53

CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the writer proposes the description of the data, testing

requirement for analysis, analysis of the data and discussion. The data was

analyzed by using statistical software program SPSS (statistical Packages for

social science) version 11.00 for windows.

A. Description of the Data

Data of this study includes three variables that are: reading strategies

(X1), vocabulary mastery (X2) and reading comprehension (Y). The data

were gathered from 320 students and then were categorized into mean,

median, mode, standard deviation, variance, range, minimum score,

maximum score and sum score. The calculation data can be seen from the

table below:

Table 10
Data Distribution from Variable Reading Strategies (X1),
Vocabulary Mastery (X2) and Reading Comprehension (Y)

Statistics
Reading Vocabulary Reading
Statistics Strategies Mastery Comprehension
(X1) (X2) (Y)
N Valid 320 320 320
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 187.44 73.63 76.76
Median 186.00 74.00 77.00
Mode 186 69a 77a
Std. Deviation 18.543 9.714 10.747
Variance 343.833 94.371 115.492
Range 78 42 43
Minimum 150 50 50
Maximum 228 92 93
Sum 59980 23562 24564
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
 54

1. Reading Strategies Variable

Reading strategies data were collected from 320 students by using a

set of instruments. The instruments consisted of 44 items. From the table

above we can see the score: mean 187, 44, median 186.00 mode 186,00

standard deviation 18.543, variance 343,833, range 78.00, minimum 150.00,

maximum 228.00, and sum 59980.

The score of mean, median and mode from reading strategies

variable (X1) are nearly the same, so these data tent to have normal
distribution. (Irianto : 1988: 53)
To get clear description about score distribution of reading strategies

variable (X1) can be seen from the following table and figure.

Table 11
Frequency Distribution Data
Reading Strategies Variable (X1)

Absolute
Interval Class Relative Frequency
Frequency
(%)
146 – 154 12 3.75
155 – 163 24 7.50
164 – 172 36 11.25
173 – 181 53 16.57
182 – 190 66 20.63
191 – 199 49 15.31

200 – 208 37 11.56

209 – 217 21 6.56
218 – 226 21 6.56
227 – 235 1 0.31
Total 320 100 %
 55

70

66
60

50 53
49
Frequency

40

36 37
30

24
20
21 21

10 Std. Dev = 18.54

12
Mean = 187
0 N = 320.00
150 168 186 204 222
159 177 195 213 231

Reading Strategies (X1)

Figure 1
Histogram of Frequency Distribution
With Normal Curve

This figure shows the score distribution of Reading strategies variable

from 320 students. From this figure, 66 students (20.63%) are located in the

mean area, 129 students (40.31%) are above mean area and 125 students

(39.06%) are below mean area.

From this distribution, the data can be divided into three

classifications: high, average and low. If the score up to one standard

deviation from mean, it means that the score is high. If the score up and

below one standard deviation, the score is average , and if the score of

students is lower from one standard deviation, it means the score is low. The

calculation of these criteria can be seen from the following table.

 56

Table 12
The score of students based on the high, average and low category

Category Score Frequency Percent

high 206 – 228 45 14.06
Average 168 – 205 237 74.06
low 150 – 167 38 11.88
Total 320 100 %

Distribution of student’s score based on the table above indicate that

the score of reading strategies of Senior High School students in Padang at

2003/2004 academic year is generally located at average level 237 (74.06%).

2. Vocabulary Mastery

Vocabulary mastery data were collected from 320 students by using a

test. The test consisted of 26 questions. The distribution of this score is mean

73.63, median 74.00, mode 69.00, standard deviation 9.714, variance

94.371, range 42.00, minimum 50.00, maximum 92.00, and sum 23562.00.

The score of mean, median and mode from vocabulary mastery

variable (X2) are nearly the same, so these data tent to have normal

distribution.

