A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVE … · 2017-12-18 · keterampilan menulis siswa di kelas 8A...

i

A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVE

LEARNING STRATEGIES TO DEVELOP STUDENTS’

WRITING SKILLS IN CLASS 8A OF SMP BOPKRI 1

YOGYAKARTA

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Agata Nina Puspita

Student Number: 121214066

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAMME

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2016

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVELEARNING STRATEGIES TO DEVELOP STUDENTS'WRITING SKILLS IN CLASS 8A OF SMP BOPKRI 1

YOGYAKARTA

By

Agata Nina Puspita

Student Number: 121214066

Advisor

I

Paulus Kuswandono, Ph.D.

11

11 May 2016


A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVELEARNING STRATEGIES TO DEVELOP STUDENTS'WRITING SKILLS IN CLASS 8A OF SMP BOPKRI 1

YOGYAKARTA

By

Agata Nina PuspitaStudent Number: 121214066

Defended before the Board of Examinerson 1 June 2016

and Declared Acceptable

Chairperson : Paulus Kuswandono, Ph.D.

Secretary : Christina Lhaksrnita Anandari, Ed.M.

Member : Paulus Kuswandono, Ph.D.

Member : Christina Lhaksrnita Anandari, Ed.M.

Member : Laurentia Sumarni, M.Trans.St.

Board of Examiners

Yogyakarta, 1 June 2016

I

Faculty of Teachers Training and Education

Sanata Dharma University

III


iv

FAILURE IS A

SUCCESS IF YOU

LEARN FROM IT!

This thesis is dedicated to:

Jesus Christ

Bapak Ignatius Sutoto, Ibu Theresia Krisyani

Agnes Rini Puspita

All family


STATEMENT OF WORK'S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written,' does not contain the work

or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the

references, as a specific paper should.

Yogyakarta,l June 2016

The writer

Ag ta Nina Puspita

21214066

v


LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN

PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang betanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama : Agata Nina Puspita

NIM : 121214066

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan

Universitas Sanata Dharma, karya ilmiah saya yang beljudu1:

A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVELEARNING STRATEGIES TO DEVELOP STUDENTS'WRITING SKILLS IN CLASS SA OF SMP BOPKRI 1

YOGYAKARTA

Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (hila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan

kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dhanlla hak untuk menyimpan,

mengalihkan dalam bentuk lain, mengelolanya da1am bentuk pangkalan data,

mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media

lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perIu meminta izin dari saya maupun

memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai

penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sehenarnya.

Dihuat di Yogyakarta

Pada tanggal 1 Juni 2016

Yang menyatakan

(Ag~a Puspita)

vi


vii

ABSTRACT

Puspita, Agata Nina. (2016). A Correlational Study on Metacognitive Learning

Strategies to Develop Students’ Writing Skills in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Metacognitive learning strategies are one of the writing strategies that can

be applied to develop students‟ writing skills. This research aimed to find out

whether there is a positive and significant relationship between metacognitive

learning strategies and students‟ writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. The hypothesis is whether there is a significant correlation between

metacognitive learning strategies and students‟ writing skills in class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta or not. The two problems formulated in this research are

(1) What are the students‟ responses to writing recount texts when they use

metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?; (2)

Is there any correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the

students‟ writing skills for writing recount texts in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?

This research employed a correlational study. The subjects of the study

were 30 students in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The research sample

was drawn by using simple random technique sampling. There were two kinds of

variables in this research. The first one was students‟ metacognitive learning

strategies as the independent variable. The second one was students‟ writing skills

as the dependent variable.

To analyse the data obtained, this research used Pearson‟s Product-

moment Simple Correlation. Students‟ metacognitive learning strategies were

measured using a questionnaire method. The questionnaire was adapted based on

theories of metacognitive learning strategies. English writing skills were tested by

a written test from the recount texts. The researcher used interviews to find out the

students‟ responses to writing when using metacognitive learning strategies, as

well as interviewing the English teacher to strengthen the result findings.

The results of this research showed that there were positive responses on

writing recount texts from the students when using metacognitive learning

strategies in the writing classes because it helped the students to center their

learning, arrange and plan their learning, and evaluate their learning. Besides,

there was a significant correlation between the students‟ metacognitive learning

strategies and the students‟ writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta (r = 0.627 > r table = 0.449). Therefore, the teacher needs to consider

metacognitive learning strategies in order to develop their writing skills in the

learning process.

