| dc.identifier.citation | Alwan-Al, (2008) The Effect of Using Metacognition Reading Strategies on the Reading Comprehension of Arabic Texts. IJAES. 13 (1) 1-17. Asay&Schneider,EW, (1976). The Effect of Untrainned Student Generated Highlighting on Learning.Paper presented at the Meeting of the Northestern Educational Research Association ,Ellensville,New York. Brown, A.L., & Day, J.D (1983). Macrorules for summarizing text : The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14. Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language Learning and Teaching. 4th edition. New York: A Pearson Education Company. Di Vesta,F,J, & Gray,S,G (1972) Listening and note taking .Journal of Educational Psychology (63) 8-14 Durkin, D. (1993). Teaching them to read (6th Ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Flavell, J. (1976) Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 34(10),906-911 Flavell, J. H. (1992). Perspective on Perspective Taking, Piaget,s Theory: Prospect and Possibilities 107-141. Hillsdale Erlbraum Gagne Robert M,(1998) The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction,CBS College Publishing ,Canada Hartley,J & Davies,I,K (1978) Note – taking : A critical r eview, Journal Innovation in Education and Teaching International ,(15:3) 207 – 224 Hattie.J (2009), Visible Learning; A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta Analyses Relating to Achivement, Routledge, Oxon, New York Horton, P.B ( 1993) An investigating of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional tool, Science Education 77 (1) 93-111 Jitendra, A., & Gajria, M. Reading comprehension instruction for students with learning disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children., 43 (8), 1-13. Joyce, Bruce; Weil, Marsha; & Showers, B.( 2011). Models of Teaching. Fourth Edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Kiewra, P & Dubois , Roskelly ( 1991) Note taking fuctions and technique, Journal of Educational Psychology (83) 240- 245 Kiewra K A, & Fletcher,HJ. (1984) The relationship between levels of note- taking and achivement. Human Learning , 3, 273-280. Kintsch, W.V.D.T.A (1998). Comprehension: A Paragdim for cognition. Cambridge. Uk: Cambrifge University Press. Kirkgoz.Y (2010) Promoting students‟ note taking skills through task-based learning,Procedia Social and Behavioral Science (2) 4346-4351 Leutwyer, B (2009) Metacognitive Learning Strategies: Differential Development Patterns in High School, Metacognitive Learning 4:111-123 Mason, C.L (1992) Concept mapping : A tool to develop reflective science instruction, Science Education 76 (1) 51-63 , John Wiley and Son. Magogwe, J.M. (2013). Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies of Universities of Botswana, Reading and writing, 4 (1) 1-8. National Research Council (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington DC:National Academy Press. Novak, J.D, Gowin, B.D, Johansen, G.T ( 1984) The use of concept mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students, Science Education 67 (5) 625-645 Prado, L., & Plourde, L. (2005). Increasing reading comprehension through the explicit teaching of reading strategies: is there a difference among the genders?. Reading Improvement, 32- 43. Richards, J.C., Willy A. R. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of curent practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Riyadi,Iswan, (2010) Pembelajaran Berbasis Metakognisi untuk Peningkatan Kompetensi Siswa , Disertasi, UPI Bandung. Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Towards a R&D program in reading comprehension. Washington, DC: RAND Reading Study Group Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanles, M. M. (1986) The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta analysis. Revief of educational research, 56 (1), 72-110. Veenman, M. V. Nad Span. (2005) The Assement of Matacognitive Skill: What can be Learned from Multi – Method Design. Metacognition Learning 4. 235-251 Winograd,P.N. (1984) Strategic difficulties in summarzing texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 404-425. Woolley, G. (2010) Developing reading comprehension: combining visual and verbal cognitive processes. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33(2), 108-125. Wormeli, R. (2004) Summarization in any Subjects: 50 techniques to improve student learning. Alexaandria, VA USA: Association for supervision & Curriculum Development | in_ID |
| dc.description.abstract | This research is based on researchers’ previous finding over teachers’ complaint on the implementation of curriculum 2013. The low achievement of students’ reading comprehension has long been related to the low motivation of students in reading. This situation has been considered as sighnificant obstacle when the phases of scientific based learning are implemented in learning process. In general, this research and development is aimed at inventing a learning model of reading comprehension that is based on metacognitive learning strategy in the lesson of Bahasa Indonesia at SMP Klaten. The purpose of the first year: to describe learning strategy that has been employed by teachers. The second year: to develop learning model of metacognitive learning strategy in the lesson of Bahasa Indonesia. Third year: to conduct extended implementation by
testing validity, practicallity and effectiveness of the model . In the first year, this research was carried out in four SMP, while in the second year was conducted in two schools. The data collection techniques used in this study were, observation, interview, document analysis, FGD, and questionnaire. To analyze the data, interactive model, evaluative analysis, and comparative analysis were employed. The result of the firs year shows that: (1) reading comprehension is carried out in different time allotment in Bahasa Indonesia learning; (2) teachers use reading aloud as the strategy to teach reading comprehension; (3) teachers are less intensive in guiding
students; (4) teachers train students to answer 5W+1H. Meanwhile, the result of the second year shows that: (1) students master the metacognitive learning strategy consists of: underlining, note taking, summarizing, and concept maping; (2) students’ reading comprehension skills are improving; (3) learning beomes more meaningful; (4) students’learning autonomy is increasing. This research will be continued in 2016 to test the validity, practicallity, effectiveness, and dissemination of the model. | in_ID |