To get clear description about score distribution of vocabulary

mastery variable (X2) can be seen from the following table and figure.
 57

Table 13
Frequency Distribution Data
Vocabulary Mastery Variable (X2)

Interval Class Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency

(%)
47 – 51 6 1.88
52 – 56 10 3.12
57 – 61 25 7.81
62 – 66 32 10.00
67 – 71 47 14.69
72 – 76 66 20.63

77 – 81 66 20.63
82 – 86 32 10.00
87 – 91 26 8.12
92 – 96 10 3.12
Total 320 100%

70

66 66
60

50

47
Frequency

40

30 32 32

25 26
20

10 Std. Dev = 9.71

10 10 Mean = 74
6
0 N = 320.00
49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94

Vocabulary Mastery (X2)

Figure 2
Histogram of Frequency Distribution
With Normal Curve
 58

This figure shows the score distribution of vocabulary mastery

variable from 320 students. From this figure, it shows that 66 students

(20.63%) are located in the mean area, 134 students (41.87%) are above

mean area and 120 students (37.5%) are below mean area.

From this distribution, the data can be divided into three

classifications: high, average and low. If the score up to one standard

deviation from mean, it means that the score is high. The calculation of these

criteria can be seen from the following table.

Table 14
The Score of students based on the high, average and low category

Category Score Frequency Percent

high 84 – 92 55 17.19
Average 63 – 83 219 68.43
low 50 – 62 46 14.38
Total 320 100 %

Distribution of student’s score based on the table above indicate that

the score of vocabulary mastery of Senior High School students in Padang at

2003/2004 academic year is generally located at average level 219 (68.43%).

3. Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension data were collected from 320 students by

using a test. The test consisted of 25 questions. The distribution of this score

is mean 76.76, median 77.00, mode 77.00, standard deviation 10.74,

variance 115.492, range 43.00, minimum 50.00, maximum 93.00, and sum

24564.
 59

The score of mean, median and mode from reading comprehension

variable (Y) are nearly the same, so these data tent to have normal

distribution.

To get clear description about score distribution of reading

comprehension variable (Y) can be seen from the following table and figure.

Table 15
Frequency Distribution Data
Reading Comprehension Variable (Y)

Interval Class Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency

(%)
48 – 52 8 2.50
53 – 57 9 2.81
58 – 62 21 6.56
63 – 67 22 6.87
68 – 72 40 12.5
73 – 77 67 20.94

78 – 82 49 15.31
83 – 87 47 14.69
88 – 92 30 9.38
93 – 97 27 8.44
Total 320 100
 60

70

67
60

50
49
47
Frequency

40
40

30
30
27
20 22
21

10 Std. Dev = 10.75

8 9 Mean = 77

0 N = 320.00
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95

Reading Comprehension (Y)

Figure 3
Histogram of Frequency Distribution
With Normal Curve

This figure shows the score distribution of Reading comprehension

variable from 320 students. From this figure, it can be seen that 64 students

(20%) are located in the mean area, 154 students (48.12%) is above mean

area and 102 students (31.88%) is below mean area.

From this distribution, the data can be divided into three

classifications: high, average and low. If the score up to one standard

deviation from mean, it means that the score is high. The calculation of these

criteria can be seen from the following table.

 61

Table 16
The score of students based on the high, average and low category

Category Score Frequency Percent

high 88 – 93 57 17.81
Average 66 – 87 203 63.43
Low 50 – 65 60 18.76
Total 320 100 %

Distribution of student’s score based on the table above indicate that

the score of reading comprehension of Senior High School students in Padang

at 2003/2004 academic year is generally located at average level 203

(63.43%).

B. Prerequisite Analysis

Research that use regression in data analysis needs to have

prerequisite analysis before coming to analyze hypothesis testing. These

prerequisites analysis are test of normality, test of linearity, test of

homogeneity, and test of multicolliniarity between independent variables.

1. Test of Normality.

To analyze the normality of the data, this research used Kolmogorov-

Smirnov (K-S) technique. It was used to reject or accept of making decision

distribution data at significance probability  = 0.05.

The data is stated at normal level if

Ho : distribution of data population is normal.

H1 : distribution of data population is not normal.

 62

Accept Ho : if significance probability greater than  = 0.05 or (sig.

probability > 0.05).

Reject Ho : if significance probability less than  = 0.05 or (sig.

probability < 0.05).

It can be seen from the table below.

Table 17
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Reading Vocabulary Reading
Statistics Strategies Mastery Comprehension
(X1) (X2) (Y)
N 320 320 320
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 187.4375 73.6312 76.7625
Std. Deviation 18.54274 9.71450 10.74672
Most Extreme Absolute .060 .074 .071
Differences Positive .060 .038 .065
Negative -.056 -.074 -.071
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1.069 1.325 1.276
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .203 .060 .077
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.