Keywords: students‟ writing skills, students‟ metacognitive learning strategies,

correlational research


viii

ABSTRAK

Puspita, Agata Nina. (2016). A Correlational Study on Metacognitive Learning

Strategies to Develop Students’ Writing Skills in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Strategi pembelajaran metacognitive adalah salah satu strategi

menulisyang dapat diterapkan untuk mengembangkan keterampilan menulis

siswa. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah ada hubungan yang

positif dan signifikan antara strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dan

keterampilan menulis siswa di kelas 8A SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

Hipotesisnya adalah apakah ada korelasi yang signifikan antara strategi

pembelajaran metacognitive dengan keterampilan menulis siswa di kelas 8A SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta atau tidak. Ada dua masalah yang dirumuskan dalam

penelitian ini yaitu (1) Apakah respon siswa ketika menulis teks recount dengan

menggunakan strategi pembelajaran metacognitive di kelas 8A SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta?; (2) Apakah ada korelasi antara strategi pembelajaran

metacognitive dan keterampilan menulis siswa untuk menulis teks recount di SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?

Penelitian ini menggunakan sebuah studi korelasi. Subjek-subjek

penelitian ini adalah 30 siswa di kelas 8A SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Sampel

penelitian diambil dengan menggunakan simple random technique sampling. Ada

dua jenis variabel dalam penelitian ini. Pertama adalah strategi pembelajaran

metacognitive siswa sebagai variabel bebas. Kedua adalah keterampilan menulis

siswa sebagai variabel terikat.

Untuk menganalisis data yang diperoleh, penelitian ini menggunakan

Pearson‟s Product-moment Simple Correlation. Strategi pembelajaran

metacognitive siswa diukur menggunakan metode kuesioner. Kuesioner ini

disesuaikan berdasarkan teori-teori strategi pembelajaran metacognitive.

Keterampilan menulis bahasa Inggris diuji dengan tes tertulis dari teks recount.

Peneliti menggunakan wawancara untuk mengetahui respon siswa dalam menulis

ketika menggunakan strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dan untuk memperkuat

hasil penemuan-penemuan dengan mewawancarai guru bahasa Inggris.

Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ada tanggapan positif dalam

menulis teks recount dari para siswa saat menggunakan strategi pembelajaran

metacognitive di kelas menulis karena membantu siswa untuk memusatkan

pembelajaran mereka, mengatur dan merencanakan pembelajaran mereka, dan

mengevaluasi pembelajaran mereka. Selain itu, ada korelasi signifikan antara

strategi pembelajaran metacognitive siswa dan kemampuan menulis siswa di

kelas 8A SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta (r = 0.627 > r tabel = 0.449).). Oleh karena

itu, guru perlu mempertimbangkan strategi pembelajaran metacognitive untuk

mengembangkan keterampilan menulis dalam proses belajar.

Kata kunci: students‟ writing skills, students‟ metacognitive learning strategies,

correlational research


ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, I would like to devote my deepest gratitude to Jesus Christ and

Mother Mary for giving me love, blessings, strength, courage, and compassion in

in every single moment of my life, especially during the process of finishing this

thesis. They know what is best for me and have a perfect plan in my life.

Secondly, I would like to express my greatest gratitude to my advisor,

Paulus Kuswandono, Ph.D., for his guidance, suggestions and motivation in the

long process of making this thesis. I really thank him for spending his valuable

time to correct my thesis in the middle of his busy days. I learned many valuable

life lessons from him.

Next, I would like to express my gratitude to Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo,

S.Pd., M.A., my Academic Advisor, and the lecturers of ELESP, Sanata Dharma

University for their lectures and guidance. I would also like to express my

appreciation to the Secretariat Staff of ELESP, Mbak Danik and Mas Yudo for

giving me a lot of contributions throughout these four years.

I would extend my gratitude to Bapak Paryadi, S.Pd. for giving me the

permission to conduct the research in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. I would also

express my gratitude to Bapak Daru Kurniawan, S. Pd., for his sincere help and

support during my research and for letting me conduct the research in his class. I

would also like to send huge thanks to the students of class 8A academic year

2015/2016 for being cooperative participants in the research.


x

I would like to deliver my best gratitude to Bapak Ignatius Sutoto and

Ibu Theresia Krisyani for their unconditional love, help and prayer. I thank them

for their guidance, patience, support and trust that they give to me. I promise to

always be their best daughter. I also thank my little sister, Agnes Rini Puspita for

her support, patience, motivation, and prayer.

