THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING FIRING LINE STRATEGY TO TEACH READING

COMPREHENSIONS

(A Pre-Experimental Study on the Tenth Grade Student of MAS Assalam Pontianak in the
Academic Year of 2021/2022)

Nova Lia Suanti1 , Diah Astriyanti2 , Elly Syahadati3

123
IKIP PGRI PONTIANAK
1
Novaliasuanti2018@gmail.com

Dalam penelitian ini peneliti akan melakukan penelitian pra-eksperimen dengan rancangan
one group pre-test postest design. Dengan demikian populasi adalah seluruh objek
penelitian yaitu siswa kelas X A dan X B berjumlah 69 siswa. Sampel dalam penelitian ini
menggunakan pengambilan contoh acak. Pengambilan contoh acak adalah teknik
pengambilan sampel yang digunakan ketika pengelompokan "alami" tetapi relatif
heterogen terlihat dalam populasi statistik. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan
dalam penelitian ini adalah teknik pengukuran. Teknik analisis statistik menggunakan uji
beda dengan menggunakan rumus uji beda dan menggunakan analisis uji beda
Berdasarkan analisis data secara umum dapat disimpulkan bahwa terdapat signifikansi
pembelajaran menggunakan strategi garis tembak terhadap pemahaman membaca siswa
kelas X pada materi mendeskripsikan orang, binatang, dan benda di MAS Assalam. Hasil
dari rumusan sub-sub masalah penelitian tersebut dapat disimpulkan bahwa: 1) Rata-rata
hasil belajar siswa sebelum mendapatkan perlakuan dengan menggunakan straregi garis
tembak di kelas X relatif tidak berhasil. Terbukti dengan rata-rata 54,57 tergolong gagal,
2) Terdapat perbedaan rata-rata hasil posttest pada kelas X. Hal ini dibuktikan dengan hasil
ttabel > hitung = 2,042 dan 9,406 (9,406 > 2,042) dan 3) terdapat perbedaan pemahaman
membaca siswa setelah pretest dan posttest. Sehingga dapat disimpulkan dari pemahaman
membaca siswa setelah menggunakan strategi garis tembak lebih tinggi dibandingkan
sebelum menggunakan strategi garis tembak. Terdapat perbedaan penggunaan garis
tembak pada pembelajaran straregi mendeskripsikan orang, binatang, dan benda di kelas X
MAS Assalam. Terbukti dengan hasil effect size 1,59 dengan kategori tergolong jadi Ho
ditolak dan Ha diterima.

Kata Kunci: Strategi Garis Tembak, Pemahaman Membaca, Studi Pra-Eksperimental

ABSTRAK

In the research, the researcher will a pre-experiemental study, whitch one group pre-test
postest design. Thus the population is the whole object of research that students of class X
A and X B numbered 69 students. The sample in this study using clusterrandom sampling.
Cluster random sampling is a sampling technique used when "natural" but relatively
heterogeneous groupings are evident in a statistical population. The technigue of data
collecting apply in this research is measurement technigue. The statistical analysis
techniques used different test by using different test formula and using different test
analysis
Based on data analysis in general can be concluded that there are significant learning to
use the firing line strategy against eighth grade students' reading comprehension in the
material describing people, animal, and thing in MAS Assalam. As a result of the
formulation of sub-sub-problems such research can be concluded that: 1) The average
student learning outcomes before getting treatment by using straregi firing line in class X
relatively unsuccessful. Evidenced by an average of 54.57 pertained fail, 2) There are
differences in the average posttest results in class X. It is proven by the results of T Table >
Tarithmetic = 2,042 and 9,406 (9,406 > 2,042) and 3) There is a difference in students' reading
comprehension after preetest and posttest. So it can be concluded from the reading
comprehension of students after using the strategy of the firing line was higher than before
using a strategy of firing line. There are differences in the use of the firing line on learning
straregi describing people, animal, and thing in class MAS Assalam. Evidenced by the
results of the effect size of 1.59 with the classified categories were so Ho rejected and Ha
accepted.