Based on the table above, it can be seen that Asymp. Sig. (2 tailed)

for reading strategies (X1) 0.203, Vocabulary mastery (X2) 0.060, and

reading comprehension (Y) 0.077. It means that these score are greater than

 = 0.05 or (sig. probability > 0.05). It can be concluded that Ho is accepted

and rejected H1, so it can be said that all variables have normal distribution.

2. Test of linearity.

Test of linearity is a test that is done to know whether data from

independent variables – reading strategies (X1) and vocabulary mastery (X2)

-tend to make linear line to dependent variable (in this case reading

comprehension (Y). It is also proved by statistical test.

 63

Ho : independent variables of data population make linear line

H1 : independent variables of data population do not make linear line

Accept Ho : if significance probability (deviation from linearity) greater than

 = 0.05 or (sig. probability> 0.05).

Rejected Ho : if Significant probability less than

 = 0.05 or (sig. probability < 0.05).

Table 18
Test of linearity between reading strategies (X1),
Vocabulary Mastery (X2) and Reading Comprehension.

ANOVA Table
Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Squares Square
Reading Between (Combined) 20224.454 63 321.023 4.946 .000
Comprehension Groups Linearity 9810.597 1 9810.597 151.137 .000
(Y) * Reading Deviation
Strategies (X1) 10413.857 62 167.965 2.588 .530
from Linearity
Within Groups 16617.496 256 64.912
Total 36841.950 319

ANOVA Table
Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Squares Square
Reading Between (Combined) 10606.615 31 342.149 3.756 .000
Comprehension Groups Linearity 5559.481 1 5559.481 61.030 .000
(Y) * Vocabulary Deviation
Mastery (X2) 5047.134 30 168.238 1.847 .610
from Linearity
Within Groups 26235.335 288 91.095
Total 36841.950 319

The tables above show that the significance scores of each variable

(X1 and X2 ) are 0.530 and 0.61 respectively. It is indicated that these scores

are greater than  = 0.05 or (sig. probability> 0.05).  = 0.05 or (sig.

probability> 0.05). It can be concluded that Ho is accepted and rejected H1,

 64

so it can be said that independent variables have relationship liniear with

dependent variable.

3. Test of homogeneity.

Test of homogeneity is done to see whether the data of the research

came from same variant (homogeny). It is also proved by statistical test.

Ho : independent variables of data came from same variant.

H1 : independent variables of data did not come from same variant.

Accept Ho : if significance probability greater than

 = 0.05 or (sig. probability> 0.05).

Rejected Ho : if Significant probability less than
 = 0.05 or (sig. probability < 0.05).
The result of the analysis can be seen below.

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Reading Strategies (X1)

Levene
df1 df2 Sig.
Statistic
1.895 35 284 .520

Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Vocabulary mastery (X2)

Levene
df1 df2 Sig.
Statistic
2.317 35 284 .600

Based on the table of analysis above, it can be seen that Significant

for reading strategies (X1) 0.520 and Vocabulary mastery (X2) 0.600. It

means that these score are greater than  = 0.05 or (sig. > 0.05). It can be
 65

concluded that Ho is accepted and rejected H 1, so it can be said that both

independent variables came from same variant or homogeny.

4. Test of Multicolliniarity.

Test of multicolliniarity between independent variables is done to

know whether independent variables ( Reading strategies and Vocabulary

mastery) influence each other. The regression is good if both independent

variables do not influence each other or the influent is small. It can be seen

from the correlation between independent variable. The score of correlation

between these variables must lower than 0.5 the result of the analysis can

be seen below.

Table 19
Test of co-linearity between independent variables

Correlations
Reading Vocabulary
Variables Statistics
Strategies Mastery
(X1) (X2)
Reading Pearson Correlation 1 .371**
Strategies (X1) Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 320 320
Vocabulary Pearson Correlation .371** 1
mastery (X2) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 320 320
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Based on the table of correlation above, it can be seen that the score

of correlation between independent variables, reading strategies and

Vocabulary mastery, 0.371. It means that this score is smaller than 0.5, so it
 66

can be concluded that both independent variables do not influence

significantly (Santoso:2000).