I would also like to thank all the teachers and staffs in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta for their guidance, support and suggestion. I am also thankful to

Vania for helping me and giving her time during the research in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Next, I also thank Gratia, Vita, Dita, Venny and Tisa for their

support and love.

My gratitude also goes to all members of PBI 2012, especially PBI 2012

Class C for the unforgettable memories we have had and for becoming my new

family. I would like to give special thanks to EMC, PPL SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta, FIDES and KKN LI Kelompok 43 Watulawang 2. I love them so

much.

At last, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to those whose names

cannot be mentioned one by one for their contributions and support in finalising

this thesis.

Agata Nina Puspita


xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………..... i

APPROVAL PAGES ……………………………………………………..... ii

DEDICATION PAGE ……………………………………………………... iv

STATEMENT OF WORKS‟S ORIGINALITY ………………………........ v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ……………………………... vi

ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………... vii

ABSTRAK …………………………………………………………………... viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………... ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………... xi

LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………. xiv

LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………………... xv

LIST OF APPENDICES …………………………………………………… xvi

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………...

A. Research Background ………………………………………………….

B. Research Problems ……………………………………………………..

C. Problem Limitation …………………………………………………….

D. Research Objectives ……………………………………………………

E. Research Benefits ……………………………………………………...

F. Definitions of Terms …………………………………………………...

1

1

5

6

7

7

8

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ………………….

A. Theoretical Description ………………………………………………..

1. The Students‟ Responses to Writing Skills ………………………...

2. Metacognitive Learning Strategies …………………………………

3. Writing Recount texts Using Metacognitive Learning Strategies …

B. Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………...

C. Hypothesis ……………………………………………………………..

12

12

12

16

19

23

25


xii

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ………………………….

A. Research Method ………………………………………………………

B. Research Setting ……………………………………………………….

C. Research Participants / Subjects ……………………………………….

1. Population …………………………………………………………..

2. Sample ………………………………………………………………

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique …………………

1. Instruments ………………………………………………………….

a. Observation ……………………………………………………...

b. Metacognitive Learning Strategies Questionnaire ………………

c. English Writing Test …………………………………………….

d. Interview …………………………………………………………

2. Data Gathering Technique ………………………………………….

3. Validity and Reliability of Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Questionnaire ……………...………………………………………..

a. Validity …………………………………………………………..

b. Reliability ………………………………………………………..

E. Data Analysis Technique ………………………………………………

1. Normality Test ……………………………………………………...

2. Linearity Test ……………………………………………………….

F. Research Procedure ……………………………………………………

26

26

27

28

28

28

30

30

30

31

32

33

34

37

38

39

40

40

41

41

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION …………...

A. The Implementation of Metacognitive Learning Strategies in SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta ………………………………………………...

B. Data Description .………………………………………………………

C. Data Analysis .…………………………………………………….........

1. The Students‟ Responses to Writing Recount texts When They Use

Metacognitive Learning Strategies in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta ………………………………………………………….

a. To Center Students‟ Learning …………………………………...

46

46

48

50

51

52


xiii

b. To Arrange and Plan Students‟ Learning ………………………..

c. To Evaluate Students‟ Learning …………………………………

2. The Correlation between Metacognitive Learning Strategies and

Students‟ Writing Skills for Writing Recount texts in Class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta ……………………………………….

a. The Score of Metacognitive Learning Strategies ………………..

b. The Score of Students Writing Skills ……………………………

c. The Testing of Statistical Assumptions ………………………….

d. Hypothesis Test

D. Discussions …………………………………………………………….

1. The Findings of the Research ……………………………………….

2. Lesson Learned of a Correlational Study on Metacognitive

Learning Strategies to Develop Students‟ Writing Skills in Class

8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta ………………..……………….

53

56

59

60

62

64

67

68

69

72

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...……….

A. Conclusions …………………………………………………………….

B. Recommendations ..…………………………………………………….

75

75

77

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………….. 80

APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………... 83


xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

3.1 The Number of Eight Grade Students of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta ……………………………………………………….

28

3.2 The Indicators and the Sub Indicators of Metacognitive Learning

Strategies Questionnaire ……………….………………………...

33

4.1 Students‟ Metacognitive Learning Strategies Frequency

Distributions ……………………………………………………...

