USING READER RESPONSE STRATEGY IN TEACHING NARRATIVE READING TO THE TENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMA MUHAMMADIYAH 6 PALEMBANG 

	

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Submitted as a fulfillment of requirements to get
A bachelor’s degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd)

by

WIDIYA WATI
NIM. 12250148

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
TARBIYAH FACULTY
ISLAMIC STATE UNIVERSITY 
RADEN FATAH PALEMBANG
2017

ABSTRACT
	The objectives of this study are to find out whether or not (1) there is a significant improvement on the tenth grade students’ reading achievement between those who are taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who are not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang, and (2) there is a significant difference on the tenth grade students’ reading achievement between those who are taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who are not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. the population of this study is consisted of 137 tenth grade students of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. there were 60 students taken as sample. Each class consisted of 30 students from class X.IPA.B as experimental group and class X.IPA.B as control group. The sample of this study was taken by using convenience sampling strategy study in this study, quasi experimental design especially pretest-posttest non-equivalent group design was used. The instrument used collecting the data was reading test. The result show that (1) there was a significant improvement from students’ pretest to posttest scores in experimental group taught by using Reader Response Strategy since the p-output (0.000) was lower than 0.05 and t-obtained is higher than t-table df=29 (2,0452) and (2) there was a significant difference from students’ posttest score in control and experimental groups, since p-output (0.000) was lower than (0.05) and t-obtained is higher than t-table (df 58=2.0017). So, the Ho (the null hypothesis) was rejected and Ha (the alternative hypothesis) was accepted. It means that there was significant difference on students’ reading achievement taught using Reader Response Strategy than those who are not. 
Keywords: Reading Achievement, Reader Response Strategy. 

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents: (1) background, (2) problems of the study, (3) objectives of the study, (4) significance of the study. 
1.1	Background 
English is an introduction language spoken in international event and it is used as the medium of information flow on science, technology, and culture as well. According to Singh (2005, p. 3) English has become global language in the twentieth or twenty-first century. By mastering English, it is easier for people to make a good relationship with other countries. 
In Indonesia, English is taught as a foreign language on purpose of making learners able to communicate, and it is taught from kinder garden up to university. Moreover, according to Lauder (2008, p.10) it is widely recognized that English is important for Indonesia and the reason most frequently put forward for this is that English is a global or international language. So the students are easy to understand and interact in various aspects by using English. 
In learning English there are four main skills that must be learned by the students. According to Brown (2000, p. 232) English has four skill those are reading, listening, speaking and writing. Reading is one of the most important skills in English. According to Petel and Jain (2008, p. 113) reading is most useful and important skill for people, this skill is more important than speaking and writing. Nunan (2006, p. 69), reading is a set of skill that involves making sense and deriving meaning from printed word. Furthermore, komiyama (2009, p. 32) state that reading is an important skill for English language learners in today’s world; it supports the development of overall proficiency and provides access to crucial information at work and in school. 
Considering the statements above, it can be concluded that, reading is important to be mastered by students. By reading well, students are able to understand and comprehend the materials they are learning. The students do not only read the reading text fluency but also they should be able to understand and respond what they have read. 
Based on the Curriculum 2013 the aim of teaching English at Senior high school level is to develop the four language skills; one of those skills is reading. In reading, there are several types of reading text have to be comprehended, especially in the tenth grade, they are, recount, narrative and procedure text. Narrative text is a story conveyed to entertain the readers or listeners (Browder and Spooner, 2011, p. 142). Narrative recreates an experience through time and can be based on own experience or experience of someone. According to Gerot and Wignell (1994, p. 204), narrative consists of some characteristics; social function, generic structure and language features. Narrative text is often fiction in which the values are used to describe and/or to explain human behavior. But sometimes students got difficulties in learning Narrative text such as lack of students’ consciousness about mean of reading and the most important things of reading, lack of students’ comprehension in reading English text, and the students do not understand well the orientation, complication, resolution, and re-orientation in reading narrative text.
However in Indonesia students still find problems in comprehending texts not only in a foreign language but also in their first language. The report from progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) in Indonesia language 2011 showed that the average reading achievement score of fourth graders in Indonesia was 428. The result was still lower than the benchmark of PIRLS scale which was 500 and Indonesia’s position was in 42 out of 49 countries. Another report is from Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) study in 2012 that showed Indonesia reading performance in Indonesia which still at 64 out of 65 countries and gained score only 396 and this was below than the average score of OECD that was 496. Those data have shown that Indonesia students face the problems in reading the text of their first language. It indicates that the students will face more problem in the reading the text of foreign language. 
Moreover, in reading the students find some difficulties in comprehending the text. Hamra and Syatriana (2010, p. 28) state that since English in Indonesia is a foreign language, most students at any levels of education get difficulties in reading English texts. It proves that many factors can make the students difficult in comprehending as they feel bored in learning process because the time is too long and the material is not interesting for them.  So, the learning process is not effective. Then it can be caused by the learning strategy and lack of vocabulary, so that they get difficulties to understand the meaning from the context. It is difficult for them to get information from the text. 
From the writer's preliminary observation on Thursday, 21st October 2016, the writer interviewed one of teacher of English and gave a questionnaire consists of 10 items to the tenth grade students of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. It was found that some students had some problems in learning reading. First, the students found it difficult in comprehend what they read. The teacher said that the students had difficulties to find the main idea and got the information from the text because of lack of vocabulary, and they did not understand the generic structure of the text. The teacher of English also said that when the teacher asked about conclusion from the text, they could not answer it. 
Based on explanations above, one of the solutions that can solve students’ problems is the use of an appropriate strategy to teach the students. There are many types of learning strategy in teaching reading. One of the appropriate strategies is reader response strategy. Reader response strategy is one of the strategies in teaching reading which is gives many options to the reader in responding to a text (Rosenblatt, 1994, p. 79).
The reader response focuses on reading experience personally, enables the reader to live through what the students read and engages in the reading experience, which allows them to connect to familiar experience in their own life. Richard (1991, p. 175) argues that reader response focuses on the role of the reader and a process-oriented approach in teaching reading comprehension especially narrative text. Moreover, Van (2009, p. 5) states that reader response supports activities that encourage students to draw on their personal experiences, opinions, and feelings in their interpretation of literature. Besides, reader response strategy has been particularly successful in helping to develop the competence of comprehension strategies (Mitchel, 1993).
 In accordance with the above descriptions, the writer is interested to apply reader response strategy to the tenth grade students of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang in teaching narrative reading. Hopefully, by using reader response strategy, the students can comprehend narrative text easily. As the explanations above, the writer will conduct a research study entitled “Using Reader Response Strategy in Teaching Narrative Reading to the Tenth Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang”.
1.2	Problems of the Study
Based on the background above, the writer formulates the problems of the study into the following questions: 
1.	Is there any significant improvement on the tenth grade students who are taught by using reader response strategy in reading skill before and after the treatment at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang?
2.	Is there any significant difference on the tenth grade students’ in reading skill who are taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who are not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang?

1.3	Objectives of the Study
Generally, the objectives of the research are to find out the answer of the problems and state the purposes clearly. The objectives of the research are:
1.	Whether or not there is any significant improvement on the tenth grade students’ narrative reading before and after the treatment at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. 
2.	Whether or not there is any significant difference on the tenth grade students’ narrative reading who are taught by using Reader Response at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang.
1.4	Significance of the Study
Hopefully, the results of this study can give valuable input and contribution to some parties: 
1.	The teachers of English at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang. This study is expected to give information and solution to the English teachers and others who concern in learning English about the use Reader Response Strategy.
2.	For the students at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang. It is expected that this study will help reduce the difficulties the students have in their reading comprehension especially for narrative reading and the students can develop their reading comprehension by using Reader Response Strategy. The students are expected to be motivated and improve their reading comprehension. To give positive contribution in teaching and learning English process, especially in reading class of the tenth grade students.
3.	For further researchers, it is expected that this study can be used as references for other researchers to get information about Reader Response Strategy.
4.	For the researcher, to enlarge the researcher’s knowledge about the research especially the researcher’s insight scientifically in the topic Reader Response Strategy.

 CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter discusses (a) theoretical framework (b) previous related studies (c) research setting (d) hypotheses of the study and (e) criteria of testing hypotheses.
2.1	The Concepts of Teaching 
According to Moore (2000, p. 4) teaching as an actions of someone who trying to assist others to reach their fullest potential in all aspects of development. Teaching is of central concern to this study of education, it can be called the central educational activity (Stanton, 1977, p. 1). In addition, Harmer (2004, p. 57) describes that teaching means to give (someone knowledge) or to instruct or train (someone). It is undertaking certain ethical task or activities the intension of which is to induce learning. Therefore, English language teaching means that the teacher gives some knowledge about English so that they can use English well anywhere. 
According to Arends (2009, p. 20) the ultimate of teaching is to assist students to become independent and self-regulated learners. This purpose does not negate other purposes of education, but instead it serves as a goal under which all other goals and teacher activities can be placed. The teacher plays many roles in the course of teaching. According to Brown (2001, p. 200) a teacher has to play many roles. Think of the possibilities: authority figure, leader, knower, director, manager, counselor, guide, and even such roles as friend, confidante, and parent. 
From the definitions above, the writer can concluded that teaching is one of the process of education done by teacher and students for transferring, guiding, and sharing the knowledge, skills and potential in all aspects of development. The importance of the definitions above is teaching is showing or helping someone to do something. 
2.2	Concept of Reading 
Reading is one of the most important skills in learning language besides listening, speaking, and writing. The students should be able to read the subject and get the information from the reading text. Reading is making meaning from print and from visual information, but reading is not simple. Reading is an active process that requires a great deal of practice and skill (Moreilon, 2007, p. 10). In other words, reading is an interactive process that goes on between the reader and the text, resulting in comprehension (Hasibuan and Ansyari, 2007, p. 115). It means that when a student read some written texts, there is an interaction between the student and text, and the student will transfer the meaning of the text or information from the text. 
An article from Al-Qur’an that explains about reading is:
اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ. خَلَقَ الإنْسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ. اقْرَأْ وَرَبُّكَ الأكْرَمُ. الَّذِي عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِ. عَلَّمَ الإنْسَانَ مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ.
Meaning: “Read the name of God that creating. Creating humans are from clod-blood. Read, God is honor that had preached us. God preached human to read some lesson that they don’t know yet”. (Al-alaq, verse 1-5)
In reading, comprehension is needed. Without comprehension, the readers cannot get the information. Based on Hamra and Syatriana (2010, p. 30), the goal of reading is to comprehend meaning and comprehension depends on the ability to get individual word meanings. Meanwhile, Holandyah (2012, p. 11) states that reading comprehension is an interactive process between the writer and reader, with the expression and reception of meaning as the primary goal of both parties.  Reading comprehension refers to reading for meaning, understanding and entertainment (Linse, 2005, p. 71). There are many kinds of written passage that can be read for the students, one of them is narrative text.
2.3	The Concept of Narrative Text 
Narrative text is a kind of monolog text in teaching reading to the students. This kind of text is used to entertain the students as well as to attract their interest to read with actual and various experience in different ways (Derewianka, 1990, p. 40). Similarly, Sarwoko (2014, p. 109) takes the view that a narrative text is a text that tells a story to entertain or amuse the reader.
According to Brewer (1980, p. 223), narrative text is a set of events that occurs through time and in thematic chain. It means that narrative text is a kind of text which tells the story in chronological way in order to amuse the reader. 
Reading literature is an excellent way for students to make progress in English language learning; it exposes them to exciting plots, interesting characters, and authentic dialogues as they learn the language in context. Narrative text is as a literary type in senior high school students, can be a valuable medium to gain students’ reading interest. Narratives are more than simple lists of sentences or ideas. Narrative are stories (Dymock, 2007). Narrative can be divided into traditional fiction including folktales, fairy tales, parables, fables, moral tales, myths and legend; and modern fiction which includes modern fantasy and contemporary realistic fiction. 
Narrative text has its own generic structure which can be easily found inside the story as Anderson and Anderson (1997, p. 8) cited in Indriani (2015, p. 41) describes the construction of narrative texts as follows:
a. Orientation/ exposition
The readers are introduced to the main characters and possibly some minor characters. Some indication is generally given of where the action is located and when it is taking place.
b. Complication/ rising action
The complication is pushed along by a serious of events, during which we usually expect some sort of complication or problem to arise. It just would not be so interesting if something unexpected did not happen. This complication will involve the main characters and oven serves to (temporally) toward them from reaching their goal.
c. Sequence of event/Climax
This is where the narrator tells how the character reacts to the complication. It includes their feeling and what they do. The event can be told in chronological order (the order in which they happen) or with flashback. The audients is given the narrator’s point of view.

d. Resolution
In this part, the implication may be resolved for better or worse, but it is rarely left completely unresolved (although this is of course possible in certain types of narrative which leaves us wondering ‘How did it end”?)
e. Reorientation
It is an optional closure of event.
Here is the example of narrative text: 
The Smartest Parrot

Orientation 

Once upon time, a man had a wonderful parrot. There was no other parrot like it. The parrot could say every word, except one word. The parrot would not say the name of the place where it was born. The name of the place was Catano.

Complication

The man felt excited having the smartest parrot but he could not understand why the parrot would not say Catano. The man tried to teach the bird to say Catano however the bird kept not saying the word.

Climax/event

At the first, the man was very nice to the bird but then he got very angry. “You stupid bird!” pointed the man to the parrot. “Why can’t you say the word? Say Catano! Or I will kill you” the man said angrily. Although he tried hard to teach, the parrot would not say it. Then the man got so angry and shouted to the bird over and over; “Say Catano or I’ll kill you”. The bird kept not to say the word of Catano.

Resolution 

One day, after he had been trying so many times to make the bird say Catano, the man really got very angry. He could not bear it. He picked the parrot and threw it into the chicken house. There were four old chickens for next dinner “You are as stupid as the chickens. Just stay with them” Said the man angrily. Then he continued to humble; “You know, I will cut the chicken for my meal. Next it will be your turn, I will eat you too, stupid parrot”. After that he left the chicken house.

Re-Orientation

The next day, the man came back to the chicken house. He opened the door and was very surprised. He could not believe what he saw at the chicken house. There were three death chickens on the floor. At the moment, the parrot was standing proudly and screaming at the last old chicken; “Say Catano or I’ll kill you”.

2.4	The Concept of Reader Response Strategy 
Response reader is a reader's reaction to the text being read. The reaction is directed to the intensity of the reader's understanding of the text is read and the totality of meaning contained in the text. Rudy (2008) said that the response focusing on the reader in reading literature.
According Al-Bulushi (2011, p. 450) reader response strategy is a strategy of reading literary text which the reader plays an integral part in bringing meaning to the text, his thoughts, reaction and ideas analyzing and learning different aspects of literary text.  
There are seven reader response strategy from Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 28-33), they are engaging, describing, conceiving, explaining, connecting, interpreting and judging.
1.	Engaging 
Engaging means involving readers’ feeling and emotional reaction in reading literary works. The readers imagine the things that happen and feel what the character feel. The students who have been engaged to the text, read a word or comprehend a text not only because they can do it, but because they are motivated to do it. Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 28) state, “ the readers are engaging with the text whenever they articulate their emotional reaction or level of involvement.” Readers are able to express their engagement with particular elements of the text, or particular characters and events. By engaging with a text, readers are guided more deeply into the text. Therefore, they can gain a clearer sense of the characters, events, and experiences that can elicit their deepest emotional response. 
2.	Describing 
Describing refers to retelling what they have read including the character, characterization, background of the story and the plot of the story. According to Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 29) “readers describe a text when they restate or reproduce information that is provided verbatim in the text. Therefore, this strategy is necessary and useful to establish meaning and understand what the story is about since it serves to identify elements of the text. 
3.	Conceiving 
Conceiving refers to understanding the character, background of the story and the language used by the characters. Beach (2000) says readers react subjectively to the characters’ needs and desires to achieve certain objects by drawing on their knowledge of cultural and historical forces. In this stage, the readers use their knowledge in conceiving social and cultural background of the story. Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 29) point out, “when readers conceive of characters, settings, and language, they are moving beyond the description of information in order to make statements about it meaning.” Readers draw conceptions which derive from their knowledge of the text as well as their knowledge of how people behave and should behave in certain situations. 
4.	Explaining  
The reasons of a character in doing something in the story are explained by the readers in this stage. Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 30) state “once we have constructed a tentative conception of characters’ behavior. However, we must still explain as best we can why those characters are behaving as they are.” The readers can enlarge the scope of explanations to include larger perspectives by analyzing of actions in terms of social, political, or economic phenomena in the story. In addition, Galda and Beach (2001) adds the readers try to draw their own perspective by explaining why the characters ought to behave. The perspectives are shaped by the cultures, social, political in which they live and work. 
5.	Connecting 
This strategy expects readers to connect their personal experience to things which happen on the characters. The readers also compare the story to other stories such as the similar ones on the film or novel. (Brines (1998) states that when students connect their own narratives with what they read, comprehension and involvement dramatically increases. The students link their prior knowledge and experiences to what they read, and then they can extend the stories into the real world in order to see how the scenarios could happen to them or real people. This is in line with what beach and Marshall (1991) explain that when reader connected their own experience to the materials in the text that the interactions between reader text became most evident. In addition, the characters and situations in a story reminded them of autobiographical events of characters and situations in other texts. This response can lead readers further into the text, provide a base for fuller and richer interpretations.
6.	Interpreting 
Interpreting and comprehension are both idiosyncratic and stylized. The readers are apt to read the same text for different purposes and, even if they read the same text for the same purposes, are apt to achieve different goals (Tierney, 1990). Interpreting, the strategy which refers to using readers’ reactions, description, conception and connection in finding the theme of the story. Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 32) define “when readers interpret a text, they employed the reactions, descriptions, conceptions, and connections they made to articulate the theme or “point” of specific episodes or of the overall text. It means that readers must first adopt a certain stance with regard to the text. They also should find out the potential for symbolic or thematic inference. 
7.	Judging 
Judging means evaluating the text’s quality and value, and react to the text in range of ways, both intellectually and emotionally (Duke and Pearson 2002). The readers state their judgment by giving opinion on the story, the author and the plot of the story. When we pull away from a text, we do more than not only construct interpretations but also make judgments about the characters in the story or about the literary quality of the text as a whole (Beach and Marshal, 1991, p. 33). Evaluating the characterization, story development, authenticity and vividness of description can lead the readers to determine that a particular text is lacking one or more. Therefore, it is inferior as piece of literature. 
 Moreover, Rudi (2008) cited in Apriani (2014, p. 29-30) composes the guiding questions based on the strategy and show in the following table.
No	Response	Indicators	Questions to Guide	
	Engaging
	Feeling, imagination, thought	1.	Can you feel what is felt by the character? What does he/she feel?
2.	Would you do the same thing if you were the character? Explain it?
3.	Can you imagine what happens? Explain it 	
3.		Describing 	Character, characterization, setting,
theme, style.	4.	What do you think of the character of the story? Is he/she good or bad ? do you like or dislike him/her?
5.	Where does the story happen? Do you like the setting? Why?
6.	Does the story tell about good things?
7.	Is the story reasonable? Is the style of the story communicative of figurative? Explain it.
8.	What event/word in the story do you think is very important? Why?	
	Conceiving 	Reason 	9.	Why is the character forbidden to do something?	
	Explaining 	Character’s action, agreement 	10.	A character is extremely hated by someone but he/she keeps patient and obeys. What do you think of the character’s action?
11.	In your point of view, what does the story talk about?	
	Interpreting 	Opinion	12.	in your point of view, what does the story talk about ?	
	Connecting 	Experience, other story, film, social life, culture, religion	13.	do you have the same experience with the character? Your brother? Parents? Neighbor? Friend?	
	Judging 	Story line, moral values, the author 	16.  is the story interesting?
17. is the story valuable? What values do you get from reading the story? What do you think of the author? 	