C. Hypothesis Testing

In this research the writer proposed three hypotheses:

1. There is contribution of reading strategies to

reading comprehension in English texts for the third year Senior

High School students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004.

It is used simple regression to prove hypothesis testing whether there

is contribution or not, between vocabulary mastery and reading

comprehension in English texts.

Ho = Reading strategies variable (X1) does not contribute significantly and

positively to reading comprehension (Y).

H1 = Reading strategies variable (X1) contributes significantly and

positively to reading comprehension (Y).

Accept Ho : if significance probability greater than

 = 0.05 or (sig. F Change > 0.05).

Rejected Ho : if significant probability is lower than

 = 0.05 or (sig. F. Change < 0.05).

The result of first hypothesis testing can be seen from the table

below.
 67

Table 20
Model Summary of Correlation Analysis
Between Reading Strategies (X1) and Reading Comprehension (Y)

Model Summary

Std.
Adjusted Change Statistics
r Error of
Model r r
Square the
Square
Estimate F Sig. F
Change df1 df2
Change
1 .516a .266 .264 9.220 115413 1 318 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Reading Strategies (X1)

From thiss table above, the correlation score (ry 1) is 0.516,

determination coefficient (r 2) is 0.266 and sig. F Change is 0.000. It means

that sig. F Change is lower than  = 0.05. It can be concluded that Ho is

rejected and accepted H1. So it can be said that there is contribution between

reading strategies and reading comprehension.

From this analysis it can be concluded that there is a significance

correlation and contribution between reading strategies and reading

comprehension in English texts for the third year Senior High School students

in Padang at the year of 2003/2004. The contribution is 26% while the other

74% is from other factors.

To know whether the form of correlation between reading strategies

(X1) with reading comprehension (Y) have predictive correlation, we use

linier regression equation Ŷ = a + b X 1. The calculation can be seen from

the table below.

 68

Table 21
Regression Coefficient between Reading Strategies (X1)
And Reading Comprehension (Y)

Coefficientsa
Standardiz
Unstandardized ed
Coefficients Coefficient
Model Variables t Sig.
s
Std.
B Beta
Error
1 (Constant) 20.705 5.243 3.949 .000
Reading
.299 .028 .516 10.743 .000
Strategies (X1)
a. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Table 22
ANOVA Table Calculation for F Testing
Reading Strategies (X1) and Reading Comprehension (Y)
ANOVAb
Sum of Mean
Model Source df F Sig.
Squares Square
1 Regression 9810.597 1 9810.597 115.413 .000a
Residual 27031.353 318 85.004
Total 36841.950 319
a. Predictors: (Constant), Reading Strategies (X1)
b. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Based on the tables above simple linear regression equation is Ŷ =

20.705 + 0.299X1, the sig. score is 0.00 <  = 0.05 and Sig. for F 0.000< 

= 0.05. It can be conclude that this regression equation is significant and can

be used as a prediction factor. It means that if reading strategies score(X1)

increase one point it will increase the reading comprehension score (Y). The

calculation is Ŷ = 20.705+0.299 X 1 Ŷ = 21.004. The figure of linear

regression line can be seen below.

 69

R e a d in g C o m p r e h e n s io n ( Y )
100

90

Ŷ = 20.705+0.299
80

70

60

Observed
50 Rsq = 0.2663

Linear
40 Rsq = 1.0000
140 160 180 200 220 240

Reading Strategies ( X1)

Figure 4
Linear Regression Equation Line
Ŷ = a +bX1

It is concluded that if Senior High School students in Padang at

2003/2004 academic year increase their reading strategies, their reading

comprehension will increase as well.

2. There is contribution of vocabulary mastery to

reading comprehension in English texts for the third year Senior

High School students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004.

It is used simple regression to prove hypothesis testing whether there

is contribution or not, between vocabulary mastery to reading

comprehension in English texts.

Ho = vocabulary mastery (X2) does not contribute significantly and

positively to reading comprehension (Y).

H1 = vocabulary mastery (X2) contributes significantly and positively to

reading comprehension (Y).

 70

Accept Ho : if significance probability greater than  = 0.05 or

(Sig. F Change > 0.05).

Rejected Ho : if Significant probability is lower than  = 0.05 or (sig.

F. Change < 0.05).

The result of second hypothesis testing can be seen from the table

below.

