The Effect of PQRST and SGD Methods on Students’ Reading Comprehension at Dehasen University

  • Mariska Febrianti Universitas Dehasen Bengkulu
Keywords: PQRS Method, Small Group Discussion Method, Reading Comprehension


This research aims to compare the effectiveness of two methods, PQRST (Preview, Question, Read, State and Test) and SGD (Small Group Discussion). It was carried out at the second semester students of Penjaskesrek Department, Dehasen University. The design was a quasi-experiment. The sample consisted of two classes; one was taught by the PQRST method and another by the SGD method. The instrument was a reading test, which was tried-out; the reliability was 0.917 (very high). The result was as follows: at the pretest, there was no significant difference between both group on all aspects and at the post test, there were no significant difference between both groups on general comprehension, reading to learn from the text, and reading to integrate information. However, SGD was found to be more effective on finding general information while PQRST was found to be more effective on reading to skim and finding simple information.


Ahmad, C. (2013). The Effectiveness of Small Group Discussion Method in Teaching Reading. Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Arikunto, S. (2006). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktek. Jakarta, Indonesia: Rineka Cipta.

Barker, L. (1987). Communication. Englewood Cliffts. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc.

Champion, A. J. (2006). Neuropsychological rehabilitation: A resource for group-based education and intervention. England: John Wiley & sons Ltd.

Cresswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research : Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education.

Febtiningsih, P., Zaim & Jufrizal. (2013). The Effect of PQRST and QAR techniques on students’ with low interest on their reading comprehension procedure texts: Study at grade vii of SMPN 2 padang. West Sumatra, Indonesia: Journal English Language Teaching (ELT) Vol. 1 No. 1.

Hamra & Syatriana, (2010). Developing a model of teaching reading comprehension for efl students. Teflin Journal Vol. 21 No. 1 p. 28

Heaton, J. B. (1998). Writing english language test. England: Longman Group UK Limited.

Kothari C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Method and techniques. New Delhi, India: New Age International Publisher.

Miqawati, A., & Sulistyo, H.(2014). The PQRST strategy, reading comprehension and learning styles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistic.Vol. 4 No.1.

Nunan, D. (1992). Research method in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Paul, E. (2005). Methods for teaching promoting students learning in K-12 classroom. Boston, San Fransisco: Allin Bacon.

Ria, A. (2007). The Teaching of reading comprehension by using small group discussion method at the first year students of smpn 1 wanadadi. Semarang, Indonesia : Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Sagala, S. (2008). Konsep dan makna pembelajaran. Bandung, Indonesia : Alfabeta.

Sandiarsa, S., Tantra, D., & Ratminingsih, N. M. (2013). Comparative study of PQRST and SQ3R strategies based on the text types upon the eighth grade students’ reading competency at smpn 4 bali. Bali, Indonesia: e-jurnal Program Pasca sarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha Vol. 1.

Septiari. (2013). Improving reading comprehension through PQRST students reading comprehension of eight grade students of SMPN 2 banjarangkan. Bali, Indonesia: Mahsaraswati Denpasar University.

Sundari, M., Wijaya, N. & Isni, L. (2010).The Use of PQRST method with CTL approach toward students’ learning outcome on chemistry subject. Semarang, Indonesia: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia Vol. 4 No. 1.

Umiyati. (2011). The Effectiveness of small group interaction in teaching reading comprehension (experimental study at seventh grade of SMP sunan bonang, tangerang). Jakarta, Indonesia: Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University.

How to Cite
Febrianti, M. (2018). The Effect of PQRST and SGD Methods on Students’ Reading Comprehension at Dehasen University. Journal of English Education Studies, 1(2), 86-98.