61

4.2 Students‟ Writing Skills Frequency Distributions ………………. 63

4.3 The Results of Normality Test …………………………………... 65

4.4 The Results of Linearity Test ……………………………………. 66

4.5 The Summarised Results of the Pearson‟s Product-moment

Simple Correlation (r) Analysis to Test the Hypothesis …………

67


xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

3.1 Research Design …………………………………………………. 27

3.2 Population and Sample ………………………………………….. 29

3.3 Pearson‟s Product-Moment Correlation Formula ……………….. 39

3.4 Cronbrach‟s Coefficient Alpha Formula ………………………... 40

3.5 Kolmogorof-Smirnov Tests ……………….…………………….. 40

3.6 Linearity Test ……………………………………………………. 41

4.1 Sturges‟ Formula ………………………………………………… 60

4.2 The Calculation of Class Interval ……………………………….. 60

4.3 Students‟ Metacognitive Learning Strategies Frequency

Distributions ……………………………………………………...

62

4.4 Students‟ Writing Skills Frequency Distributions……………….. 63


xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

1. Cover Letter for the Headmaster of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta... 84

2. Research Letter from SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta ……………..... 85

3. Recount texts Material …………………………………………….. 86

4. Writing Test ……………………………………………………….. 88

5. Questionnaire ……………………………………………………… 90

6. Writing Score Rubric …...…………………………………………. 93

7. Observation Sheet Result …………………………………………. 95

8. Validity Analyses ………………………………………………..... 99

9. Reliability Analyses ……………………………………………..... 108

10. Samples of Students‟ Writing Test …...…………………………… 109

11. Students‟ Writing Score …………………………………………... 113

12. Metacognitive Learning Strategies‟ Questionnaire Result ………... 114

13. The Result Computation of Interval Class on Metacognitive

Learning Strategies ………………………………………………...

116

14. The Result Computation of Interval Class on Writing Skills ……... 117

15. The Statistical Assumptions Test of Normality Test ……………… 118

16. The Statistical Assumptions Test of Linearity Test ………………. 119

17. The Descriptive Statistics of the Variables ……………………….. 121

18. The Correlational Analysis ………………………………………... 122

19. A Sample Result of Interview with the Students ………………..... 123

20. Result of Interview with the Teacher ……………………………... 129

21. Questionnaire Blueprint …………………………………………... 135


xvii

22. Interview Blueprint for Students ………………………………….. 139

23. Interview Blueprint for the Teacher ………………………………. 142


1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter consists of six major underlying sections, namely research

background, research problems, problem limitation, research objectives, research

benefits and definition of terms. Research background discusses and explains the

practical and the theoretical background related to this research. Problem

formulation presents the two research problems based on the research baclground.

Next, problem limitation presents the focus of the study. Research objectives

discuss the expected results from the research conducted. Research benefits

present the benefits of conducting this research. Definition of terms explains some

definition to which the researcher refers in conducting the research.

A. Research Background

Nowadays, writing becomes one of the important skills because it helps to

inform others, carry out transactions, persuade, and tell what people feel. It also

becomes one of the essential parts of the lesson that will never be left in

education. However, according to Myles (2012), writing skills do not develop

successfully among the learners because writing may become a very complex

process and sometimes it becomes a challenging activity, especially for the

beginner students. It requires conscious effort and much practice in composing,

developing and analysing ideas. Furthermore, second language learners have

difficulties in writing activity because they need exploration and critical reflection


2

from the learners (Reid, 2009). Therefore, the major cause of the difficulty is a

lack of writing strategy to emphasize exploration rather than conclusiveness

because they still have some difficulties in producing a text although they already

have a basic skill about writing.

In fact, there are many strategies that can be used by the students and they

will not have any difficulties if they know about how to implement the writing

strategies. According to Fogarty (1994), one of the strategies is by using

metacognitive strategy which involves questioning, visualizing and synthesizing

information. On the other hand, the students lack understanding on how to use it.

In the writing classes, some students might not be familiar with the strategy and it

will become a tough activity for those who have not known because they could

not know how to produce a good text easily. It will also make the students have

difficulties in writing effectively and strategically, especially in exploring their

ideas through writing in the writing classes. As a result, a good strategy is needed

in order to improve students‟ skills in writing, so that they are able to self-plan,

self-monitor, self-regulate and self-evaluate their own writing skills properly

(Oxford, 1990).

Writing is an important aspect in language learning because by writing, the

students can produce a productive text. It is affected by the strategy that the

students used. Based on the experience during teaching practice in Class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta, the researcher found that many students had

difficulties in writing activity rather than speaking, listening or reading activity.