Table 23
Model Summary of Correlation Analysis
between Vocabulary Mastery (X2) and Reading Comprehension (Y)

Model Summary

Std.
Adjusted Change Statistics
r Error of
Model r r
Square the
Square
Estimate F Sig. F
df1 df2
Change Change
1 .388a .151 .148 9.918 56.515 1 318 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Vocabulary Mastery (X2)

From this table above, the correlation score (ry 2) is 0.388,

determination coefficient (r 2) is 0.151 and sig. F Change is 0.000. It means

that sig. F Change is lower than  = 0.05. It can be concluded that Ho is

rejected and accepted H1. So it can be said that there is contribution between

vocabulary mastery and reading comprehension.

From this analysis it can be concluded that there is a positive and

significance correlation and contribution between vocabulary mastery and

reading comprehension in English texts for the third year Senior High School

students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004. The contribution is 15.1%,

while the other 84.9% is from other factors.

 71

To know whether the form of correlation between vocabulary mastery

(X2) and reading comprehension (Y) have predictive correlation we use linier

regression equation Ŷ = a + b X2.

Table 24
Regression Coefficient between Vocabulary Mastery(X2)
and Reading Comprehension (Y)

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Standardized
Mode Coefficients Coefficients
Variables t Sig.
l Std.
B Beta
Error
1 (Constant) 45.121 4.245 10.628 .000
Vocabulary
.430 .057 .388 7.518 .000
Mastery (X2)
a. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Table 25
ANOVA Table Calculation for F Testing
Vocabulary Mastery (X2) and Reading Comprehension (Y)
ANOVAb
Sum of Mean
Model Source df F Sig.
Squares Square
1 Regression 5559.481 1 5559.481 56.515 .000a
Residual 31282.469 318 98.373
Total 36841.950 319
a. Predictors: (Constant), Vocabulary mastery (X2)
b. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Based on the table above simple linear regression equation is Ŷ =

45.121 + 0.430X2, the sig. score is 0.00 <  = 0.05 and Sig. for F 0.000 < 

= 0.05. It can be conclude that this regression equation is significant and can

be used as a prediction factor. It means that if vocabulary mastery score(X 2)

 72

increase one point, it will increase the reading comprehension score (Y). The

calculation is Ŷ = 45.121+0.430 X 1 Ŷ = 45.551.

The figure of simple regression equation line can be seen below .

100
R ea din g C om p re he nsio n (Y)

90

Ŷ =45.121+ 0.430
80

70

60

Observed
50 Rsq = 0.1509

Linear
40 Rsq = 1.0000
40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Vocabulary Mastery (X2)

Figure 5
Linear Regression Equation Line
Ŷ = a +bX2

It is concluded that if Senior High School students in Padang at

2003/2004 academic year increase their vocabulary mastery, their reading

comprehension will also increase.

 73

3. There is contribution both of reading strategies

and vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension in English

texts for the third year Senior High School students in Padang at

the year of 2003/2004.

It is used multiple regression to prove hypothesis testing whether

there is contribution or not, among reading strategies and vocabulary

mastery to reading comprehension in English texts.

Ho = both reading strategies (X1) and vocabulary mastery (X2) do not

contribute significantly and positively to reading comprehension (Y).

H1 = both reading strategies (X1) and vocabulary mastery (X2) contribute

significantly and positively to reading comprehension (Y).

Accept Ho : if significance probability greater than  = 0.05 or

(Sig. F Change > 0.05).

Rejected Ho : if Significant probability is lower than  = 0.05 or (sig.

F. Change < 0.05).

 74

The result of third hypothesis testing can be seen from the table below.

Table 26
Model Summary of Correlation Analysis
Among Reading Strategies (X1), Vocabulary Mastery (X2) and Reading
Comprehension (Y)
Model Summary

Std.
Adjusted Change Statistics
r Error of
Model r r
Square the
Square
Estimate F Sig. F
df1 df2
Change Change
1 .558a .311 .307 8.947 71.647 2 317 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Vocabulary Mastery (X2), Reading Strategies (X1)

From this table above, the correlation score (ry 12) is 0.558,

determination coefficient (r 2) is 0.311 and sig. F Change is 0.000. It means

that sig. F Change is lower than  = 0.05. It can be concluded that Ho is

rejected and accepted H1. So it can be said that. There is contribution both of

reading strategies and vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension in

English texts for the third year Senior High School students in Padang at the

year of 2003/2004.