2.5	Procedure Of Reader Response Strategy 
Reader response strategy is use in analyzing students’ appreciation on literary subject. Reader response strategy focuses on socio-cultural of the readers which involves their emotions, relationships, motives, and reactions on literary works. To understand the socio-cultural aspects in the story, readers are guided to use the seven of reader response. Furthemore, Miall & Kuiken (1994, p.12) as cited by Husin (2009, p.14), studies literary response offers the opportunity to explore the functions and processes of feeling and to do so with a richness and complexity, and with an ecological validity, that is perhaps unavailable elsewhere.
According to Beach and Marshall (1991, p. 28). Procedure in teaching reading by using reader response strategy is described as follow: 
1.	Engaging. The teacher gives a narrative text to the students. The students ask to read the narrative text. Teacher says that readers are engaging with a text when they are articulating their emotional reaction or level of involvement with the text. In engaging student’s activities are free-writing and think-aloud. 
2.	Describing. The students describe a text when they restate or reproduce the information that is provided verbatim by the author. In describing students activities are make jotting/listing.  
3.	Conceiving. When the students conceive of the characters or settings in a text, they are moving beyond a description of information to a statement about its meaning. In conceiving students activities is author’s chair activities. 
4.	Explaining. In explaining a characters actions, students are drawing on their conceptions of characters’ traits, beliefs, or goals to infer a reason for that characters action. In explaining students activities make journal question-asking. 
5.	Connecting. Students may often connect their own autobiographical or prior reading experience with the text. In connecting student’s activities is treeing/conferences. 
6.	Interpreting. In interpreting a text students involves defining the symbolic meaning, theme, or point of specific events in the text. We are usually discussing what the text “says.” In interpreting students activities are oral interpretation and mapping. 
7.	Judging. The students conclude the story by giving opinion about the value of the story. When students judge a text, students pulling back from it to make evaluative statements about its characters or literary quality. In judging students activities is role play. 
From these seven steps of reader response, it can be inferred that reader response help readers appreciate literary works. Readers are guided step by step starting from engaging to judging in order to appreciate the text. These strategies explore intrinsic and extrinsic elements of the story. What readers think and feel would enable them in appreciating the text.
2.6	Previous Related Studies
There are three previous studies which are related to the writer’s present study. The first study entitled “Using Reader Response Strategy and Sociogram to Enhance Narrative Reading Comprehension Achievement of the Tenth Grade Students of SMA Negeri 3 Palembang” done by Apriyani (2014). The result of her study shows that there is a significant difference between those who get those two interventions and those who are not. The study uses experimental method. 
The second study entitled “The Effect of Reader Response Strategy and Students’ Reading Interest Toward Students’ Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text at Grade X SMA 2 Kota Bengkulu” written by Utami, Zaim, & Rozimela (2014). The result of the study shows that the Reader Response Strategy provides a significant effect on students' reading comprehension as compared Small Group Discussion commonly used by teachers in teaching reading. The study uses experimental method. 
The third study entitled “Enhancing Students’ Reading Achievement and Critical Thinking by Applying Reader Response Strategy (RRS) and Movie Maker Software (MMS)” by Imam (2014). The Result of her study shows that there are some significant enhancement in students’ reading achievement and critical thinking after they were taught by applying RRS and MMS. The population of the study is forty students of English major of FKIP UNSRI Bukit. The study uses quasi experimental design in that both of groups (experimental and control group) are given pre and post-test.  
2.7	Research Setting 
In this study, the writer conducted her research at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang that was located on jl. Balayudha, Km 4.5 Palembang. SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang has been built since 01 July 1988/1989. The headmaster of this school is Renov Lismar, M.Pd.i. The total number of the teachers and staffs of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang are 55 person. There are 18 servants, 32 honored teachers, 5 administration staffs. This school has 12 classrooms which are permanent building with total students in academic year 2016/2017 are 380 students.
The facilities of this school are computer laboratory, physic and biology laboratory, library, headmaster’s room, teacher’s and administration’s room, health unit, kitchen, canteen, teacher’s toilet, school filed, parking area, security post. The physical facilities of this school are table, chair, whiteboard, telephone, television. This school also has sport facilities; those are basketball, volley ball, badminton, and table tennis. 
2.8	Hypotheses of the Study 
According to Creswell (2012, p. 111), hypotheses are statements in quantitative research in which the investigator makes a prediction or a conjecture about the outcome of a relationship among attributes or characteristics. Hypotheses of this study are proposed as Null Hypothesis (Ho) and Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) as follows: 
1.	Ho: There is no significant improvement on the tenth grade students’ reading comprehension scores who are taught using reader response strategy at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang before and after treatment. 
2.	Ha : There is a significant improvement on the tenth grade students’ reading comprehension scores who are taught using reader response  strategy at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang before and after treatment. 
3.	Ho: There is no significant difference on the tenth grade students’ reading comprehension scores between those who are taught by using reader response strategy and those who are not at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang. 
4.	Ha : There is a significant difference on the tenth grade students’ reading comprehension scores between those who are taught by using reader response strategy and those who are not at SMA Muhammadyah 6 Palembang. 
2.9	Criteria of Testing Hypotheses
To prove research problem in measuring significant different, testing research hypothesis is required as follows: 
1.	If the p-output (sig. 2-tailed) is lower than 0.05, and t-obtained is higher than t- table 2,0452 (with df= 29), the null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. 
If the p-output (sig.2 tailed) is higher than 0.05 and t-obtained is lower than t-table 2,0452 (with df= 29), the null hypothesis (Ho) is accepted, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected. 
2.	If the p-output (sig. 2-tailed) is lower than 0.05, and t-obtained is higher than t- table 2,0017 (with df=58), the null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. 
If the p-output (sig.2 tailed) is higher than 0.05 and t-obtained is lower than t-table 2,0017 (with df= 58), the null hypothesis (Ho) is accepted, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected. 

