The Effect of Graphic Organizers Strategy on Reading Comprehension of Students with Difference Learning Styles

Mihdar Amar

Abstract


Abstract

This investigation of the effect of Graphic Organizers strategy conducted on students with different learning styles of reading comprehension. This research to examine whether there is a significant difference in the reading comprehension between the students taught by KWL and Mind Mapping. Whether there is any significant difference in reading comprehension among the visual and auditory. Whether there is any significant difference in reading comprehension among the students’ learning styles use a graphic organizer. Whether there is an interaction between the KWL and Mind Mapping and students’ learning styles in reading comprehension.  The population was the students of the second grade of SMK 02 Muhammadiyah Malang in academic 2018/2019 consist of 22 students. The instruments of this research consist of two instruments. They were questionnaire and testing for getting the data of students’ reading comprehension. The result of computation independent t-test showed that the mean score of the experimental group A was 67.77 and experimental group B was 59 it meant that H0 was rejected. The finding also indicated that the difference between reading comprehension among visual and auditory was significant. The finding also indicated that visual group taught using Mind Mapping had a better score that visual group taught using KWL. The finding discloses too that there was no interaction between graphic organizers and learning style. It meant that graphic organizers did not have something to do with learning style.

 

Keywords: graphic organizers, mind mapping, kwl, reading comprehension, and learning styles.


Full Text:

PDF

References


References

Brown, H.D.(2007). Teaching byy principles an Interactive Approach to language Pedagogy(2nd ed.). San Francisco State University.

Fealy, E. M., (2010). Explicit Instruction of Graphic Organizers as an Informational Text Reading Comprehension Strategy: Third Grade Students Strategies and Perceptions.

Grabe, W. &Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and Researching Reading. Britain:

Pearson Education

Gajria, M., Jitendra, A., Sood, S., & Sacks, G. (2007). Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: A research synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 210-225

Hall, R. H., Dansereau, D. E., & Skaggs, L. P. (2001). Knowledge maps and the presentation of related information domains. Journal of Ex- perimental Education, 61,5-18

Jiang, X.,&Grabe, W. 2007. Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 34-55

Jitendra, A. K., Edwards, L., Choutka, C. M., &Treadway, P. (2002). A collaborative approach to planning in the content areas for students with learning disabilities: Access to the general curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,17, 251–266.

McKnight, K. S. (2010). The Teacher’s Big Book of Graphic Organizers. San Francisco: Jossey -Bass A Wiley Imprint

Walker, L. (2002). First language influences on second language word reading: All roads lead to Rome. Language Learning, 49 (3), 447-471.

Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., Lauer, K. D., Stafford, K. B., DeSisto, L. A., &deCani, J.S. (2005). Expository text comprehension in the primary grade classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 538-550.

Williams, J.P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary grade students: A focus on text structure. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 6-18.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.