From this analysis it can be concluded that there is a positive and

significance correlation and contribution between vocabulary mastery and

reading comprehension. The contribution is 31.1% while the other 68.9% is

from other factors.

To know whether the form of correlation among reading strategies

(X1), vocabulary mastery (X2) and reading comprehension (Y) have

 75

predictive correlation, it is used linear regression equation Ŷ = a + bX 1+bX2..

Resume of calculation can be seen from the tables below.

Table 27
Regression Coefficient between Reading Strategies (X1) Vocabulary
Mastery (X2) and Reading Comprehension (Y)
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model Variables t Sig.
Std.
B Beta
Error
1 (Constant) 11.300 5.491 2.058 .040
Reading
.250 .029 .431 8.593 .000
Strategies (X1)
Vocabulary
.253 .056 .228 4.552 .000
Mastery (X2)
a. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Table 28
ANOVA table calculation for F testing
Reading Strategies (X1), Vocabulary Mastery (X2)
and Reading Comprehension (Y)
ANOVAb
Sum of Mean
Model Source df F Sig.
Squares Square
1 Regression 11469.307 2 5734.653 71.647 .000a
Residual 25372.643 317 80.040
Total 36841.950 319
a. Predictors: (Constant), Vocabulary Mastery (X2), Reading Strategies (X1)
b. Dependent Variable: Reading Comprehension (Y)

Based on the table above multiple linear regression equation is Ŷ =

11.300 + 0.250X1 + 0.253X2 the sig. score for “t” is 0.000 for X 1 and 0.000

for X2 <  = 0.05 and Sig. for “F” 0.000 <  = 0.05. It can be conclude that

this linear regression equation is significant and can be used as a prediction

factor. It means that If reading strategies score(X1) and vocabulary mastery

(X2) increase one point, it will increase the reading comprehension score (Y).

The calculation is
 76

Ŷ = 11.300 + 0.250X1 + 0.253X2

Ŷ = 11.300+ 0.250 X 1 + 0.253 X 1

Ŷ = 11.803

It can be concluded that if Senior High School students in Padang at

2003/2004 academic year increase their reading strategies and vocabulary

mastery, their reading comprehension will also increase.

The figure of multiple linear regression equation line can be seen below.

Linear Regression
Reading Comprehension (Y) = 11.30 + 
0.25 * x1 + 0.25 * x2
R-Square = 0.31 
  

     
 
  
     

  
  

  
      
 
   

  

  
 
 



   
  
 







 
 
  

  






  
  
  

  
    
  
 



    
   

      
 
 
 

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

Figure 6
Multiple Linear Regression Equation Line
Ŷ = a + bX1+bX2.
 77

4. Relative Contribution and Effective Contribution

The score of relative contribution (RC) and effective contribution (EC)

from both reading strategies variable (X1) and vocabulary mastery (X2) to

reading comprehension (Y) can be seen in appendix and the table below.

Table 29
Resume of Relative Contribution and
Effective Contribution Variable X1 and X2 to Y

Variables Relative Effective

Contribution Contribution
X1 to Y 63.88% 19.87 %
X2 to Y 36.12% 11.23 %
100.00 31.10%

From this table can be explained that reading strategies variable

contributes 19.87% to effective contribution to reading comprehension

English texts for the third year Senior High School students in Padang at the

year of 2003/2004, while vocabulary mastery variable contributes 11.23% to

reading comprehension English texts for the third year Senior High School

students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004. So, both of these variables

give effective contribution 31.10% to reading comprehension.

However, the contribution from both variables is effective contribution

that is still influenced by interaction of both independent variables. To know

the real effective contribution of both independent variables need to further

analysis. The analysis technique that is used is partial correlation. The

resume of this analysis can be seen in the appendix and the table below.
 78

Partial Correlation Determination

Correlation Coefficient Coefficient P
ry1-2 0.4346 0.189 0.000

ry2-1 0.2477 0.061 0.000

This table shows that the correlation between variable X1 and variable

Y when variable X2 is controlled, correlation coefficient is 0.4346 and

determination coefficient is 0.189. This means that reading strategies of

Senior High School students in Padang at 2003/2004 academic year

contributes 18.9% to reading comprehension if vocabulary mastery of the

student is constant. While the correlation coefficient between vocabulary

mastery variable and reading comprehension variable is 0.2477 and

determination coefficient is 0.061 when reading strategies variable is

controlled. It means that vocabulary mastery of Senior High School students

in Padang at 2003/2004 academic year contributes 6.1% to reading

comprehension if reading strategies variable is in constant condition.