CHAPTER III
METHOD OF RESEARCH
	This chapter presents: (1) method of the study, (2) variables of the study (3) operational definitions, (4) population and sample, (5) data collection, and (6) data analysis (7) hypotheses testing. 
3.1	Method of the Study 
In this study, the writer used quasi experimental design. Quasi-experimental designs do not include the use of random assignment (Fraenkel, et. al., 2012, p. 275). the writer used Pretest-Posttest Non-equivalent Group Design. There are two groups, they are experimental and control group which both are given pretest and posttest. The experimental group is given treatments by using Reader Response Strategy, but the control group is not.
Cohen (2007, p. 283) defines the figure of Pretest-Posttest Non-equivalent Groups Design as follows:

 O1	 X	 O2 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - -    
 O3		 O4

O1    M   x2O3
	
O4      M x5O6

O1    M   x2O3
	
O4      M x5O6

O1    M   x2O3
	
O4      M x5O6

O1    M   x2O3
	
O4      M x5O6

O1    M   x2O3
	
O4      M x5O6

Where:
O1	: Pretest in experimental group
O3	: Pretest in control group
X	: treatment in experimental group using Reader Response Strategy
O2	: posttest in experimental group
O4 	: posttest in control group

 ------- : The dashed line separating the parallel rows in the diagram of the non-equivalent control group indicates that the experimental and control groups have not been equated by randomization-hence the term ‘non-equivalent.

3.2	Variables of the Study 
In this study there are two kinds of variables; those are independent variables and dependent valiable. Best and Kahn (1995, p. 137) stated that variables are the conditions or characteristics that the experimenter manipulates, controls or observes. 
Independent variable is the major variable to investigate (Hatch and Farhady, 1982, p. 15). In this study, the independent variable of the study is Reader Response Strategy.
Dependent variable is the variable which observe and measure to determine the effect of the independent variable ( Hatch and Farhady, 1982, p. 15). In this study, the dependent variable of the study is students’ reading achievement.
3.3	Operational Definitions 
The tittle of this study is “Using Reader Response Strategy in Teaching Narrative Reading to the Tenth grade students of SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang”. The terms that need to explain are Teaching, Narrative Reading, and Reader Response Strategy.
Teaching is facilitating the students for learning or transferring information or knowledge from the teacher to the students. Teaching is one of the processes of education done by teacher and students for transferring, guiding, and sharing the knowledge, skills and potential in all aspects of development. The importance of the definitions above is teaching is showing or helping someone to do something.
In this study, reading comprehension means that process in constructing meaning to understand the written language. So, the readers can get the new information. To know students’ comprehension in reading, it is done reading test. 
Narrative text is a story that is created in a constructive format that describes a sequence of fictional or non-fictional events. Narrative is a text which contains about story and its plot consists of climax of the story (complication) then followed by the resolution.
Reader response strategies are the ways strategies which is oriented to the reader’s response when they are reading the short stories. There are seven reader response steps those are engaging, describing, conceiving, explaining, connecting, interpreting, and judging. 
3.4	Population and Sample
3.4.1 Population
According to Arikunto (2002, p. 108) population is all of the subjects who are connected to the research. Population is area generalized which consists of object or subject which has certain quality and characteristic to be decided by researcher to be studied and also concluded ( Sugiono, 2011, p. 80). So the population of this study is tenth grade students SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang in Academic years 2016-2017. They are divided into 4 classes : those are X.IIS.1, X.IIS.2, X.MIA.1, X.MIA.2. The total number of the student is 137. The distribution of population of student of tenth grade at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang can be seen in the table. 
Table 1
The Population of the research
No	Classes	Number of students	
1.	X.MIA 1	30	
2.	X.MIA 2	30	
3.	X.IIS 1	39	
4.	X.IIS 2	38	
	Total 	137	
(Source : SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang in the academic year of 2016-2017)
3.4.2.	 Sample
A sample is a group in a research study on which information is obtained (Frankel and Wallen ( 2007, p. 66). While, Sugiono (2012, p. 63) defines that sample is part of the number and characteristics of the population. In this study, the writer will take that two classes or groups as the sample. In doing this study, there are two classes as the experimental and the control group. To get the sample of this study, purposive sampling will be used because they had similar characteristic and same abilities. 
Purposive sampling is different from convenient sampling in that researchers do not simply study whoever is available but rather use their judgment to select a sample that they believe, based on prior information, will provide the data they need (Fraenkel, et. al., 2012, p. 100).   Additionally, Cohen, Manion and Morisson (2011, p. 113-114) emphasize that purposive sampling is the sample has been chosen for a specific purpose. In this way, the researchers build up a sample that is satisfactory to their specific needs. 
Table 2
Sample of the study

No	Class	Group 	Number of students	
1.	X.MIA A	Control 	30	
2.	X. MIA B	Experiment 	30	
Total	60	

3.5	Data Collection 
To obtain the data needed for the study, the writer collects them by  giving test. According to Brown (2004, p. 3), test is a method of measuring person ability, knowledge performance in a given domain. In collecting the data the writer used test.
3.5.1	Tests 
According to Brown (2004, p. 3), test in simple terms, is a method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or performance in a given domain. In this study, the writer used test in collecting the data. The test is multiple choices reading comprehension. This reading comprehension test is ready made test which is develop from some books. This study used test in collecting the data. This study used reading comprehension instrument test (See Appendix N). The kind of the test is multiple-choice reading comprehension. All of questions were about narrative text. The texts were taken from students’ book and internet script.
The purpose of the test is to know the result of teaching reading by reader response strategy. There are two parts of test in this study, they are pre-test and post-test. The test items in pre-test are same as those of post-test, because the purpose of giving them is to know the progress of students reading comprehension achievement before and after treatment. 
1.	Pre-test 
Pre-test is done before the treatments in both groups, experimental and control group. Pretest is done to know students’ reading achievement before the writer gives the treatment. In this study, pre-test will be done before giving treatment in both groups, experimental and control group. Creswell (2012, p. 297) states that a pretest provides a measure on some attributes or characteristics that are assessed for participants in an experiment before they receive a treatment. The pre-test will be given both in experimental and control group. It measures the students’ reading comprehension before treatment. The purpose of giving pretest to the students is to know the students’ ability in learning reading before implementing Reader Response Strategy.  
2.	Post-test 
Post-test is done after the treatments in both groups, experimental and control group. This test is done to know the students’ score in reading comprehension after the treatment. In this study, the writer will give post-test to the experimental and the control group after conducting treatments. Creswell (2012, p. 297) states that a post-test is a measure on some attribute or characteristics that are assessed for participants in an experiment after a treatment. The treatment which will be given to the experimental group is Reader Response Strategy. The type of posttest will be the same as the pretest. The aim of giving posttest to the students is to measure students’ comprehension in reading after implementing Reader Response Strategy. The result of this test will be compared with the result of pretest in order to know the improvement of students reading comprehension by using Reader Response strategy. From the posttest, the writer can get the data that will be used to measure the students’ progress taught by using Reader Response Strategy.
3.5.2	Research Instrument Analysis 
3.5.2.1	Validity Test 
According to Fraenkel, et. al. (2012, p. 147) validity is the most important idea to consider when preparing or selecting an instrument to use. Validity test is used to measure whether the obtained data of an instrument is valid or not (Hollandyah, 2014, p. 32). There are kinds of validity test to be administered for research instrument, they are:
1)	Construct Validity 
According to Brown (2004, p. 25) states that construct validity is a major issue in validating large-scale standardized tests of proficiency. The construct validity of this study involve two types, they are items for pre-test and post-test and lesson plans for experimental group. 
After constructing the instruments related to some aspect measured, then it is consulted to achieve some expert judgments from at least three validators to evaluate whether the components of the instrument are valid or not to be applied in research activities. There are some characteristics for expert judgments or validators, such as: (1) English educational background, (2) English lecturer, and (3) minimum score TOEFL 500. 
In relation to the statement above, the writer asked the lecture of English Education Study Program at UIN Raden Fatah Palembang as validator in this study. There were three validators to validate the research instruments and lesson plan. Based on the assessment carried out by validator I, II, and III, the instruments and lesson plan can be used with little revision. The first validators gave B both instrument and lesson plan. The second validator gave A for instrument and B for lesson Plan. The third validator gave B for instrument and A for lesson plan. From the validators, it could be assumed that the instrument and lesson plan were appropriate to apply in this research. The result of three validators of this research instruments test, lesson plan, and materials can be seen in (See Appendix   ).
2)	Validity of Each Question Items
Validity test of each question item is used to indicate whether the test item of the instruments in each question is valid or not. To find out the validity of each question items, the tryout was done. The tryout of the test was on Wednesday, 15th of February 2017 at 09.00 p.m – 10.30 p.m. the instruments of the test were tasted to 33 students (X.B) to the tenth grade students at SMA Nurul Iman Palembang. 
The result of the test was analyzed by using (Statistical Package for Social Science) SPSS version 16.0 to know whether it was valid or not, the score of significance (r-output) was compared with the score of “r-table” product moment. If the result of the test showed that routput was higher than rtable (with N=33) 0.344 with sample (N) is 33 students, it means that the item was valid. The r-table of product moment for a certain number of sample (see appendix M). 
In this part, there were 60 multiple choice items given 33 students at SMA Nurul Iman Palembang. the instruments can be seen in (appendix N). It was found that there were 15 questions were considered invalid. It means that 15 items test could not be used as the instrument since the scores of significance are lower than 0.344. Then, 45 questions item were considered valid. It means that 45 items test could be used as the instrument since the scores of significance were higher than 0.344. There were only 40 valid question items to be instruments of pretest and posttest. (See appendix O). 
3)	Content Validity 
In this research, the writer also does a content validity to estimate the validation of the test. A test is said to have content validity if its content constitutes a representative sample of the language skills, structures, etc. with which it is meant to be concerned (Hughes, 1989, p.  22). The writer estimates the content validity by the table of test specification which was appropriate for the material to the students. The first book was written by Tim Era Pustaka Utama (2013) entitled Bahasa Inggris SMA & MA. The second book was written by Gabriel et.al (2008) entitled Creative English.