Keywords: Firing Line Strategy, Reading Comprehension, Pre-Exprimental Study

INTRODUCTION

Reading must be mastered by students, because by reading students will acquire

knowledge, information and problem solving learning. The word is an important factor in
determining the level of understanding (Erika Sinambela, 2015:14).
Learning English is difficult for some students, because English is a foreign language,
while students in everyday use the mother tongue or national language in communicating,
resulting in low understanding of English students. As a result of observations made,
teachers still use conventional approaches in the learning process, namely teacher-centered
rather than student-centered learning. Students rarely get the opportunity to practice the
acquired knowledge, so students have difficulty practicing English properly. Teachers
often practice classically and not individually.
One of the problems that students often experience is that they do not understand
the meaning of the word because of the lack of vocabulary they have, because reading is a
boring activity. In addition, students also still have some difficulty in finding general and
specific information, identifying key ideas, identifying and implicit information, because
English teachers do npot know the teaching methods that are able to overcome student
boredom.
Pearson and Johnson (in Zuchdi, 2000:23-24) state that: factors that can influence
reading ability are linguistic ability, interests, motivation, and a collection of reading skills.
Thus, students must have the ability to speak, interest and motivation to understand a
reading.
One strategy that can be done is to use a firing line strategy. Firing line is a fast
movement format that can be used for a variety of purposes such as testing and role
playing, it offers continuous multiple spins, learners have the opportunity to respond
quickly to questions asked or other types of challenges (Silbermen 2012: 212). Firing line
is one of the active learning strategies that can utilize learning groups to maximize
learning.
Research conducted by Jawara (2013: i) said that the firing line strategy is very
effective in learning in the classroom. Maharani (2015: i) concluded that the use of firing
line strategies is more effectively used than using conventional methods to improve
reading ability.
Based on the above, the problem of this research is formulated as follows,the
research is interested to do the research titled “ The effectiveness of using firing line
strategy to teach reading comprehensions (A Pre-Experimental Study on the Tenth Grade
Student of MAS Assalam Pontianak in the Academic Year of 2021/2022).

RESEARCH METHODS

In the research, the researcher will a pre-experiemental study, whitch one group pre-test
postest design. Ary et al, (2010:303) statesd that form of pre-experiemental study consist
of one group pre-test postest design and static-group comparison. Is use because the
researcher wants to investigate of the effect of firing line method in teaching reading
comperhension before anda after giving treatment.
1. Population
Fraenkel and Wallen (2009:90) stated that “population is the larger group to
whitch one hopes to apply the results. Ary, et al., (2010: 34) population members of
well defined class of people, event or object.therefore the population is the whole
object of research that students of class X A and X B numbered 69 students in tenth
grade in MAS Assalam.
2. Sample
Sample is part of population, chosen to paticipate in the study. Bordens and
Abbott (2011:163) said that “samples a small sub group chosen from the larger
population. Sample is a group in a research study from which information is obtained
(Fraenkel and Wallen, 2009:90). The sample in this study using clusterrandom
sampling. Cluster random sampling is a sampling technique used when "natural" but
 relatively heterogeneous groupings are evident in a statistical population. The research
will determine one class to be thing sample X A

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

A. Research Findings
The analysis below are to show the individual score, mean and standard
deviation of the test, normality of data and testing the hypothesis to determine the
hypothesis and to answer the research question. Post-test was held, by spreading the
posttest with material about describing people, animal, and thing. The data obtained
from the study are the data of the test results, namely pretest and posttest in class X as
follows:
a. Students' Individual Score in Pretest Postest
The first step to find the effectiveness of the treatment, the researcher
calculated the individual score of pre-test and post-test. below one example of
students' individual score (students' code: A). the results of both individual score
are presented appendix.
Pre-test Post-test

X 1 =20 X 2 =100

After the students' individual score in pretest and postest obtained, the
researcher analyzed the data by employing SPSS version 16.00. the data
calculation was displayed as follows:
Table 4.1
Statistics of the Pretest and Postest
Statistics
Pretest Postest
N Valid 35 35
Missing 0 0
Mean 54.5714 82.0000
Std. Error of Mean 2.53025 1.64240
Median 50.0000 80.0000
Mode 45.00 75.00
Std. Deviation 1.49692E
9.71657
1
 Variance 224.076 94.412
Range 55.00 30.00
Minimum 20.00 70.00
Maximum 75.00 100.00
Sum 1910.00 2870.00

