the students who have
a more focused and inquisitive attitude high self-confidence have better reading
because they feel good or comfortable skill than those who have low self-
with who they are. They are more focused confidence; and (3) There is an
and do not hesitate to ask questions. interaction between teaching methods
Asking questions in the classroom and self-confidence. The students who
requires certain courage to stand up and have high self-confidence are active
interrupt the teacher to ask a question, enough in reading activity. They have
and it requires self-confidence to do that. high willingness to read the text without
They can do that if they feel capable, being guided too hard by their teacher.
competent, and energetic in the When they are taught by using fan-n-pick
classroom. They trust their own abilities method, they can share idea each other in
and don’t fear failure in learning process. a group discussion. High self-confidence
In contrast, the students who have low students make a lot of friends and
self-confidence tend to study lazy or they engage themselves in a group discussion.
are not able to solve their problem, and Discussion brings various viewpoints to
they do not commit something with their the forefront in a common place, thereby
new ideas. Students having low self- enriching everyone by giving a multi-
confidence cannot express their answers angle view of the topic. In this situation,
of the questions freely. They might not teacher just helps the students to have a
stand up and ask the teacher to explain good understanding about the content of
once more even though they are the text they read. By using fan-n-pick
struggling to get a concept right. This method, students can adjust their
creates obstacles to their learning. They reading skills to the level of their partner
are not able to share the information they because they are working together. They
get from the text. During the discussion, also encourage and support each other in
they are passive. They just listen what language use (Kagan, 1994: 15-17). It
others say about the answers of the means that teaching steps of this method
questions. Then they agree with their can build the students’ self-confidence in
129
ENGLISH TEACHING
Vol. I, Issue 1 (2012), PP 121-131
http://jurnal.pasca.uns.ac.id
the classroom because there is an CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
interaction among students especially Based on the findings, it can be
when they share the answers of the concluded that fan-n-pick is an effective
questions related to the text given by the method to teach reading. The
teacher. That is why fan-n-pick method is effectiveness of the method is
more effective than GTM to teach determined by the level of the students’
students who have high self-confidence. self-confidence. Fan-n-pick is more
In contrast, GTM is more effective to effective than GTM to teach students who
teach students who have low self- have high self-confidence. For the
confidence. Teaching reading using GTM students who have low self-confidence,
is easier to do than using fan-n-pick, but GTM is more effective than fan-n-pick to
it is boring. Larsen (2001: 17-18) states teach reading. The writer hopes that it
that the weak point of grammar can be a reference for the English
translation method is that the teacher teachers to teach reading creatively and it
has authority in the classroom. It can be can be references for other researchers to
said that the teacher plays a bigger role conduct further research.
than students in learning activity. There
is no group discussion activity. It means BIBLIOGRAPHY
that the students do not share their Aebersold, J. & Field M. (1997). From
Reader to Reading Teacher.
answers of the questions with the others.
Cambridge: Cambridge University
The students who have low self- Press.
Arikunto, S. (2007). Prosedur Penelitian;
confidence are very happy because they
Suatu Pendekatan Praktik (6th Revised
do not need to share ideas in answering Ed.). Jakarta: P.T. Rineka Cipta.
Best, J. W. (1981). Research in Education.
the questions of the text. Low self-
New Jersey: Prentice-hall, Inc.
confidence can influence the students to Broughton, Geoffrey. (1980). Teaching
English as a Foreign Language.
feel too anxious, nervous, or worried
London and New York: Routledge.
about. Burn, P.C., Roe, B.D., and Ross, E.P. (1984).
Teaching Reading in Today’s
They are always ashamed to answer
Elementary School. Boston: Houghton
the questions in front of the other Mifflin Company.
Dornyei, Zoltan. (2005). The Psychology of
students. It makes them very passive
the Language Learner Individual
during reading activity. That is why GTM Differences in Second Language
Acquisition. New Jersey: Lawrence
is moreappropriate to teach reading to
Erlbaum Associates.
students having low self-confidence. It Hartoyo. (2010). Research Method in
Education. Semarang: UNNES Press.
means there is an interaction between
Kagan, Spencer. (1994). Cooperative
teaching methods and students’ self- Learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan
Publishing.
confidence to teach reading.
130
ENGLISH TEACHING
Vol. I, Issue 1 (2012), PP 121-131
http://jurnal.pasca.uns.ac.id
Kerlinger, F. N. (1992). Foundation of
Behavioral Research. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. (2001).Techniques
and Principles in Language Teaching.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Patel. (2008). English Language Teaching
(Methods, Tools, and Techniques).
Jaipur: Sunrise.
Richards, Jack C. & Rodgers, Theodore S.
(2001). Approaches and Methods in
Language Teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Skidmore, Sharon. (2008). Balanced
Literacy Through Cooperative
Learning and Active Engangement.
Sidney: Hawker: Brownlow Education.
Tuckman, Bruce W. (1972). Conducting
Educational Research. USA: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
131