D. Discussion

This study revealed that there is significant and positive contribution

of both reading strategies and vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension

in English texts for Senior High School students in Padang at the year of

2003/2004. It is proved by three hypotheses testing. First, reading strategies

is contributed to reading comprehension. The contribution is positive and

significant. From data analysis above, it can be seen that effective

contribution of reading strategies to reading comprehension is 19.87%.

 79

Second, hypothesis is also proved that there is positive and significant

contribution between vocabulary mastery and reading comprehension. The

effective contribution is 11.23%. Third, the effective contribution of both

reading strategies and vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension is

31.10%.

However, if we look at the total contribution of both reading

strategies and vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension English text of

Senior High School students in Padang at 2003/2004 academic year is still

low. Theoretically, reading strategies and vocabulary mastery are dominant

factors in understanding English text.

McWhorter (1992:23) said that reading strategies can increase

reading comprehension significantly if the students use many strategies in

reading comprehension. In addition Honsenfeld (in Oxford, 1990:1996) also

stated that there are many strategies in reading comprehension in order to

understand reading comprehension effectively. Based on these theories, and

indication in the field, the ability of reading strategies of Senior High School

students in Padang at 2003/2004 categorically still low.

Actually, this condition is related to the time of studying English in the

school. The students do not have much time to study English since there are

many subjects to have study in the same time. Another factor why students

have low ability in reading strategies is lack of English literature in the school.

Although the contribution of vocabulary mastery to reading

comprehension is positive and significant, the real condition of the third year

Senior High School students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004 in mastering

 80

vocabulary is still low as well. Because the effective contribution of

vocabulary mastery to reading comprehension variable contributes only

11,23% and contributes only 6.1% when reading strategies variable is

controlled. Ellen (1997:49) said that vocabulary is an important part in

language, and should be learn continually by the student. It means

vocabulary mastery is the basic need that has to have by the third year

Senior High School students in Padang at the year of 2003/2004. It is

impossible to understand English if they do not master English vocabulary.

The more the students master English vocabulary the more they get from

English text.

As an addition, Whorter (in Yusuf, 1991:34) also said that vocabulary

development should be improved by the students. It is not only influence in

reading skill but also in writing, listening, and speaking skills. In vocabulary

development, it also involves more than having new many vocabularies. The

students should know how to use appropriate words in an appropriate

sentence, such as kind of words, and changing of words.

From the real condition of the third year Senior High School students

in Padang at the year of 2003/2004, both reading strategies and vocabulary

mastery need to be improved in order to understand reading comprehension

comprehensively. An effective effort have to be done by everyone who is in

charge – especially for teachers of English subject – how to improve the

ability of the third year Senior High School students in Padang at the year of

2003/2004 deal with reading strategies and vocabulary mastery in

understanding reading comprehension an English text.

 81

E. Limitation of the Study

In conducting this research, the writer just examines two aspects that

effect reading comprehension, that are; reading strategies and vocabulary

mastery. Actually there are many aspects that can be affected reading

comprehension. It is writer’s limitation ability why the writer only chooses

these factors, but this choice based on the related literature.

Although this study involve methodology and procedures that are

suitable for quantitative research, the writer believe in conducting this

research there are many aspects that influent the quality of this research

such as in getting data from a set of questionnaires. It is the students

honesty based in answering the questions. It means the quality of the

research based on the students’ honesty. The more objective the students

answer the questions the more valid the research will be and will describe

the real condition of the population. Data for vocabulary mastery and reading

comprehension variable are collected from test. Although the questions had

been testing for validity, reliability, difficulty index and determining of power,

but the questions are still limited only 26 questions for X2 and 25 for Y. It

needs more questions constitute from extend indicators to get more real

condition of the students. It is hope for next researchers to conduct research

more comprehensible.