Based on the above table, shows that the highest pre-test value is 70 and
the lowest 20 with the standard deviation of 1.49, while the pretest average value
is 54.57. The highest post-test value of 100 and the lowest 70 with a standard
deviation of 9.71 while the average post-test value of 82.
b. Research Finding on the Students’ Mean Score in Pre-test
The pre-test given is recommendee as the first tes before treatment. The
result of the pre-test shows the results of the students’ score before treatment
being conducted. Based on the table individual score (see appendix), the score of
pre-tes has indicated 75 as the higtest score and 20 as the lowest score. The nex
step is calculating the mean score of pre-test by devinding the total score of pre-
test with the whole number of research sample. Thus, the result of the test is
54,57.
The computation of mean score of pre-test:
C1
X1= x 100
N1

1.910
X1= x 100
3.500

X 1 =54,57

c. Research Finding on the Students’ Mean Score in Post-test

The Post-test given is recommendee as the first tes before treatment. The
result of the Post-test shows the results of the students’ score before treatment
being conducted. Based on the table individual score (see appendix), the score of
post-tes has indicated 100 as the higtest score and 70 as the lowest score. The next
step is calculating the mean score of Post-test by devinding the total score of Post-
test with the whole number of research sample. Thus, the result of the test is 82.
The computation of mean score of Post-test:
 C2
X2= x 100
N2
2.870
X2= x 100
3.500

X 2 =82

d. Standar Deviation
Standar deviation (SD) represents the deviation of the values of a set of
data from its average or mean. it shows how different values of a particular data
set are dispersed. when SD is lowes, it means that the values are very close to
their average. on the other hand, when SD is higher, it means that the values are
scattered far from the avarage value. the researcher used SPSS version 16.00 to
calculated the SD both pre-test and post test, the result can be see in the table 4.1
above. the calculation showed that the standar deviation of pretest was 1.49 and
the post test was 9.71. it can see that the students' reading score were to average
after the treatment of strategy firing line applied.
e. Validity and Reliability
The result of calculation with product moment correlation was consulted
with Table r result of product-moment correlation. If r count> rtable then item question
is valid.
Table 4.2
Problem validity
No RCount rtable Validity Information
1 0,695 0,361 Valid Problem used
2 0,401 0,361 Valid Problem used
3 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used
4 0,722 0,361 Valid Problem used
5 0,374 0,361 Valid Problem used
6 0,445 0,361 Valid Problem used
7 0,669 0,361 Valid Problem used
8 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used
9 0,565 0,361 Valid Problem used
10 0,629 0,361 Valid Problem used
11 0,470 0,361 Valid Problem used
12 0,371 0,361 Valid Problem used
13 0,618 0,361 Valid Problem used
14 0,493 0,361 Valid Problem used
 15 0,631 0,361 Valid Problem used
16 0,668 0,361 Valid Problem used
17 0,559 0,361 Valid Problem used
18 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used
19 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used
20 0,586 0,361 Valid Problem used
21 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used
22 0,633 0,361 Valid Problem used
23 0,619 0,361 Valid Problem used
24 0,392 0,361 Valid Problem used
25 0,861 0,361 Valid Problem used

Based on the table above, shows that all the questions given to 30 students
are problem used and can be used to measure reading comprehension in eighth
grade, because the value of rCount> rTable.
According (Zuldafrial, 2012: 25) The reliability of the instrument is the
degree of determination or keajekan or consistency of measuring instruments used
to measure. Reliability (realibility) comes from the word rely which means to
believe and reliable which means can be trusted. Trust is related to determination
and consistency. The test result of learning is said to be reliable if it gives the
result of measurement of learning result which is relatively consistent. According
to Arikunto (2006: 86) said that, "a test can be said to have a high level of
confidence if the test can give the right results". Because the test is a multiple
choice then the reliability of the test calculated by using the alpha formula as
follows:
r
( k−1k )(1− )
M (K− M)
21=
ks 2

Where:
R12 : Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficient
K : The number of items
M : Mean of the scores.
s : variance of scores. (Ayodele, 2012:397)

