The Correlation between Reading Comprehension and Writing Narrative Text

Ability of the Third Semester Students of English Study Program Teachers

Training and Education Faculty of University of Riau

Ronald Ershadi P, Muhammad Syarfi, Desri Maria Sumbayak

Teachers Training and Education Faculty
University of Riau

Abstract
This research was intended to know how significant the correlation between
reading comprehension and writing narrative text ability of the third semester
students of English Study Program, Teachers Training and Education Faculty of Riau
University. The researcher used reading comprehension test and writing a summary
test to see how significant the correlation between the two variables. The research
started on October 23th 2012.
There are two stages to do this research. First is held a try out and second is
take a real test. For try out, there some questions that have to revised, because there is
a question is difficult and some are too easy. So, the researcher has to change it. After
that he takes a real test of reading comprehension and writing a summary.
Based on the finding, it was concluded that there was a correlation between
reading comprehension and writing narrative text ability of the students and it was in
moderate level.

Keywords: reading comprehension, writing narrative text ability, narrative text

1
INTRODUCTION

Reading is one of basic skills to be achieved during language course. Unlike

speaking, reading is not something that every individual learns to do. Reading is a
skill that everyone needs whether he is a student in elementary, secondary, university
or adult school. Writing is very important for those who learn English as foreign or
second language. Writing is the act or art of forming letters and characters on paper,
wood, stone, or other material, for the purpose of recording the ideas which
characters and words express, or of communicating them to others by visible signs. It
means that, by writing, someone can express the ideas he/she is going to express.
Basically, reading and writing affects one another. Researchers have found, when
students read extensively they become better writers. Reading is a variety of genres
that helps students to learn structures and language that can be transferred to their
writing later on. At the same time, writing practice will help the students to build
their reading skill. Especially for young learners who are working to develop their
phonemic awareness and phonics skills. Phonemic awareness will develop as the
learners read and write new words. Similarly, phonics skills (the ability to link
sounds) are reinforced when learners read and write the same words. For intermediate
learners, practice writing by their own texts will help them to analyze the texts that
they read. Langer and Flihan (2000) state that correlational studies to that time
showed that "better writers tend to be better readers (of their own writing as well as of
other reading material), that better writers tend to read more than poorer writers, and
that better readers tend to produce more syntactically mature writing than poorer
readers" To prove the statement above, the researcher try to find out how significant
the correlation between reading comprehension and writing narrative text ability of
the third semester students of English Study Program of UR.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
1. The Nature of Reading
Reading is one of the four language skills that should be mastered by every
student if they want to comprehend the text entirely. Reading perceives a written text
in order to understand its contents. Reading is to learn unique thinking skills.
Furthermore, learners must have ability to comprehend the material from text by
using their own through activities which help them into an outline, be able to find
comparison and contrast or cause and effect examples, following an argument in the
text, choosing relevant topic under discussion. According to Nunan (1990:33) states
reading is an interactive process, in which the reader constantly shuttles between
bottoms-up and top-down processes. Harmer (1995:215) states that reading is often a
prelude to a speaking or writing activity. In the development of the theory of reading
comprehension, bottom-up and top-down processing strategies are important for
readers. Moreover, Grabe (2009:47) states that aspect of reading – perception of word
or comprehension is consider being a primary importance.
According to Nunan (1999:251) there are seven main purposes of reading: (1)
to obtain information for some purposes or because we are curious some discussed;

2
(2) to obtain instructions on how to perform some tasks for our work or daily lives
such as knowing how an appliance works and business runs; (3) to act in a play, play
a game, do a puzzle; (4) To keep in touch with friends by correspondence or to
understand the business letters, business documents and reports; (5) To know when
and where something will take place; (6) To know what is happening as reported in
newspapers, magazines, reports, business journals, business books, etc; (7) for
enjoyment or excitement.

