Enhancing English Reading Comprehension in Secondary School Students through Pair Check Technique: Insights into Effective Teaching Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research was carried out to investigate the use of Pair Check technique on improving students’ reading comprehension on narrative text at grade X of SMKS 1 Tamansiswa. The research methodology used in this research was a quantitative method. The population of this research was grade X of SMKS 1 Tamansiswa in the academic year 2024/2025. The researcher took two classes as the sample. The samples were X-MPLB 1 as experimental group consisted of 25 students and X-MPLB 2 as control group consisted of 25 students. The experimental group was taught by Pair Check technique meanwhile control group was taught by Conventional technique. The data were obtained by using pre-test and post-test given to both groups. The experimental class’ mean score on the pre-test was 66,4 and the mean score of control class was 58. On the other hand, the mean of variable in experimental class on post-test was 80,4, while the mean score of control class on post-test was 68. To acquire data, the researcher used test as instrument. The result of t-test was 3,536 which was higher than t-table at 5% of level significance (1,6772). The result of significance value indicates that alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted, while the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected. It meant that there was significant effect by using Pair Check technique at grade X of SMKS Tamansiswa in reading comprehension narrative text. In short, the Pair Check technique enhances students' critical thinking skills by encouraging them to analyze and discuss texts collaboratively. This method promotes active engagement with the material, allowing learners to clarify misunderstandings and reinforce their comprehension through peer interaction. Additionally, Pair Check fosters a supportive learning environment where students can build confidence in their reading abilities and develop effective communication skills.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".