In this research, reliability calculations performed using Microsoft Office

Exel 2013, obtained the results of the test test in the form of objective (multiple
choice) as a whole by using the formula Spearman - Brown. Obtained by trial
results based on the criteria of reliability, then the results of reliability is 0,905>
 rtable 0,361, then with low reliability category with low intreprestasi (less good),
but can be used to measure reading comprehension.
f. Normality Data
The provision to state whether or not a normal data can be seen from an
alpha or significance level, Asymp. Sig> alpha it can be stated that the data used
is normally distributed. Meanwhile, according to Sugiyono (2004: 173), "Testing
the normality of data can be done using normal opportunity paper or Chi Square."
The test of normality with Chi Squares is by comparing the value / price of Chi
Square calculated with Chi Square Table, provided that if Chi Square price is
smaller or equal to Chi Square price then the data distribution is not normal, and
vice versa if Chi Square Greater than Chi Square Table then the data is declared
normal.
According to Santoso (2005: 209-212), "Normality test can also be done
with Shapiro-Wilk, Liliefors and normal probability plots", provided that if the
data comes from a normal distribution, then the data distribution values will lie
around straight line. In this study, the researchers used two normality test tools:
normal probability plots that can be obtained directly from the linear regression
analysis output in Normal P-Plot Regression Standardized Residual and
Kolmogorov Smirnov Z.
Based on Normal P-Plot Regression Standardized Residual and
Kolmogorov Smirnov Z test, in this research can be seen that the spread of data
from this research spread around the straight line hence can be concluded that
requirement of normality of data in this research fulfilled.
The provision to state whether or not a normal data can be seen from an alpha or
significance level, if Asymp. Sig> alpha then the residual regression is normally
distributed. The results of the normality assay using Kolmogorve Smirnonov can
be seen in Table 4.2 below:
Tabel 4.3
Test Normality
 One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Pretest Postest
N 35 35
Normal Parametersa Mean 54.5714 82.0000
Std. Deviation 1.49692E1 9.71657
Most Extreme Differences Absolute .176 .193
Positive .134 .193
Negative -.176 -.110
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.039 1.141
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .231 .148
a. Test distribution is Normal.

Based on normality test results obtained asimptotic significance (for two-

way test) of 0,231 and 0,148. Because sig> alpha (0.05) then accept H 0 means:
Residual regression is normally distributed. So the analysis used is t test.
g. T-test
In this research, the first question is about the effectiveness of reciprocal
in teaching reading comprehension on descriptive text. to answer this question,
the researcher use t-test formula by SPSS version 16.00.
Table 4.4
t-Test
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Std. Std. Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pair 1 Pretest -
-2.74286E1 17.25123 2.91599 -33.35458 -21.50257 -9.406 34 .000
Postest

From the result of computation above, it is obtained that the value of t-test
is bigger than ttable. thus, it shows that the mean scores of post-test and pretest of
the experhave significant difference. the calculation of t-test was 9.406. the t-test
table 5% with df (degree of freedom) = 2,042. it indicates that tcount is bigger
that ttabel or 9,406 > 2,042 (the t table can be see on appendix). therefore, the
teaching reading comprehension on narative tex by using reciprocal can increase
 the students' in reading. it means the null hypothesis (Ho) which say "teaching
reading comprehension on narative tex by using strategy firing line is not
effective" is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which say "teaching
reading comprehension on narative text by using strategy firing line is not
effective" is accepted.

h. Effect Size
After the researcher having process of describing the t-test score, the
researcher find out the significant effect of the treatment to see how far the
effectiveness using strategy firing line in teaching reading comprehension. The
formula of effect size as follows:
So there is an increased understanding of students with high category 0.70.
So, therefore Ho is rejected, which means accepting Ha. It can be concluded there
is an increased understanding of the students in class X before and after using the
strategy of the firing line.
Furthermore, to determine the effect of an increase in students'
understanding of the effect size using the formula as follows:
x2 −x1
ES =
Sd

82−54,57
ES =
17.25123

27,43
ES =
17.25123

27,43
ES =
17.25123

ES = 1,59

Based on calculations using the formula above effect size, it can be seen
the effect of the use of the firing line strategy against the students' understanding
amounted to 1,59, while the rest of 8.41% influenced by other factors that are not
in this study. Based on Size Effect pricing criteria, it can be concluded that the use
of the firing line strategy is classified.