2. The Nature of Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension instruction has evolved from teaching decoding of
texts to teaching inferential and evaluative thinking (Fielding and Pearson, 1994:1).
There are many different purposes for reading, sometimes to learn material, for pure
pleasure, and need to follow a set of directions. Research suggests that
comprehension of narrative text is better when the text is organized to a well-known
story grammar (Calhoun, 1999:127).
Reading comprehension is a reading-thinking activity and as such relies for its
success upon the level of intelligence of the reader, his or her speed of thinking, and
ability to detect relationship (Burnes and Page, 1991:47). Reading can “expose
students to models of different types of writing” (Joyce and Christie, 1989, p.105).
What you have to do with a story is, you analyze it; you break it into parts.
You figure out the characters, how they’re the same and different. And the plot, how
it begins with a problem and goes on until it is solved. Then you understand the story
better, and you can even write your own. (Calfee, 1991; in Ming Yueh Shen, 2009)

3. The Nature of Writing Paragraph

Writing is not an easy work, because it expresses ideas in an acceptable
written language, of course, requires both writers’ linguistic and communicative
competences. It means that writing is not a simple activity. There are a lot of aspects
involved in the process of writing. Alice Oshima and Ann Hogue (1991:3) state that
there are four main stages in the writing process: prewriting, planning, writing and
revising drafts.
According to Richard (1992:70) there are three stages often recognized in
writing process, they are rehearsing, writing and revising. Furthermore, Gorman (in
Murcia, 1979:161) also states that writing is as a complex activity. It requires a
variety of skills that must be employed by the writer during his writing activity.
Hughes (1986) proposes five components of writing that must be noticed by
writers in writing a composition. They are content, organization, vocabulary,
grammar, mechanism.

4. The Advantages of Writing

In modern life, there are many cases that can be done through writing. Say for
example, we can share information to others by writing, both via internet and
correspondence, we can get a job, we can share anything to the others by our write.
Beside, Harsyaf and Izmi (1995:214) in MGMP (2009) said that writing will be used

3
as a generic term to refer to all the various activities that involves transferring thought
through paper.

5. The relationship between Reading and Writing

Coles (1998:1) said that learning to read and write is perceived to be
important across countries and culture. Wilson (1981:279) states that the relationship
between reading and writing based is on communication. Both processes should
develop as a natural extension of the child’s need to communicate.
Nelson and calfee. (1998; in Ming Yueh Sen, 2005:2) suggest that while
constructing meaning for the whole text, the writer has to specify “the functional
aspects of language to readers for organizing, selecting and connecting content”.
Noryce and Christie (1998; in Ming Yueh Sen, 2005:3), in particular, indicate that a
writer utilizes the same schemata that are used for reading comprehension.
Reading and writing connections have been proposed under the constructive
orientation. Nelson and Calfee (1998) in Ming Yueh Shen (2009) said that both
reading and writing require learners to actively involve in constructing meaning.
Readers provide personal response and feelings that can be transacted into expressive
writing. In this way, reading is used to stimulate writing as a source of motivation.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research deals with the correlation between two variables, namely
reading comprehension as the independent and writing summary ability. Correlation
research is a research to find out how significant the correlation between two
variables. In this case, the variables are reading comprehension and writing narrative
text ability. The population of the research was the third semester students of the
English Study Program Teachers Training and Education Faculty of the University of
Riau. The sample in this research was taken by using cluster sampling. According to
Gay (1987:322) the sample for correlation research is selected by using an acceptable
method, and 30 participants are generally considered to being minimally acceptable
sample size. In this research, the populations will be grouped or clustered as classes.
The writer just chooses randomly the cluster as sample. Furthermore, the writer will
take two classes as the sample.
To get the data, the researcher makes two instruments. First is about reading
comprehension test and second is about writing test. Before the researcher takes a real
test, he tests the students by doing try out which aims to determining the appropriate
material. After that, the researcher revised the items that rejected. Heaton (1975) says
that index of difficulty of an item shows how easy or difficult the particular item
proved in the test. The test should reach the standard level of the difficulty which is
>30% and <70% determined by Heaton (1975:172). The items were accepted if the
degree of difficulty was between 0.30 and 0.70. If the index of difficulty was below
0.30 (difficult) or over 0.70 (easy), they would be rejected.
To get reading comprehension result, first, the students were given a reading
test. The kind of reading test is the writer give a narrative text. The respondents asked
to choose the most correct answer from the given option. The total amount of the

