Cooperative integrated reading and composition (CIRC) with mind mapping strategy and its effects on chemistry achievement and motivation http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v17

Research Design

This research can be put under the category of quasi-experimental study which focusing on the teaching of chemistry. The design of the research according to Cresswell (2012) is the design of pre-test and post-test.

Table 1. Research Design

Group	Pre-test	Teaching Strategies	Post-test
Treatment	T1	X1	T2
Control	T1	X2	T2

Table 1 shows the design of the study by Campbell and Stanley (1979); T1 represents the pre-test treatment group and the control group. The T2 represents the post-test for the treatment group and the control group. X1 dan X2 represent teaching strategies given to the treatment and control groups. Treatment group used the integration of cooperative learning instructional strategies in reading and writing and a mind map while the control group used conventional instruction.

Intervention related to experimental group

In teaching using cooperative integrated reading and writing with mind mapping strategy, students was write in the form of a mind map after they are done with the discussion on ideas or keywords in the reading material, Creativity in making a mind map is up to each group to design the mind map. It aims to develop and enhance students' thinking skills in finding the ideas of each individual and write them in a unique and coloured form of mind maps. More details can be seen in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2. Flowchart of the Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition with Mind Maps

This learning strategy used cooperative learning methods. Learning activities during teaching and learning is to form a group, read, analyze literature, discuss, create mind maps, and presentations. Pre-tests were made in the first week of implementation; students in the experimental group were informed of the group works required by CIRC and mind mapping strategy. We explained how the groups would be established, duties would be assigned and the activities would be carried out (such as deciding on the name of the group, etc.). In the second till the fifth week of implementation, Sentences and texts in the worksheets handed out to students were read in the scope of reading (students to read accurately the texts in their own worksheet and then make small discussion for comprehending the topic) and create mind maps (groups were asked to write down the sentences on the paper that was handed out to group and making a map). Finally; the researcher entered performance exerted by groups in the previous activities on each group’s scoreboard and the most successful group was awarded in class in the fifth week. Pos-tests were made in the sixth week of implementation.

Sample Research

For the sampel, 64 students from 2 different classes were chosen for study. Both classes have similar academic performances and are taught by the same Chemistry teacher. The sample consists of students at Senior High school of Darul Hikmah who are from XI science1 (32) class and XI science2 class. Next, XI science1 class was randomly determined as treatment group by infusing learning strategies in cooperative reading and writing with mind maps and XI science2 class as the control group with conventional teaching strategies.

Research Instrument

a. Chemistry Achievement Test

Students’ performances in chemistry were measured by test that posed in the pre-test and post-test. The test were designed by the researcher in collaboration with the teachers at the school and based on chemistry syllabus. The construction of the achievement test is in accordance with the Test Determination Schedule based on Bloom's Taxonomy skills level.

Table 2. Determination of Pre- and Post- Achievement Test

Category	Cognitive				No Item
Category	C1	C2	C3	C4	No Item
Classifying rough suspension, true solution, and colloids		1			2
Classifying rough suspension, true solution, and colloids	1				2
Classifying the types of colloids based on dispersed phase and dispersing phase		6			8
	2				8
Describing the role of colloids in cosmetics, foods and pharmaceuticals industry				2	4
		1
			1
Explaining liofil and liofob colloids			1		3
	1
		1
Describing the characteristics of colloids				3	6
			1
		2
Explaining the manufacturing process of colloids by trial			1		2
Explaining the manufacturing process of colloids by trial		1			2
Total Item						25

b. Motivation Questionnaire

The motivation questionnaire is prepared for both groups. Section A collects data on the students’ background. Section B collects data on students’ motivation that was divided into two parts which are intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Motivation section contains 31 items that provide information on the students’ intrinsic motivation (16 items) and extrinsic motivation (15 items).

Table 3. Constructs of Motivation Questionnaire

Constructs Measured	Item	Total item
Intrinsic Motivation	B1,B4,B6,B8,B9,B11,B13, B15,B17,B19, B21,B20,B22,B24,B26,B29	16
Extrinsic Motivation	B2,B3,B5,B7,B10,B12,B14, B16, B18, B23,B25,B27,B28,B30,B31	15

Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability of the instruments are necessary elements in study, where they referred to the extent to which the instrument measures what it is to be measured or the extent to which the instrument is accurate and precise (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997).

a. Validity of Chemistry Achievement Test

Table 5 shows that the difficulty index of the chemistry achievement test questions is at a moderate level. Thus, the difficulty of the question is balanced and almost complete. The value of the Discriminant Index for every question item in the chemistry achievement test was between 18.18% and 100%. This shows that every item has a discriminant index between levels of bad and very good. The value of the difficulty index of each item in the chemistry achievement test was between 35.90 and 69.23. Karno (1996) noted that the best difficulty index that should be used for each item is moderate level. In this research each item of the test performance at a moderate level. From the analysis, there are some questions that were modified to balance the questions to be at average level in overall status, and the questions developed can be used to measure chemistry achievement.

Table 4. Discriminant Index and Difficulty Index Value of Chemistry Achievement Test

Topic	Question no	Discrimination Index (%)	Difficulty Index	Difficulty Index Interpretation
Colloid	1	63.64	48.72	Moderate
	2	81.82	61.54	Moderate
	3	54.55	69.23	Moderate
	4	18.18	66.67	Moderate
	5	27.27	66.67	Moderate
	6	72.73	64.10	Moderate
	7	100.0	66.67	Moderate
	8	54.55	64.10	Moderate
	9	81.82	69.23	Moderate
	10	100	66.67	Moderate
	11	36.36	35.90	Moderate
	12	81.82	46.15	Moderate
	13	100	53.85	Moderate
	14	90.91	61.54	Moderate
	15	72.73	66.67	Moderate
	16	72.73	56.41	Moderate
	17	81.82	64.10	Moderate
	18	63.64	64.10	Moderate
	19	45.45	58.97	Moderate
	20	72.73	61.54	Moderate
	21	36.36	61.54	Moderate
	22	54.55	66.67	Moderate
	23	18.18	46.15	Moderate
	24	90.91	58.97	Moderate
	25	72.73	58.97	Moderate

b. Validity of Motivation Questionnaire

The Cronbach’s Alpha value was used to obtain the reliability for every construct in resarch. The results of the analysis were shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Reliability Index of Motivation Questionnaire

Construct	Cronbach’s Alpha (>0.6)
Intrinsic motivation	0.792
Extrinsic motivation	0.752

Based on Table 5, the Cronbach’s alpha reliability index for students’ intrinsic motivation aspect towards chemistry (16 items) is 0.792. Additionally, the Cronbach’s alpha reliability for students’ extrinsic motivation aspect towards chemistry (15 items) is 0.752.