B. Discussion
 The average yield posttest in class X normal distribution and homogeneous
tested using T test (for both normal distribution) in the can T hitung of 9,046 and TTable
amounted to 2,042. So Thitung 9,046 > TTable 2,042, this fact shows that there are
differences in the average of the results of the posttest in class X between before and
after using the strategy of the firing line.
Before providing treatment in class X, first given pretest. Pretest is given to
know the initial ability of students in a class X. The ability of class X beginning
student who will be given the treatment by using the strategy of the firing line. After
pretest done, then the next step is to provide treatment to the class X is. At the material
time describing people, animal, and thing. Students are motivated by strategy firing
line and more aware of the indicators studied.
Use of the firing line strategy used by teachers in accordance with the learning
implementation plan (RPP). Students in shape in small groups consisting of 4-5 people
and will discuss the topics that have been assigned to a teacher in each group. From
this fact in accordance with the advantages of strategy firing line is an interesting
presentation by forming students in small group work that trains students to be
independent and mutually respect each other's opinion in solving a problem and can
give students' motivation. This is in line with the advantages of the firing line strategy.
Stimulate students to always competed well in the study. Undeniably a class there had
to be a competition or rivalry. With a comfortable learning, active fun, effective and
learners will certainly feel have got something useful for him so that his needs will
learn to feel fulfilled. Thus they are stimulated to get the heart's satisfaction (Oktiani,
2013:11).
However, in the implementation of firing line strategy still found weaknesses
include: The teacher still looks unruffled in explaining the method and has not been
firm in instructing the rules in the method during the question and answer session.
This resulted in students rowdy and engrossed in chatting themselves with a friend
seat. The student still looks confused with the new method used by his teacher. So at
the time of question and answer session and discussion only some groups that look
dominant have good cooperation, for example Groups 3 and 6. While in other groups
there are only a few students In groups that want to work together, such as helping
each other and Solve existing problems in the group. This results in a question session
Answer can not be completed on time by most groups.
 Of these weaknesses, the teacher attempts to plan the lesson at the next
meeting, so that the goal of student cooperation increases. Students are conditioned to
help each other in understanding the material. In addition, the teacher also gives hand
out to each group, it is intended that students are not rowdy and chatting alone but are
conditioned to read and understand the hand out that contains the material.
Researchers and teachers are also hesitating on the strategy for the Q & A session to
run smoothly, which gives 10 minutes to self-condition and discuss the material. With
discussions such as this, cooperation and understanding of students will increase so
that when the question and answer session carried out will run smoothly and on time
because students are easy to answer questions.
The next step after completion of the treatment is, giving a final test (posttest).
Posttest given to determine student understanding after being given treatment using a
strategy of firing line by the researchers, the learning outcomes of students who were
not given the treatment by using strategy firing line by teachers of English. Based on
the results of data processing, obtained an average result A class VIII student before
firing line using a strategy of: 54,57 with a standard deviation: 1,49, while the average
results of A class VIII student after using a strategy of firing line : 82 with a standard
deviation: 9,71. This indicates that the firing line strategy can improve student
learning outcomes. As Usman et al (2012: 24-25) says that the function of strategy is
to help facilitate learning for students and facilitate teaching for teachers and more
attention and interest of students in learning.
The effect of the firing line to the understanding strategy read in class X SMA
Assalam Pontianak, use the formula obtained results Effect Size Ho rejected and Ha
accepted, evidenced by the results of Effect Size 1,59 were classified as moderate. The
conclusion is that there are significant strategy use the firing line against the reading
comprehension of students in class X SMA Assalam Pontianak. The results of this
study supported research conducted by Husna (2015) which mentions that the
effective learning strategy of firing line on mathematics learning outcomes on the
subject matter of counting operations on the form of student algebra in class VII of
SMP Negeri 1 Karang Baru of the academic year 2015/2016.
The implementation of firing line strategy, able to make conditioned students
to help each other group members in understanding the material. In addition, the
teacher also gives hand out to each group, it is intended that students are not rowdy
 and chatting alone but are conditioned to read and understand the hand out that
contains the material. Researchers and teachers are also making a strategy for the Q &
A session to run smoothly, which gives 10 minutes to self-condition and discuss the
material. With discussions such as this, cooperation and understanding of students will
increase so that when the question and answer session carried out will run smoothly
and on time because students are easy to answer questions.

Teachers are also able to manage the time well so that the question and answer
session runs two rounds in accordance with the planning. In addition, student
cooperation is also more visible and increasing. Students no longer work individually,
but help each other. Students who are already familiar with the material submitted by
the teacher already want to explain to students who have not understood. They look
more courageous in expressing opinions in front of other friends. In addition the
students also look respect each other, they will listen and give feedback to friends who
are arguing.