Table 3
Test of Specification Table

Objective 	Test materials 	Indicators	Number of Items	Total 	Type of Test 	Answer Key 	
The students are able to understand the meanings in short simple essays in the term of narrative text to interact with surrounding environment   	Narrative texts 	The students are able:
1.	To find the detail and factual information 

2.	To detect the main idea 

3.	To identify by the reference word 

4.	To recognize the synonym of word 

5.	To deduce the moral lesson 	1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 36, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 

10, 19, 35, 37, 

4, 8, 9, 17, 23, 24, 31, 32, 34, 43, 44, 48, 49, 56, 58, 59, 60

7, 15, 20,  22, 47, 50, 57

30, 42	60	Multiple choice 	b, e, d, a, a, b, c, d, c, d, c, a, a, d, a, b, a, a, c, a, d, d, c, b, a, c, a, c, e

c, c, e, d

a, c, a, c, d, c, a, a, a, c, b, b, e, b, c, d, e

c, b, d, a, e, a, e

a, d	

3.5.2.2.	 Reliability Test 
In accordance with Fraenkel, et. al. (2012, p. 154), reliability refers to the consistency of the scores obtained how consistent they are for each individual from one administration of an instrument to another and from one set of items to another. 
Reliability test measures whether or not research instrument used for activities of pretest and posttest are reliable. Fraenkle and Wallen (1990, p. 136) explain that the test score is considered reliable whenever the reliability coefficient of test score should be at least 0.70 and preferably higher. To know the reliability of the test internal consistency reliability in Split half reliability coefficient with Spearman-Brown formula was used. This method was appropriate for multiple choice items. The calculation was done by using SPSS 16.0 program. It was found that the p-output of Gutman Split-half Coefficient is 0.706 from the score. It can be stated that the reliability of reading test items is reliable since the p-output is higher than r-table (0.344) with sample (N) is 33 students. The result analysis of reliability test was described in table 6 bellow.
Table 4
Result of Reliability analysis Measure Using Split Half

Reliability Statistics	
Cronbach's Alpha	Part 1	Value	.438	
		N of Items	20a	
	Part 2	Value	.234	
		N of Items	20b	
	Total N of Items	40	
Correlation Between Forms	.555	
Spearman-Brown Coefficient	Equal Length	.714	
	Unequal Length	.714	
Guttman Split-Half Coefficient	.706	
a. The items are: item1, item2, item3, item4, item5, item6, item7, item8, item9, item10, item11, item12, item13, item14, item15, item16, item17, item18, item19, item20.	
b. The items are: item21, item22, item23, item24, item25, item26, item27, item28, item29, item30, item31, item32, item33, item34, item35, iitem36, item37, item38, item39, item40.	

3.5.2.3	Readability Test 
To know the appropriate level of reading texts for students’ level in comprehending the reading texts, readability test will be done. The name of application is readability formula. It can be measured by using online readability test which can be accessed from http//www.readabilityformula.com. There are some categories in reading text level. They are (1) very easy level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 90-100, (2) easy text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 80-98, (3) fairly easy text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 70-79, (4) standard text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 60-69, (5) fairly difficult text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 50-59, (6) difficult text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 30-49, and (7) very confusing text level whenever the result of flesh reading ease score is within 0-29. 
Table 5
Result of readability test for research instrument
No	Text Title	    Text
   type	Text Statistic	Flesh Reading Ease Score	Text Category	
			Character per Word	Syllable per Word	Word per Sentence			
1	The Story of the Smart Parrot	Narrative text	3.8	1.0	8.0	85.8	Easy 	
2	Too late for the wedding 		4.2	1.0	11.0	78.5	Fairly easy	
3	The retun of Dracula 		4.5	2.0	7.0 	75.5	Fairly easy 	
4	Jack and the bean 		4.1	2.0	7.0 	69.3	Standard 	
5	The legend of malin kundang		4.2	2.0	7.0 	65.3	Standard 	
6	No welcome at the hotel		5.6	2.0	6.0	51.0	Fairly difficult 	
7	The school bully 		5.8	1.0	11.0 	50.9	Fairly difficult 	

3.6	Data Analysis 
In analyzing the data, the writer uses and describes some techniques, as follows:
3.6.1	Data Description 
Data descriptions illustrate two analysis, they are distribution of frequency data and descriptive statistics. 
1)	Distributions of frequency data 
In distributions of frequency data, the students’ score, frequency, percentage are achieved. The distributions of frequency data re obtained from students’ pretest-posttest scores in experimental and control group. 
2)	Descriptive statistics 
In descriptive statistics, number of sample, the score of minimal, maximal, mean, and standard deviation are analyzed. Descriptive statistics are obtained from students’ pretest and posttest scores in experimental and control groups. 
3.6.2	Prerequisite Analysis 
Before analyzing the obtained data, pre-requisite analysis should be done to see whether the data obtained are normal or homogeny.
1)	Normality Test 
Normality test is used to measure whether the obtained data is normal or not. The data can be classified into normal whenever the p-output is higher than 0,05 (Basrowi, 2007, p. 82). In measuring normality test, I-sample Kolmogronov Smrinov is used. The normality test is used to measure students’ pretest and posttest score in control and experimental groups. 
2)	Homogeneity Test 
Homogeneity test is used to measure the obtained scores whether it is homogeneity or not. Basrowi (2007, p. 106) states that the score is categorized homogeneity when the p-output was higher than mean significant difference at 0,05 levels. In measuring homogeneity test. Levene Statistics in SPSS is used. The homogeneity test is used to measure students’ pretest and posttest in control and experimental groups. 
3.7	Hypotheses Testing 
In measuring significant improvement and significant difference on students’ listening comprehension by using Reader Response strategy, as follows:
a. in measuring significant improvement, paired sample t-test is used for testing the students’ pre-test to post-test reading comprehension by using reader Response Strategy in experimental groups. A significant improvement is found whenever the p-output is lower than 0,05 and t-obtained is higher than t-table 2,0452 (with df = 29). 
b. in measuring significant difference, independent sample t-test is used for testing the students’ post-test reading comprehension in control and experimental groups. A significant improvement is found whenever the p-output is lower than 0,05 and t-obtained is higher than t-table 2,0017 (with df = 58).

CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION
This chapter presents: (1) findings and (2) interpretation.
4.1 Findings
The findings of this research cover: (1) data descriptions; (2) prerequisite analysis; and (3) result of hypothesis testing.
4.1.1 Data Descriptions
In data descriptions, there were two analyses. They were distributions of frequency data and descriptive statistics.  
4.1.1.1 Distributions of Frequency Data
In the distribution of data frequency, score, frequency, and percentage were analyzed. The scores were acquired from: (1) pretest scores in control group, (2) posttest scores in control group, (3) pretest score in experimental group, and (4) posttest scores in experimental group (See Appendix Q).
(1)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Experiment Group
In distribution of data frequency, it was found the interval score, frequency and percentage. The result of the pretest scores in experiment group is described in table 10 below:

Table 6
Frequency Data of Students’ Pretest Scores in Experiment Group

pretest_experiment	
		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent	
Valid	30	4	13.3	13.3	13.3	
	40	3	10.0	10.0	23.3	
	45	2	6.7	6.7	30.0	
	50	3	10.0	10.0	40.0	
	55	3	10.0	10.0	50.0	
	60	5	16.7	16.7	66.7	
	65	7	23.3	23.3	90.0	
	70	1	3.3	3.3	93.3	
	75	2	6.7	6.7	100.0	
	Total	30	100.0	100.0		

