THE COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN REFLECTIVITY AND IMPULSIVITY COGNITIVE STYLE IN USING LEARNING STRATEGY IN READING AND READING COMPREHENSION
Abstract
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui Kelompok mana antara murid yang reflektif atau impulsif yang lebih baik dalam pemahaman membaca dan apakah ada perbedaan yang significant antara kedua kelompok murid saat menggukan strategi belajar untuk membaca. Alat ukur yang digunakan adalah Matching Failiar Figure Test (MFFT), Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire (LLSQ), dan tes membaca. Hasilnya menunjukan bahwa siswa reflektif lebih baik dalam pemahaman membaca dibandingkan siswa impulsif. Hasilnya juga menunjukan bahwa hipotesis 2 ditolak karna tidak ada nya perbedaan yang signifikan antara siswa reflektif dan impulsif dalam menggunakan strategi belajar. Peneliti dapat menyarankan bahwa penelitian ini sangat penting untuk siswa dapat mengetahui kecenderungan strategi belajar yang mereka gunakan untuk memaksimalkan proses belajar dalam memahami tes membaca.
The aims of this study were to find out whether i) reflective or impulsive students had better comprehension in reading and ii) there was a statistically significant difference between impulsive and reflective students in using different learning strategy in reading. The instruments are Matching Familiar Figure Test (MFFT), Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire (LLSQ), and the reading comprehension test. The result showed that reflective students did better in reding comprehension than the impulsive students. It also showed that the hypothesis was rejected that there was no a statistically significant difference between reflective and impulsive students in using different learning strategy. This suggests that it is very important for the teachers to know students’ dominant learning strategies to maximize their learning process in comprehending reading test.
Keywords: learning strategies, impulsivity, reflectivity, reading comprehension.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bazargani, D. T., and Larsari, V. N. 2013. Impulsivity–Reflectivity, gender and performance on multiple choice items. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW). 4(2), 194-208.
Hadidi, N., Soltani, K., and Seifoori, Z. 2017. Iranian EFL learners' reflectivity/impulsivity styles and their metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use across gender. (Journal of Instruction and Evaluation) Journal of Educational Sciences Fall 2015. 8(31), 103-124.
Kagan, J. 1966. Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptul tempo. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 71(1), 17-24.
Kesuma, S. W. 2015. The effect of students’ cognitive style on their reading comprehension at eight grade students of SMPN 21 Bandar Lampung. Unpublished Script, Lampung University
Mokhtari, K., &Richard, C. 2002. Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies of reading strategies inventory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Naimie, Z., et al. 2010. Do you know where I can find the new center which is called “Cognitive styles and language learning strategies link”? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 497–500.
Sari, L.A. 2015. The use of learning strategies in reading comprehension by the second year students at SMAN 1 Gedong Tataan. Unpublished Script, Lampung University
Sholatunisa, F. 2016. The analysis of student learning strategies used by females and males students in reading comprehension at SMAN 2 Kalianda. Unpublished Script. Lampung: The Faculty of teacher Training and Education University of Lampung.
Wenden, A., & Rubin, J. 1987. Learning strategies in language learning. Cambridge: Practice-Hall International.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 U-JET
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.