FROM PASSIVE TO ACTIVE: EMPOWERING STUDENTS IN READING TASKS THROUGH THE JIGSAW COOPERATIVE LEARNING APPROACH
Abstrak
This study evaluated whether the jigsaw method could enhance students' reading comprehension skills. The research was conducted using a pre-experimental approach, where each student in a group was assigned a unique section of the material to study. After studying, students who had studied the same sections would form an "expert group" to discuss and fully understand the information. The results of this research were analyzed based on various factors such as frequency and percentage rate of student scores, average scores, t-test value, and hypothesis testing. These results were interpreted here: Pre-test and post-test scores were gathered for evaluation. The researcher calculated the average score for students' reading comprehension achievements, noted any improvements or differences between paired scores, and squared those gains before tabulating them. The average pre-test and post-test score was 5, with the pre-test average being 52 and the post-test average being 7.66. It indicated an increase in students' average scores after implementing the treatment method, and their post-treatment performance surpassed their initial performance significantly. It showed a significant difference between students' pre-treatment and post-treatment outcomes. Using jigsaws, a cooperative learning model in teaching, can be beneficial in enhancing students' reading comprehension abilities and overall English learning capacity.
Referensi
Akhmad Yazidi. (2014). Memahami Model-Model Pembelajaran Dalam Kurikulum 2013 (the Understanding of Model of Teaching in Curriculum 2013). Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pembelajarannya, 4(1), 89–95. http://ppjp.unlam.ac.id/journal/index.php/jbsp
Andrade, H. L. (2019). A Critical Review of Research on Student Self-Assessment. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
Barber, A. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2020). How Reading Motivation and Engagement Enable Reading Achievement: Policy Implications. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219893385
Basri, N. (2022). STUDENTS ' LEARNING PERFORMANCE WITH TRADITIONAL ASSESSMENT AND PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT IN ENGLISH CLASS. NATIONAL SEMINAR OF PBI (English Language Education), 245–251.
Basri, N., & Rahayu. (2022). English Students’ Motivation and Their Learning Styles in Speaking Class at Sawerigading University of Makassar. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 3(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v3i1.53
Castro, M., Expósito-Casas, E., López-Martín, E., Lizasoain, L., Navarro-Asencio, E., & Gaviria, J. L. (2015). Parental involvement on student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 14, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.01.002
Celik, B. (2019). Developing Writing Skills Through Reading. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 6(1), 206–214.
Fan, S., Zhang, J., Blanco-Davis, E., Yang, Z., Wang, J., & Yan, X. (2018). Effects of seafarers’ emotion on human performance using bridge simulation. Ocean Engineering, 170, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.10.021
Firman, Aswar, N., Sukmawaty, Mirnawati, & Sukirman. (2020). Application of the Two Stay Two Stray Learning Model in Improving Indonesian Language Learning Outcomes in Elementary Schools. Jurnal Studi Guru Dan Pembelajaran, 3(3), 551–558.
Hortigüela Alcalá, D., Hernando Garijo, A., Pérez-Pueyo, Á., & Fernández-Río, J. (2019). Cooperative Learning and Students’ Motivation, Social Interactions and Attitudes: Perspectives from Two Different Educational Stages. Sustainability, 11(24), 7005. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247005
Kemker, R., McClure, M., Abitino, A., Hayes, T., & Kanan, C. (2018). Measuring Catastrophic Forgetting in Neural Networks. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11651
Maison, Tant, T., Kurniawan, D. A., Sukarni, W., Erika, & Hoyi, R. (2021). Assessing students' attitudes towards physics through applying inquiry and jigsaw cooperative learning models in high schools. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 439–450. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14426a
Mamajanova, G. (2020). EFFECTIVE METHODS OF LEARNING TECHNICAL TERMS. Theoretical & Applied Science, 81(01), 567–570. https://doi.org/10.15863/TAS.2020.01.81.94
Nur, S., Anas, I., & Rahayu. (2022). Engaging Novice Writers in Online Collaborative Review through Peer-Review Circles. International Journal of Language Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v6i1.26141
Nur, S., Vega, N. De, & Ayu Muhammad, A. P. (2022). Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy of Students’ Attending Online Courses Through MBKM Program. Journal of Educational Science and Technology (EST), 8(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.26858/est.v8i1.30922
Panitz, T. (1997). Collaborative versus Cooperative Learning: A Comparison of the Two Concepts Which Will Help Us Understand the Underlying Nature of Interactive Learning. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 8(2), 13.
Peets, K. F., Yim, O., & Bialystok, E. (2022). Language proficiency, reading comprehension, and home literacy in bilingual children: the impact of context. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(1), 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1677551
Sawyer, J., & Obeid, R. (2017). Cooperative and collaborative learning: Getting the best of both words. How We Teach Now: The GSTA Guide to Student-Centered Teaching, 163–177.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Developmental and Motivational Perspectives on Cooperative Learning: A Reconciliation. Child Development, 58(5), 1161. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130612
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know and need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0004
Vega, N. De, Basri, M., & Nur, S. (2023). Integrating mobile-assisted learning for a dynamic blended approach in higher education. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 32(2), 819. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijeecs.v32.i2.pp819-827
Westgate, E. C., & Wilson, T. D. (2018). Boring thoughts and bored minds: The MAC model of boredom and cognitive engagement. Psychological Review, 125(5), 689–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000097
.png)
1.png)