CONCLUSION
Based on data analysis in general can be concluded that there are significant
learning to use the firing line strategy against eighth grade students' reading
comprehension in the material describing people, animal, and thing in MAS Assalam
Pontianak. As a result of the formulation of sub-sub problems such research can be
concluded that:
1. The average student learning outcomes before getting treatment by using strategy
firing line in class X relatively unsuccessful. Evidenced by an average of 54.57
pertained fail. There are differences in the average posttest results in class X. It is
proven by the results of TTable = 2,042 and Tarithmetic = 9,406 (9,406 > 2,042).
2. There is a difference in students' reading comprehension after pretest and posttest.
So it can be concluded from the reading comprehension of students after using the
strategy of the firing line was higher than before using a strategy of firing line.
There are differences in the use of the firing line on learning strategy describing
people, animal, and thing in class X MAS Assalam Pontianak. Evidenced by the
results of the effect size of 1.59 with the classified categories were so Ho rejected
and Ha accepted.
REFERENCES

Alderson, Charles. 2000. Assesing Reading. Cambridge: Univercity Press.

Ary, Donat, et al 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. Waddworth: Nelson

Education.

Ayodele, J And Oluwatoyo. 2012. Efectiveness of Think Pair Share Method to Teach
Reading Comprehension Viewed From Students’ Motivation. Jurnal Pasca. Uns.
Ac.id, 1 (1), pp.109-120.

Burnsin Sormin, 2012. Improving Students’ Achievement in Reading Comperhension

Through Think Pair Share Tecnique. (Online).

Blerkom, M. L. V, 2009. Measurament and Statistics for Teachers. New York: Lawrence
Erlbaum / Routledge.

Frankel and Wallen, 2009. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. USA:
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Gulo, W. 2004. Strategy Learing. Lisbon.

Gunning, T. G. 2010. Creating Reading for All Children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Heaton, Brown, 2004. Writing English Language Test. Longman. Handbook for Language
Teacher.

Heaton, J.B. 2011. Writing English Language Test. Longman. Handbook for Language
Teacher.

Lems, Kristin, Leah D. Miller and Tenena M. Soro. 2010. Teaching Reading to English
Language Learners. New York: Guilford Press

Muliana, 2011. Effective is the use of K-W-L Strategy in teaching listening comprehension
to the tenth grade students of SMA St. Petrus Ketapang in academic year 2010/
2011.
Moreillon, Judi. 2007. Collaborative Strategies for Teaching Reading Comprehension:
Maximizing Your Impact. Chicago: The American Library Association

Narkubo, 2010. Strategi Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Nuttal, C. 1985. Teaching Reading Skill in a Foreign Languege. London: British Library
Cataloguing in Publication Data.

Oktiani, Resi. 2013. Penerapan Strategi Firing Line Yang Dimodifikasi Untuk
Meningkatkan Aktivitas Dan Hasil Belajar Siswa Dalam Pelajaran Kimia Di
Kelas X TPMI SMKN 2 Kota Bengkulu (Classroom Action Research). Skripsi:
Bengkulu: Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan.

Ness, M. 2011. Explicit Reading Comprehension Instruction In Elementary Classrooms:

Teacher Use Of Reading Comprehension Strategies. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 25(1), 98-117.

Pang, S. E., Muaka, A., Bernhardt, B., & Kamil, M. L. 2003. Teaching Reading. Geneva:
International Bureau.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. 2002. Longman dictionary of language teaching and
applied linguistics. Malaysia: Pearson Education.

Sanjaya, Wina.2006. Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan.

Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Silbermen 2009. Active Learning. New York.

Sing, Y, K. 2006. Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistic. New Delhi: New
Age International (P) Ltd.

Subana, Sudrajat. 2009. Pengantar Penelitian Ilmiah. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Thea Leddy, 2011. Reading Comprehension Strategies In A Remedial Elementary

Classroom. Michigan University.

Zainul, Asmawi. 2012 Pengukuran, Tes dan Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Jakarta : PAU.

Zuchdi, Darmiyati dan Budiasih. 2000. Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia di Kelas
Rendah. Yogyakarta: PAS