Based on the result analysis of students’ pretest scores in experiment group, it showed that four students got 30 (13.3%), three students got 40 (10.0%), two students got 45 (6.7%), three students 50 (10.0%), three students got 55 (10.0%), five students got 60 (16.7%), seven students got 65 (23.3%), one student got 70 (3.3%), and two students got 75 (6.7%). 
(2)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Experiment Group
In distribution of data frequency, the result of the posttest scores in experiment group is described in Table 12 below:
Table 7
Frequency Data of Students’ Posttest Scores in Experiment Group

posttest_experiment	
		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent	
Valid	45	1	3.3	3.3	3.3	
	50	4	13.3	13.3	16.7	
	52.5	1	3.3	3.3	20.0	
	55	2	6.7	6.7	26.7	
	60	2	6.7	6.7	33.3	
	65	3	10.0	10.0	43.3	
	70	6	20.0	20.0	63.3	
	75	5	16.7	16.7	80.0	
	80	2	6.7	6.7	86.7	
	85	3	10.0	10.0	96.7	
	87.5	1	3.3	3.3	100.0	
	Total	30	100.0	100.0		

Based on the result analysis of students’ post test scores in experiment group, it showed that one student got 45 (3.3%), four students got 50 (13.3%), one student got 52.5 (3.3%), two students 55 (6.7%), six students got 60 (6.7%), three students got 65 (10.0%), six students got 70 (20.0%), five students got 75 (16.7%), two students got 80 (6.7%), three students got 85 (10.0%), and one student got 87.5 (3.3%). 
4.1.2 Prerequisite Analysis
In prerequisite analysis, there were two analyses should be done. They were normality test and homogeneity test. 
4.1.2.1 Normality Test 
In measuring normality test, 1 Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov is used.  The normality test is used to measure students’ pretest and posttest in control and experimental group.
(1)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups
The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in table 22 below.
Table 8
The Result of Normality Test of Students’ Pretest in Control and Experimental Groups

No	Students’ Pretest	N	Kolmogrov Smirnov	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.719	0.679	Normal	
2	Experimental Group	30	0.941	0.338	Normal	

Based on the table above, the result showed that the significance value of the students’ pretest in control group was 0.679, while the experimental group was 0.338. From the score, it could be stated that the students’ pretest score in experimental and control groups were considered normal since the result of the 1-sample Kolmogorov Simonov were higher than 0.05.	
(2)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups
The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in table 23 below.
Table 9
The Result of Normality Test of Students’ Posttest in Control and Experimental Groups
No	Students’ Posttest	N	Kolmogrov Smirnov	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.686	0.735	Normal	
2	Experimental Group	30	0.837	0.485	Normal	

Based on the table above, the result showed that the significance value of the students’ posttest in control group was 0.735, while the experimental group was 0.485. From the score, it could be stated that the students’ posttest score in experimental and control groups were considered normal since the result of the 1-sample Kolmogorov Simonov were higher than 0.05.	
4.1.2.2 Homogeneity Test 
 In measuring homogeneity test, Levene statistics was used. Levene statistics  is  a  formula  that  used  to  analyze  the  homogeneity  data.  The homogeneity  test  was  used  to  measure  students’  pretest  scores  in experimental  and  control  groups,  and  students’ posttest  scores  in experimental and control groups.
(1)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Group
Table 10
Homogeneity Test of Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental group

No	Students’ Pretest	N	Levene Statistics	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	2.378	0.128	Homogenous	
2	Experimental Group	30				

Based on table above, it was found that the p-output is 0.128. From the result, it could be stated that the obtained score from students’ pretest in experimental and control groups are homogenous, because it is higher than 0.05. 
(2)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Group
Table 11
Homogeneity Test of Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental group

No	Students’ Pretest	N	Levene Statistics	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.899	0.347	Homogenous	
2	Experimental Group	30				

Based on table above, it was found that the p-output is 0.347. From the result, it could be stated that the obtained score from students’ posttest in experimental and control groups are homogenous, because it is higher than 0.05.

4.1.3 The Result of Hypotheses Testing
(1)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group
In distribution of data frequency, the result of the posttest scores in control group is described in Table 12 below:
Table 12
Frequency Data of Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group

Pretest_control	
		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent	
Valid	30	2	6.7	6.7	6.7	
	40	3	10.0	10.0	16.7	
	45	3	10.0	10.0	26.7	
	50	5	16.7	16.7	43.3	
	55	5	16.7	16.7	60.0	
	57.5	1	3.3	3.3	63.3	
	60	5	16.7	16.7	80.0	
	62.5	1	3.3	3.3	83.3	
	65	4	13.3	13.3	96.7	
	77.5	1	3.3	3.3	100.0	
	Total	30	100.0	100.0		

Based on the result analysis of students’ pretest scores in control group, it showed that two students got 30 (6.7%), three students got 40 (10.0%), three students got 45 (10.0%), five students 50 (16.7%), five students got 55 (16.7%), one student got 57.5 (3.3%), five students got 60 (16.7%), one student got 62.5 (3.3%), four students got 65 (13.3%), one student got 77.5 (3.3%) .
(3)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group
In distribution of data frequency, the result of the posttest scores in control group is described in Table 12 below:
Table 13
Frequency Data of Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group

posttest_control	
		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent	
Valid	40	2	6.7	6.7	6.7	
	45	2	6.7	6.7	13.3	
	50	6	20.0	20.0	33.3	
	52.5	1	3.3	3.3	36.7	
	55	2	6.7	6.7	43.3	
	57.5	1	3.3	3.3	46.7	
	60	4	13.3	13.3	60.0	
	62.5	1	3.3	3.3	63.3	
	65	6	20.0	20.0	83.3	
	70	1	3.3	3.3	86.7	
	75	3	10.0	10.0	96.7	
	80	1	3.3	3.3	100.0	
	Total	30	100.0	100.0		

Based on the result analysis of students’ pretest scores in control group, it showed that two students got 40 (6.7%), two students got 45 (6.7%), six students got 50 (20.0%), one student got 52.5 (3.3%), two students got 55 (6.7%), one student got 57.5 (3.3%), four students got 60 (13.3%), one student got 62.5 (3.3%), six students got 65 (20.0%), one student got 70 (3.3%), three students got 75 (10.0), and one student got 80 (3.3%). 
4.1.1.2 Descriptive Statistics
In the descriptive statistics, the total of sample (N), minimum and maximum scores, mean scores, standard deviation were analyzed. The score were acquired from; (1) pretest scores in control, (2) posttest scores in control group, (c) pretest scores in experimental group, and (4) posttest in experimental group.
(1)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Experimental Group
The result analysis of descriptive statistics of students’ pretest in Experimental group is described in Table 20 below:

Table 14
Descriptive Statistic on Students’ Pretest Scores in Experimental Group

Descriptive Statistics	
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	
Pretest_experiment	30	30.00	75.00	54.0000	13.48051	
Valid N (listwise)	30					

In descriptive statistics of students’ pretest scores in Experimental group, it showed that the total number of sample was 30 students. The minimum Pretest scores was 30, the maximum score was 75.00, the mean score was 54.0000 and the standard deviation was 13.48051. 
(2)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Experimental Group
 The result analysis of descriptive statistics of students’ posttest in Experimental group is described in table 21 below:
Table 15
Descriptive Statistic on Students’ Posttest Scores in Experimental Group

Descriptive Statistics	
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	
Posttest_experiment	30	45.00	87.50	67.3333	12.24628	
Valid N (listwise)	30					

In descriptive statistics of students’ posttest scores in Experimental group, it showed that the total number of sample was 30 students. The minimum Posttest scores was 45.00, the maximum score was 87.50, the mean score was 67.3333 and the standard deviation was 12.24628. 
(3)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group
The result analysis of descriptive statistics of students’ pretest in control group is described in Table 18 below:
Table 16
Descriptive Statistic on Students’ Pretest Scores in Control Group

Descriptive Statistics	
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	
Pretest_control	30	30.00	77.50	53.2500	10.75090	
Valid N (listwise)	30					

In descriptive statistics of students’ pretest scores in control group, it showed that the total number of sample was 30 students. The minimum Pretest scores was 30.00, the maximum score was 77.50, the mean score was 53.2500 and the standard deviation was 10.75090. 

