EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension Level: What Do They Portray?
(1) Universitas Jambi
(2) Universitas Jambi
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Levelling reading comprehension may help students learning and teacher course designing. This study attempts to portray the level of EFL reading comprehension in a public university in Jambi, Indonesia. The participants were 78 EFL learners who were registered in the academic year 2020-2021. The data were collected through administering a set of adapted reading test and calculated based on the indicator of the scoring system and criteria. These data were classified into each level of reading comprehension which is described in the form of percentage and presented through diagram and chart. The major findings of this study reveal that. 1) there were 77 or (99%) participants can complete most of the literal test items and they just achieved literal level of comprehension of reading skill. 2) there were 24 or (31%) participants were able to answer all inferential test items successfully and they just reach inferential level of reading comprehension. 3) there were 19 or (24%) participants can give their answer critically and they just obtained a critical level of reading comprehension. It is interpreted that numerous students were still in the position of the literal level which is regarded as a very low or basic level of reading comprehension. So, it is strongly recommended that EFL learners at Universitas Jambi require an intensive practice of reading to achieve a highest level of reading comprehension.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing Reading Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Andriyani, M., Arbain., & Ariyanti. (2019). The correlation between student’s reading habit in English and students’ reading comprehension ability. BORJU: Borneo Educational Journal, 1(1), 15-21.
Creswell, J. W. (2016). Education Research 3rd Edition : Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Inc.Upper Saddle River.New Jersey 07458.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2001). What Reading Does for the Mind. Journal of Direct Instruction, 1(2), 137–149.
Freeman, L. (2011). Technique & Principle in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford Univesity Press.
Harmer, J. (2017). How To Teach English. Harlow: Longman.
Klemer, A. (2016). Constructivist Reading Model (CRM) For The Students of English Education Program of Widya Mandiri Chatholic University Kupang : English Language Studies, Graduate Program, Sanata Dharma University.
Latif, M. A. (2014). Tanya Jawab Metode Penelitian Pembelajaran Bahasa. Universitas Negeri Malang.
Maulidah, et. al. (2013). Pengertian, Keterkaitan, Jenis dan Pengaplikasian Keterampilan Membaca. Universitas Lambung Mangkurat. Lampung
Romadhoni, I. (2010). Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension on Narrative Text through Story Mapping at the Tenth Grade Students of SMAN 5 BatangHari, A thesis, Faculty Of Teacher Training and Education, English Department, Jambi University.
Songsiengchai, T. (2010). Strategi in Reading Online and Printed Academic Text of English. Major Students of Srinakharinwirot University. Thailand: Srinakharinwirot Universit
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30998/scope.v7i2.16359
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Nyimas Triyana Safitri, melati melati melati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License