4
questions is 20 items, with 80 optional answers. The test was taken from reading
textbook. After the reading test finished, the researcher collect their answer sheets
and try to find out mean score, standard deviation and reliability of the reading
comprehension test. To get the real writing summary score of sampled student, they
were given a writing test. The test is asking the students to summarize the narrative
text that they have read before in their own words. The summary was containing 3
paragraphs. After collecting the data, the writing sheets were scored. The researcher
asked three raters to help him correcting the students’ writing. In scoring the students
compositions, the writer used the scoring based on Hughes (1989:91-93). There are
five aspects of writing; they are grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, organization and
fluency. After getting the real score of students in writing a summary of narrative
text, the writer analyzed it to find out the mean score by using descriptive statistic and
then researcher try to find out the percentage of the student’s ability in writing
summary of narrative text by using the formula by Hatch.
To find out whether there is a significant correlation between reading
comprehension and writing summary ability the researcher used the coefficient
correlation’s Formula by Sudjono. After finding out the result of the coefficient of
correlation, the writer interpreted it whether it is very low, low, moderate, high or
very high. To know whether the hypothesis of this research is accepted or rejected, it
could be found by comparing the value of rxy with the value in the r table of Product
Moment Correlation. Before doing that step, the value of the degree of freedom had
been found first by using the formula of degree of freedom by Sudjono.
When the value of degree of freedom had been known, the final step is to
consult the value of the degree of freedom to r table of Product Moment with the
level of significant of 5% (0.05) which means there are only five possible errors of
the case observed. According to Sudjono (2004:195) if the value of rxy ˃ or ≥ the
value of r table of Product Moment, the Null hypothesis is rejected and the
Alternative hypothesis is accepted, and vice versa.

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

There were two kinds of try out, namely reading comprehension and writing a
summary based on narrative text. They were taken in the third semester students of
English Study Program of UR on October 23th 2012. Based on the difficulty level,
the items would be accepted if they were between 0.30 and 0.70. The mean score and
the standard deviation of each test were also calculated in order to find out the
reliability of the tests. From the result of the reading comprehension try out, it was
found that there were nine items that rejected. Eight items were rejected because easy,
their difficulty level were bigger than 0.70. An item was rejected because difficult, its
difficulty level was under 0.30. Then, after the mean score of the reading
comprehension try out was calculated, it was found that the score was 13 and its
standard deviation was 3.06, so by using the formula of Heaton, the result of the
reliability of this try out test was 0.53 which was classified as high. From the result of
reading comprehension, there were 13 students or (43.33%) got score ≥ 80, so their

5
ability level was classified as Excellent. Then, 9 of them (30%) were good in their
reading comprehension test because their scores were between 60 and 79. Finally, 8
of them (26.67%) were average in their reading comprehension test.
To get the real writing summary score of sampled student, they were given a
writing test. The test is asking the students to summarize the narrative text that they
have read before in their own words. The summary was containing 3 paragraphs. The
test was conducted to measure the writing summary ability of the third semester
students’ of English Study Program Teachers Training and Education Faculty of UR.
In writing test, the researcher asked three raters to correcting the answer sheets. Based
on the first rater, it was found that the mean score of the student’s writing a summary
is 58.93, then based on second rater, the mean score of the students’ writing a
summary is 57.40 and the last rater, the mean score of the students’ writing a
summary is 59.16. Recapitulation of the mean score of the students’ ability in writing
summary from the three raters is 58.53 which was classified as average. For the
classification of the student’ ability in writing a summary is a student (3.33%) at
excellent level, 14 students (46.67%) were at good level, 10 students (33.33%) were
at average level and 5 students (16.67%) were at poor level.
After the researcher get the score of reading comprehension and writing a
summary ability, the researcher try to calculate the coefficient of the correlation
between reading comprehension and writing a summary ability. The coefficient of
correlation or r was found by applying the sums of calculated data above. It was
found that the score of r is 0.59 which was moderate level. Because the result of the
coefficient was 0.59, it could be assumed that 59% of the students succeed in
increasing their writing ability through their ability in reading comprehension. Based
on the result, it was found that there was a correlation between reading
comprehension and writing a summary even though it was at moderate level.
After calculating the data, it was found that the value of rxy is 0.59 and the
value of the degree of freedom (df) is 28. Then, from the r table of Product Moment
Correlation it can be seen that the value of significant 5% (0.05) is 0.361. That means
the value of rxy is obtained bigger than the value of r table of Product Moment. That
means there is a mediocre correlation between students’ ability of reading
comprehension and their ability in writing a summary. It can be concluded that the
null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This research is supposed to find out whether or not there is a significant
correlation between reading comprehension and writing narrative text ability of the
students. From the computation by using Product Moment Pearson Correlation, it was
found that there was a correlation between the reading comprehension and writing
narrative text ability of the students and it was moderate.
There are also some suggestions that the writer gives. First, students should
enlarge their knowledge of reading comprehension since it plays an essential role in
increasing their writing ability. Second, the students need to understand more the
aspects of reading such as main idea, detail information, vocabulary, references and

6
inferences. Third, the students need to understand more the aspects of writing in order
to improve their ability, especially in summarizing paragraphs. Fourth, the students
need to motivate themselves to improve their writing ability by using different
writing technique, such as writing journal or task. Finally, the writer knows that there
are still many problems coming out concerning reading and writing skills.