(4)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group
 The result analysis of descriptive statistics of students’ posttest in control group is described in Table 19 below:
Table 17
Descriptive Statistic on Students’ Posttest Scores in Control Group

Descriptive Statistics	
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation	
Posttest_control	30	40.00	80.00	58.5833	10.55942	
Valid N (listwise)	30					

In descriptive statistics of students’ posttest scores in control group, it showed that the total number of sample was 30 students. The minimum Posttest scores was 40, the maximum score was 80.00, the mean score was 58.5833 and the standard deviation was 10.55942. 
4.1.2 Prerequisite Analysis
In prerequisite analysis, there were two analyses should be done. They were normality test and homogeneity test. 
4.1.2.1 Normality Test 
In measuring normality test, 1 Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov is used.  The normality test is used to measure students’ pretest and posttest in control and experimental group.
(3)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups
The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in table 22 below.
Table 18
The Result of Normality Test of Students’ Pretest in Control and Experimental Groups
No	Students’ Pretest	N	Kolmogrov Smirnov	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.719	0.679	Normal	
2	Experimental Group	30	0.941	0.338	Normal	

Based on the table above, the result showed that the significance value of the students’ pretest in control group was 0.679, while the experimental group was 0.338. From the score, it could be stated that the students’ pretest score in experimental and control groups were considered normal since the result of the 1-sample kolmogronov smirnov were higher than 0.05.	
(4)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups
The computations of normality used the computation in SPSS 16. The result of analysis is figured out in table 23 below.
Table 19
The Result of Normality Test of Students’ Posttest in Control and Experimental Groups
No	Students’ Posttest	N	Kolmogrov Smirnov	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.686	0.735	Normal	
2	Experimental Group	30	0.837	0.485	Normal	

Based on the table above, the result showed that the significance value of the students’ posttest in control group was 0.735, while the experimental group was 0.485. From the score, it could be stated that the students’ posttest score in experimental and control groups were considered normal since the result of the 1-sample kolmogronov smirnov were higher than 0.05.	
4.1.2.2 Homogeneity Test 
 In measuring homogeneity test, Levene statistics was used. Levene statistics  is  a  formula  that  used  to  analyze  the  homogeneity  data.  The homogeneity  test  was  used  to  measure  students’  pretest  scores  in experimental  and  control  groups,  and  students’ posttest  scores  in experimental and control groups.
(3)	Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental Group
Table 20
Homogeneity Test of Students’ Pretest Scores in Control and Experimental group

No	Students’ Pretest	N	Levene Statistics	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	2.378	0.128	Homogenous	
2	Experimental Group	30				

Based on table above, it was found that the p-output is 0.128. From the result, it could be stated that the obtained score from students’ pretest in experimental and control groups are homogenous, because it is higher than 0.05. 

(4)	Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Group
Table 21
Homogeneity Test of Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental group

No	Students’ Pretest	N	Levene Statistics	Sig.	Result	
1	Control Group	30	0.899	0.347	Homogenous	
2	Experimental Group	30				

Based on table above, it was found that the p-output is 0.347. From the result, it could be stated that the obtained score from students’ posttest in experimental and control groups are homogenous, because it is higher than 0.05. 
4.1.3 The Result of Hypotheses Testing
In this study, Paired sample t-test used to measure a significant improvement on students’ narrative reading score taught by using Reader Response Strategy at SMA Muhammadiyah 6  Palembang before and after treatment. Independent sample t-test was used to measure a significant difference on students’ narrative reading score taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who were not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. 
4.1.3.1	Result of Paired Sample t-test in Experimental group
In this study, paired sample t-test was used to measure the significant improvement on the tenth grade students’ narrative reading achievement taught by using Reader Response Strategy the result of students’ pretest and posttest scores. The analysis result of paired sample t-test describe in table 26. 

Table 22
Analysis Result of Paired Sample T-Test from Students’ Pretest to Posttest Scores in Experimental Group

Reader Response Strategy	Paired Sample T-Test	Ho	Ha	
	T	Df	Sig. (2-tailed)			
	12.411	29	0.000	Rejected	
Accepted	

Based on the table above, it was found that the p-output is 0.000 with df=29 (2,0452), and t-value= 12.411. It can be stated that there is significant improvement from students’ pretest to posttest scores in experimental group taught using Reader Response Strategy since p-output is lower than 0.05 and the t-value (12.411) was higher than t-table (2.0452). The null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It can be assumed that there was a significant improvement on students’ narrative reading score taught by using Reader Response Strategy at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang before and after treatment.
4.1.3.2	Analysis Result of Independent Sample t-test on Students’ Posttest Score in Control and Experimental Groups
In this study, independent sample t-test was used to measure the significant difference on students’ narrative reading scores taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who were taught by using teacher’s method at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. Since t-obtained was higher than t-table, and p-output was lower than 0.05, it can be stated that there was a significant difference on students’ narrative reading score taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who were taught by using teacher’s method at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. The result of independent sample t-test is described in table 27.
Table 23
Analysis Result of Independent Sample t-test on Students’ Posttest Scores in Control and Experimental Groups

Using Reader Response Strategy and Strategy that is used by the teacher of English at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang	Independent Sample t-Test	Ho	Ha	
	T	Df	Sig. (2-tailed)			
	2.964	68	0.004	Rejected	
Accepted	

Based on the table analysis above, it was found that the p-output was 0.002 and the t-obtained was 2.964. Since the p-output was lower than 0.05 and the t-obtained (2.964) was higher than t-table (1.9955). The null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It can be stated that there was a significant difference on students’ narrative reading comprehension score taught by using Reader Response Strategy and those who were not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang.
4.2	Interpretation  
Based on the findings which have been described in the previous section, it was found that there were two conclusions. First, there was significant improvement from students’ pretest to posttest scores in experimental group taught by using Reader Response Strategy since p-output is lower than 0.05. Second, there was significant different between students’ posttest score in control and experimental groups since the p-output was lower than 0.05 and t-obtained was higher than t-table. The result indicated that Reader Response Strategy could be used as good strategy in teaching narrative reading.
Before the students were given the treatment, the students in experimental and control groups were given pretest. Then, students’ pretest score in experimental and control groups were obtained. In doing the pretest the students felt confused and difficult in answering the question both of classes. It could be seen in the table of students’ pretest scores in control (table 10) and experimental groups (table 14). The result showed that X.MIA A got lower than X.MIA B. It was proved by the mean score of pretest in X.MIA B which was higher than X.MIA A. It could be assumed that experimental group was X.MIA A and control group was X.MIA B. In this case, the experimental group needed treatment by using Reader Response Strategy to get better than before. 
During the treatment, there were 12 meetings excluding pretest and posttest in experimental group. In the first meeting, the students were confused about Reader Response Strategy because it was the first time and the students did not how to apply it. In the second and the third meeting, the students were still confused. So the students were helped by demonstrating Reader Response Strategy during the treatment. In the fourth meeting the students were still confused in comprehending text. They did not know vocabulary, main idea and conclusion. Between fifth and eighth meeting, they slowly could manage to find main idea, they could know the new vocabulary and they could know how to make conclusion in a text. Finally, on the tenth to twelfth meeting they could understand the material of narrative well by applying RRS. Because it could help them to elaborate their idea and connect to text to find the conclusion of a text. It was in line with what Sebastian and Meera (2014), they pointed out that Reader Response Approach could create the interactive process in the whole classroom by giving responsibility of their learning to the students. 
After conducting the treatment, both control and experimental groups were given posttest. It was found students’ pretest and posttest score in experimental and control groups. Then, the data from both of groups in pretest and posttest were analyzed by SPSS. In analyzing normality, 1-sample kolmogoronov smirnov were used. The result students’ pretest and posttest score in experimental and control groups were normal since the significant of normality test was higher than 0.05. To analyze homogeneity, Levene statistics was used. The result students’ pretest and posttest score in experimental and control groups were homogenous since the significant of homogeneity test was higher than 0.05. In conclusion, the data showed that the abilities of the students were same. Then, the data were analyzed for hypothesis testing.
In analyzing hypothesis testing, paired sample t-test and independent sample t-test were used. The result of paired sample t-test shared that there was significant improvement between students’ pretest and posttest in experimental and control group. The students of experimental group were taught by using Reader Response Strategy, and the students of control group were not taught by using Reader Response Strategy. Both of groups were taught narrative reading. It means that the students’ narrative reading achievement in experimental group was improved after they were taught by using Reader Response Strategy. Moreover, students’ narrative reading achievement in control group also got improvement but it was not as significant as the experimental group. Meanwhile, the result of independent sample t-test, it was found that there was significant difference between the students’ posttest score of experimental groups who were taught by using Reader Response Strategy and the control group who were taught by using strategy that was used by the teacher of English at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. This result is consistent with many studies; some of them were conducted by Imam (2014) who found that Reader Response Strategy gave positive effect to the fourth semester students of FKIP UNSRI in reading achievement in narrative text and Apriani (2014) who reported that Reader Response Strategy gave positive effect which can help students in reading achievement on narrative text.
Based on the data analysis, it was significant improvement and difference on students’ narrative reading comprehension taught by using Reader Response Strategy. The findings proved theories that state some advantages of this strategy could be accepted. Mitchel (1993) stated that this strategy could formulate their generalization and cover such elements such us characterization and theme. She added it facilitated students to make meaning. It was in line with Pardo (2004) in describing stage of Reader Response Strategy, the students described the literary elements that are common across narrative pieces, such us plot, characters, and setting. Thus, students will be able to access schema for a certain narrative genre. 
In conclusion, it was inferred that the implementation of Reader Response Strategy showed significant improvement and significant difference on students’ narrative reading at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. Reader Response Strategy successfully motivated the students in learning narrative reading and made the students interested and active  in learning English. It could be assumed that Reader Response Strategy is effective to teach reading comprehension to the students. Dhanapal (2010) pointed out that the use of reader of Reader Response Theory to literary texts was specifically effective in cultivating critical and creative thinking skills. This strategy assigned the readers with the dominant role to construct meaning and interact with texts differently and personally. They were involved in investigating the content of the story. Therefore, they could understand what the story was about.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
This chapter presents: (a) conclusion and (b) suggestions
5.1 Conclusion
	Based on the findings and interpretation, it could be concluded that there were some conclusion. First, based on the result of pretest to posttest, Reader Response Strategy was significant improvement on students’ narrative reading achievement of the tenth grade student at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. Second, there was a significant difference on students’ narrative reading achievement who were taught by Reader Response Strategy and those who were not at SMA Muhammadiyah 6 Palembang. Therefore, it could be inferred that It Reader Response Strategy was one of good alternative strategy to teach narrative reading at the tenth grade students. This strategy could improve students in learning reading comprehension in narrative text. 
5.2. Suggestions
Based on the conclusion above, in order to enhance the students’ reading comprehension achievement in narrative text, some suggestions were offered. 
The teachers of English of senior high school are suggested to apply Reader Response Strategy in teaching narrative text to their students since the result has shown that those two strategy could increase students’ reading comprehension achievement. 
In addition, the teachers should familiarize the students to connect the story into the other stories either national or international stories when they gave the Reader Response intervention in the classroom. They could enlarge their mind in which there were some stories which had some similarities even though they came from different country. Thus, the teacher should involve the students to engage and conceive the story. They were used to answer the questions which the answers were available in the text. By engaging and conceiving the story (narrative text), they were able to think critically to express their opinion about the reason beyond character’s action. It could guide them to judge whether the story (narrative text) was good enough or not. It also helped them to find out the moral value of the story. It meant that as teachers, we had tried to form them become independent or autonomous readers early.  

