%A DINI KURNIA NURSEPTI 853042012
%J Digital Library
%T A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS? READING COMPREHENSION
ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH PREDICTIVE
TECHNIQUE AND THOSE TAUGHT THROUGH MAKING INFERENCES 
TECHNIQUE AT THE SECOND GRADE OF SMAN 1 KOTAGAJAH
%X Reading is strongly recommended for all students who learn English subject.  By
reading, they are expected to be good in reading by using their prior knowledge
for connecting background knowledge to their thoughts to get the information and
from the text.  However, the students still have some problems in comprehending
the texts.  In addition, the students tend to be passive and do not focus and they
could not answer or give responds quickly during the learning process.

The objectives of the research are (1) to investigate whether there was difference
of students? reading comprehension achievement between those taught through
predictive technique and those taught through making inferences technique, and
(2) to determine which one of the two techniques was more effective for teaching
reading comprehension.  The researcher applied pre-test and post-test control
group design.  This experimental method dealt with two groups: the experimental
class and control class.  The sample of the research was the second grade of
SMAN 1 Kotagajah.

The findings of the research revealed that there was difference of students?
reading comprehension achievement between those taught through predictive
technique and those taught through making inferences technique.  In addition,
predictive technique was more effective than making inferences technique to
encourage the students? motivation to be more active during the process of
learning reading.  It can be seen from the results of post-test in the experimental
class was 81.50 which higher than the mean score of students? post-test in the
control class which was 72.18, with mean difference of score was 9.32.  The value
of two tailed significant was 0.000.  It means that H0 was rejected and H was
accepted since 0.000 < 0.05.
%D 2013
%L eprints14922