7
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, Roberta. 2002. The Playful Way to Serious Writing: An Anything- Can-Happen
Workbook to Inspire and Delight. New York. Houghton Mifflin Company.

Azhar, Fadly, et al. 2006. Paduan Penulisan dan Pelaksanaan Skripsi pada Program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni FKIP-
UR. Pekanbaru. Unpublished.

Aziz, Duriya. 2004. My Pals Are Here, English 5B. Singapore. Marshall Cavendish
Education

Blanchard, Karen and Christine, Root. 2003. Ready to Write A First Composition
Text Third Edition. New York. Longman.

Calhoun, Emily F. 1999. Teaching Beginning Reading and Writing. United States of
America. ASCD.

Coles, Martin and Jenkins, Rhonda. 1998. Assessing Reading 2: Changing practice in
classrooms. London and New York. Routledge.

Fielding, Linda G and David Pearson, P. 1994. Reading Comprehension: What

Works. Gale Group.

Gay, L. R. 2000. Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and

Application.__________: Printic. Hall, Inc.

Grabe, William. 2009. Reading in a Second Language. New York. Cambridge

University Press.

Gunning, Thomas G. 2010. Reading Comprehension Booster. San Fransisco. Jossey-

Bass.

Harisson, Colin. 2004. Understanding Reading Development. London. SAGE

Publications.

8
Harisson, Colin and Salinger, Terry. 2002. Assessing Reading I: Theory and Practice.
New York. Routledge.

Harmer, Jeremy. 1995. The Practice of English Language Teaching. United

Kingdom: Longman

Harris, David. P. 1974. Testing English as Second Language. Bombay-New Delhi:

Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company LTD.

Harris, Karen R and Graham, Steve. 2007. Teaching Reading Comprehension to

Students with Learning Difficulties. London. New York. The Guilford Press.

Harsyaf, Nurmaini, and Izmi. 2009. Teaching Writing (MGMP Module). Jakarta:
Center of Development and Empowerment of Teachers Language and
Education Personnel (CDELTEP)

Hatch, Farhady. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics.
London: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Rowley.

Heaton, J.B. 1975. Writing English Language Test. Singapore: Publishers Pie Ltd.

Holt, S. L. & Vacca, J. L. (1984). Reading with a Sense of Writer: Writing with a
Sense of Reader. In J. M. Jensen (Ed.). Composing and Comprehending (pp.
177-181). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Hornby, A. S. 2005. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford. Oxford

University Press.

Hudson, Richard. 2001. Grammar Teaching and Writing Skill: The Research
Evidence. London. http://ww001w.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/writing.htm.
Retrieved on 11 February 2011

Hughes, Arthur. 1986. Testing for Language Teacher. Canbridge University Press.

9
Langer & Flihan. 2000. Writing and Reading Relationship: Constructive Task. Center
on English Learning & Achievement.

McGuinness, Diane. 2004. Early Reading Instruction. London. England. MIT Press.

Noyce, R.M. and Christie, J.F. 1989. Integrating Reading and Writing Instruction in
Grade K-8. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Nunan, David. 1999. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston, U.S.A: Heile
Publishers.

Oshima, Alice and Hogue, Ann. 1999. Writing Academic English Third Edition..
New York. Longman.

Serravallo, Jennifer. 2010. Teaching Reading in Small Groups. Portsmouth:

Heinemann.

Shanahan, Timothy. The Reading-Writing Relationship: Seven Instructional

Priciples. Volume 41. No 7. March 1988: JSTOR

Shen, Ming-Yueh. Reading-Writing Connection for EFL College Learners’ Literacy

Development. Volume 11. Issue 1. 2009.

Yueh Sen, Ming. Reading-Writing Connection for EFL College Learners’ Literacy

Development. The Internet Asian EFL Journal, Vol. 11 Issue 1, March 2009.

10