Keywords
learning styles
students’ reading comprehension
How to Cite
Abstract
This study aims to explain the relationship between student learning styles and student achievement in English Reading Comprehension and to determine how extents the teaching material meets the needs of students with different learning styles. Researchers conducted the One-Group Pretest-Posttest design where only one experimental group was given a pre-test and post-test. Data collection is done in several ways, namely by giving a questionnaire from Barsch Learning style inventory (1980), interviewing and conducting pre and post tests to determine the development of students' abilities before and after the presentation of the material. In addition, classroom observation was conducted to find out the classroom activities and students’ participation toward teaching material given. The data revealed that the average of students’ result in pre-test was 38.92 % while the result of the average of students’ result in post-test was 68.58 %. It may say that the students’ improvement in reading comprehension using the teaching material has a significant improvement. 100% of visual learners have improved the ability in English reading comprehension after being given the material. 100% of auditory learners also have an increase in the ability in English reading comprehension after the provision of teaching materials. Likewise with visual-auditory learners in which 100 percent of respondents experienced an increase. However, only 80 percent of 100 percent kinesthetic learners experience an increase after the provision of teaching materials. There are many factors that influence the students. It can be in the form of internal factors that trigger students' motivation in learning English.
References
Barsch Jeffrey. 1980. Barsch Learning Style Inventory. Retrieved from http://www.windward.hawaii.edu/trio/forms/participant_inventories.pdf accessed on 29th January 2014.
Boström. Lena .(2011). Students’ Learning Styles Compared with their Teachers' Learning Styles in Secondary Schools. Mid Sweden University, Sweden. Institute for Learning Styles Journal Volume 1, Spring 2011
Carr, &Punzo, Rutherford, Quinn &Mathur. (1993). The Effects of self-monitoring of academic accuracy and productivity: on the performance of students with behavioral disorders (pp50-241).
Clarke, D.F. & Nation, I.S.P. (1980).Guessing the meanings of words from context: strategy and and techniques system (pp211-220).
Deporter, Bobbi and Hernacki Mike. 2004. Quantum Learning. Bandung: Mizan Pustaka.
Ellis and Johnson.1994. Teaching Business English. Oxford : Oxford University Press
Gay & Airaiasian. 2006. Educational Research : Competencies for analysis and applications. 8th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Publisher.
Gilakjani, Abbas. 2012. Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic Learning Styles and Their Impacts on English Language Teaching. Journal of studies in
Education. ISSN 2162-6952 2012, Vol.2, No.1.
Gilakjani & Ahmadi. 2011. The Effect of Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learning Styles on Language Teaching. International Conference
On Social Science and Humanity. IPEDR Vol.5.
Griffiths Carol. 2008. Lesson from Good Language Learner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grellet.F. (1981).Developing Reading Skills: A Practical Guide to Reading Comprehension Exercises (pp 58-59).Cambridge University Press.
Grellet.F. (1999).Developing reading skills(pp 2-25). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Hanson, M. Porter, Rutherford, Quinn, &Marthur.(1996). Self-management through self-monitoring. In K. Jones & T. Charlton.(Eds.), Overcoming learning and behaviour difficulties: Partnership with pupils . London: Rutledge.
Heilman, W. Athur.et.al.(1981). Principles and Practice of Teaching Reading.5th. Ed. Bell & Howell Company.
Husain, Djamiah. 1999. Learning and Personality Styles in Second Language Acquisition . Unpublished Thesis. Hasanuddin University.
Magliano, J. P., Baggett, W. B., Johnson, B. K., &Graesser, A. C. (1993). The time course of generating causal antecedent and causal consequence
inferences.DiscourseProcesses,Vol 16.(pp35-53).
Maria, K. (1990). Reading Comprehension Instruction, Issues and Strategies. Parkton, MD: York Press.14-15.
Oxford. (2006). Word Power Dictionary(pp 717). New York: Oxford University press
Seyed Hossein Fazeli, M. e. (2010). Language in India:some Gaps in the current Studies of reading in Second/Foreign language learning. (Vol.10).issue4. (pp376-380).
Sinambela Erike, et al. 2015. Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension Achievement by Using K-W-L Strategy. North Sumatra: HKBP Nommensen University.
Sirajuddin, Andi. (2010). Improving speaking ability by using Total Physical Response Strategy at SMA Negeri 1 Samarinda. Unpublished Thesis. Hasanuddin University.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for Understanding.Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA : RAND,7. Reading. study Group.11.
Souhila, Rouai. 2013. The Use of Reading Strategy in Improving Reading Comprehension. University Kasdi Merbah Ouargla
Vaishnav, Rajshree. (2013). Learning Style and Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students. Voice of research Vol. 1 Issue 4, March 2013.
Woolley. G. (2011).Reading Comprehension: Assisting Children with Learning Difficulties. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9789400711730-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1158048-p174102871.
Before going to review process, all manuscripts will be checked that they are free from plagiarism practice using "Turnitin" software. If there is an indication of plagiarism, the manuscript will instantly be rejected.