Result

The normality test was used to measure weather the data in the experimental class and control
class are normally distributed or not. Table 1 present the Result of normality test of the
experimental and control class, there are some differences of the result control class and
experimental class.

Shapiro-Wilk
Class
Statistic Df Sig.

Experimental .959 19 .555

Control .916 17 .125

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Based on Table 1, it can be seen that Pvalue (Sig.) for experimental class was 0.555 and Pvalue
(Sig.) for control class was 0.125. Because Sig. (Pvalue) of experimental class > α 0.05. So,
Ho is accepted and Sig. (Pvalue) for the control class > α 0.05. So, Ha is rejected. The
conclusion is the data in the experimental class and control class has normal distribution.

Table 2 shown the mean and levene statistic of homogeneity test of the experimental and
control class by using SPSS according to student scores.

Levene
df1 df2 Sig.
Statistic
Score Based on Mean .001 1 34 .981

Based on the results obtained in the test of homogeneity of variances in the column, it could be
seen that Sig. (Pvalue) = 0.981 > α = 0.05. It demonstrated that Ho was accepted because Sig.
(Pvalue) > α = 0.05. It means that the variance of the data was homogenous.
Descriptive statistics of reading score in both class Experimental class and control class were
shown in this table below.

4.5

4
Mean = 37.45
3.5
Std.Dev = 14.738
3
N = 22
2.5
Frequency

1.5

0.5

0
16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 80
Score

As the figure 1 shows, before the researcher give the treatment, there are 4 students got score
32, 2 students got score 20, 1 student got score 16, 1 student got score 24, 3 students got
score 28, 2 students got score 36, 2 students got score 40, 2 students got score 44, 1 student
got score 48, 1 student got score 52, 2 students got score 56, 1 students got score 80.

Thus, the researcher got the mean of pretest in experimental class was 37.45, standard
deviation was 14.738, N was 22, median was 34.00, mode was 32, variance was 217.212,
minimum score was 16, maximum score was 80. It showed student’ reading comprehension
before they got treatments.

The post was employed to find out the effect of using group investigation toward reading
comprehension, the researcher conduct pretest and posttest to compare both of them, SPSS
was conducted to analyzing the mean and std dev in terms of reading score. (see Figure 2)

7
Mean = 80.6
6
Std.Dev = 11.033

5 N = 20

4
Frequency

0
56 60 64 72 76 80 84 88 92 96
Score
The results, as demonstrated in Figure 2, after conducted the treatment, student reading
comprehension had a significant effect on the student’ post-test reading scores. There were
6 students got score 88, 1 student got score 56, 1 student got score 60, 1 student got score
64, 2 students got score 72, 1 student got score 76, 4 students got score 80, 1 students got
score 84, 2 students got score 92, 1 student got score 96.

Furthermore, the mean of post-test in experimental class was 80.6, standard deviation was
11.033, N was 20, median was 83.20, mode was 88, variance was 121.726, minimum score
was 56, maximum score was 96. It showed the indication significant effect after giving the
treatment.

To answer the research question, concerning the influence of using group investigation
toward student reading comprehension, independent sample t-test was used to checking the
value of significant generated Sig. (Pvalue) to compare student score between pretest and
posttest.

t Df Sig. (2-tailed)

4.388 34 .000

As Table 3 displays, obtained in the independent sample t-test in Table 1, the value of
significant generated Sig. (Pvalue) = 0.000 < α = 0.05. Hence, Ha is accepted and Ho is
rejected. Based on the computation, respectively, indicating a significant influence of using
Group Investigation toward student reading comprehension.