REFERENCES

Al-Bulushi, Y. (2011). Teaching short stories in the Omani context: the use of reader response theory. Literary information and computer education journal (LICEJ), 2(3), 450-455. 

Apriani, E. P. (2014). Using reader response strategy and sociogram to enhance narrative reading comprehension achievement of the tenth grade students of SMAN 3 Palembang. (Undergraduate’ Thesis). Palembang, Indonesia: Universitas Sriwijaya. 
Arends, R. (2009). Learning to teach. (7th ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge university. 
Arikunto, S. (2002). Procedure penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta. 

Basrowi & Soenyono. (2007). Metode analisis data sosial. Kediri : Jenggala Pustaka Utama. 

Beach, R.W., & Marshall, D.J. (1991). Teaching literature in the secondary school. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, inc. 

Beach, R. (2000). Critical issues: Reading and responding to literature at the level of activity. Journal of Literacy Research, 32(2), 237-251. Doi: 10.1080/10862960009548075. Retrieved from http//jlr.sagepub.com/.  

Brines, D. (1998). Connecting narratives: Students’ lives and high school literature. Language Arts Journal of Michigan, 14(2), 51-54. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2168-149X.1418. 

Browder, D. M., & Spooner, F. (2011). Teaching students with moderate and severe disabilities. New York, NY: Guilford Press. 

Brown, H.D (2001). Teaching by Principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. (2nded). New York, NY: Longman. 
Brown, H. Douglas. (2004). Language Assessment Principle and Practice in the Classroom. New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
Brown, H. Douglas. (2007). Principle of language teaching and learning. (5th ed). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.  
Cresswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Educational, Inc.  
Cohen, L, Lawrence M & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.  
Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring How Text Works. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.
Dhanapal, S. (2010). Stylistics and reader response: an integrated approach to the teaching of literary texts. Literacy information and computer education journal (LICEJ), I (4), 233-239. 
Duke, N, K., & Pearson, P, D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. Retrieved from www.Learner.org/...org/teachreading35/pdf/Dev_Rea. 
Fraenkel. J. R., Wallen. N.E., & Hyun. H. H. (1990). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill,Inc. 
Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., & Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill,Inc. 
Garcia, R. (2012). Bridging the English learner achievement gap. New York, NY: Teacher Collage Press. 
Galda, L & Beach. R. (2001). Response to literature as a cultural activity. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(1), 64-73, doi: 10.1598/RRQ.36.1.4. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable.com. 
Gerot, Linda and Peter Wignell (1994). Making sense of functional grammar. Sydney: Antipodean Educational. 
Hamra, A., & Syatriana, E. (2010). Developing a model of teaching reading comprehension for efl students. TEFLIN Journal, 21, 30. 
Hasibuan. Kalayo & Muhammad Fauzan Ansyari (2007). Teaching English as Foreign Language(TEFL). Pekanbaru: Alaf Riau Graha UNSRI Press. 
Hatch, Evelyn and Hossein Farhady. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. USA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Harmer, Jeremy. (2004). English language teaching. New York, NY: Longman.
Holandyah, M. (2012). Extensive reading and reading comprehension. Palembang: English Study Program Raden Fatah Institution for Islamic Study.

Hughes, Arthur. (1989). Testing for language teachers. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Husin, I. (2009). Using reader response strategy in developing students’ appreciation on literary works at English education study program of PGRI university. (unpublished thesis). Palembang, Indonesia: Sriwijaya University. 
Imam, R.  H. N. (2014). Enhancing students’ reading achievement and critical thinking by applying reader response strategy (RRS) and movie maker software (MMS). Palembang, Indonesia: Universitas Sriwijaya. 
Indriani, Etik. (2015). Improving students’ writing narrative texts by using the combination of story sequencing cards and round table technique. Semarang, Indonesia: UNNES. 

Mitchell, D. (1993). Reader response theory: some practical application for the high school literature classroom. Language Arts Journal of Michigan, 8(2), 41-53. 
Moreilon, judi. (2007). Collaborative strategies for teaching reading comprehension maximizing your impact. New york: The Library America.  

Moore, Kenneth D. ( 2000). Effective instructional strategies from theory to practice. New York, NY: Sage Publication, Inc. 
Nunan, D.(2006). Practical English Language Teaching: Young Learners. Singapore: McGraw Hill.

Kalayo Hasibuan and M Fauzan Ansyari, (2007). Teaching English: As a foreign language (TEFL). Pekanbaru: Alaf Riau Graha UNRI Press.
Komiyama, R. (2009). ETF motivating students to read. Boston, MA: California State University.

Lauder,  A. (2008). The Status and Function of English in Indonesia: a Review of Key Factors. Makara, Sosial Humaniora, 12(1), 9-20.

Linse, C. T. (2005). Practical English language teachings: Young learners. Singapore: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results in focus: What 15 years-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Retrieved from www.oecd.org 

Rosenblatt, Louise M. (1994). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: southern lllinois University Press.  
Pardo, L. S., (2004). What every teacher needs to know about comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(3), 272-280. 

Patel, M. F. & Jain, P. M. (2008). English language teaching: Methods, tools, & techniques. Jaipur, ND: Sunrise Publisher. 

Rosenblatt, Louise M. (1994). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: southern lllinois University Press.  
Rudy, Rita inderawati. (2008). The application of reader response approach toward local literature to develop students’ critical thinking and cultural awareness. Retrieved from file:///G:LITERATUREFORALL Paper presented in Asia TEFL International Conference at Sanur Bali in 2008.htm. 

Rudy, Rita inderawati. (2010). Model respons nonverbal dan verbal dalam pembelajaran sastra untuk mengembangkan keterampilan menulis siswa SD: Studi kasus-eksperimen di SD negeri ASMI I, III, V kota Bandung tahun ajaran 2003/2004. (Doctoral Dissertation). Bandung, Indonesia: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. 

Sarwoko, (2014). Mandiri English SMP/MTs kelas VIII: English on target. Jakarta, Indonesia: Erlangga. 

Sebastian, R. M., & Meera, K. P. (2013). Effectiveness of reader response pedagogy on communication apprehension in an ELT classroom. The Down Journal. 2(2), 576-588. 

Sebastian, R. M., & Meera, K. P. (2014). Activiting students creativity: the effect of reader response approach on creative writing in an ELT classroom. Scholars World. 2(2), 184-189. 

Singh, I. (2005). The history of English: A student’s guide. New York, NY: Hoder Education Press. 

Sugiyono. 2012.Metode Penelitian Bisnis. Bandung : Alfabeta.

Stanton, J. M. (1977). The concept of teaching. Published Thesis. University of Canterbury.
Tierney, R. J. (1990). Redefining reading comprehension. Retrieved from www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/Journals/ed-lead/el_199003_tierney.pdf. 
Van, T. T. M. (2009). The relevance of literary analysis to teaching literature in the EFL classroom. English Teaching Forum, 47(3), 2-9. 
Whitton, Diana et al. (2004). Learning for teaching, teaching for learning. Australia, AUS: Cengage Learning.