They also found difficulties in arranging a productive text although the teacher


3

had explained the topic and what they had to write in the text which was related to

the topic. In addition, in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta, one class consists of thirty

(30) students. This situation made the teacher optimize the use of suitable strategy

in creating a critically reflective text by exploring students‟ ideas to recognize

whether their ideas have supported their writing or not. Based on the difficulties in

the writing activity, the researcher as the practice teacher tried to help students by

showing a good strategy in the form of metacognitive learning strategies.

Furthermore, during the observation as the practice teacher, the researcher found

that the English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta has implemented

metacognitive learning strategies in the writing classes. Besides, based on the

observation, the researcher also found that the students of class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta had an ability to produce a productive text because they

had good ability in other language skills, especially speaking. However, the

researcher observed that the students had difficulty in writing English and it was

proven when the researcher gave a writing assignment to the students.

In teaching and learning process, the students‟ successes depend on their

strategy in learning activity, so they need a good strategy to enhance their writing

skills (Oxford, 1990). In connection with writing skill, the researcher had the

opportunity to conduct the research in the writing classes. Based on the English

teacher‟s explanation, the students had learned about writing recount texts.

Besides, since this research was conducted during the students‟ preparation of

their examination, recount texts were used to prepare the students for

examination. On the other hand, the researcher reviewed of the materials related


4

to writing recount texts to the students in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Furthermore, the researcher found that the students needed

metacognitive strategy to overcome the difficulties in writing a productive text. It

is regarded as high order skills that follow up the knowledge of cognitive process

and constitute an attempt to regulate ones‟ own learning by means of planning,

monitoring and evaluating (El-Koumy, 2004). It includes the students‟ awareness

of whether they can link what they write to their lives, ability to involve cognitive

process (recall the knowledge they have) and how to make an important

perception from the writing.

According to O‟Malley (1987), metacognitive learning strategies help the

learner to evaluate their learning achievements, progress and to help the learner

for future learning directions. Metacognitive processes also have been understood

to play an essential part in achieving the goal to be critical learner through all

types of learning, including writing. Many recent researches illustrate and show

the positive effects and relationship between metacognitive learning strategies and

language learning development. There have been some studies on using

metacognitive learning strategies in language learning activities. For example, a

research was conducted by Wahyuni (2000), a graduate of Sanata Dharma

University entitled “English Education Study Program Students‟ Metacognitive

Learning Strategies and Reading Achievement: a Correlational Study.” This study

aimed to find out whether there is a positive relationship between metacognitive

learning strategies and reading achievement and also, to find out the proportion of

each type of metacognitive learning strategies, namely planning, monitoring, and


5

evaluating, of English Education Study Program students. Even though the result

of the study shows that there was no correlation between English Education Study

Program students and metacognitive learning strategies, but the proportion of

planning, monitoring, and evaluation were 72%, 68%, and 69% respectively.

Nevertheless, there are also researches on the development of students‟

writing skills by using metacognitive learning strategies particularly second

language learners. In addition, the use of metacognitive strategies in the writing

process has been generally supported by the learners‟ background knowledge and

experience and it becomes valuable for their learning process. It can help the

learners to overcome their difficulties in writing activity. In connection with the

students‟ difficulties in writing activities, it triggers the researcher to conduct a

study on using metacognitive learning strategies to develop students‟ writing

skills. Therefore, this study provides the readers to know the use of metacognitive

learning strategies in order to know the students‟ responses to writing skills and

whether there is a correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and

students‟ writing skills or not.

B. RESEARCH PROBLEMS

There are two major problems that appear in this study:

1. What are the students‟ responses to writing recount textss when they use

metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?


6

2. Is there any correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the

students‟ writing skills for writing recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta?

C. PROBLEM LIMITATION

This research is limited to the discussion of students‟ responses to writing

recount texts when they use metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Besides, it is also limited to the correlation between

metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ responses to writing recount

texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The limitation was chosen to

answer the respondents‟ difficulties in writing recount texts, namely organizing

ideas, using correct grammar and choosing correct words in writing, which can be

seen through the result of students‟ writing test. Furthermore, this research

focused on the development of students‟ writing skills by using metacognitive

learning strategies.

In this research the observation was done by the researcher during the

teaching practice and the participants of this research only included class 8A in

academic year 2015/2016 (30 students). The participants were the researcher‟s

students during the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. This

research was done through the writing test, the questionnaire and the interview for

students and the English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta on Thursday, 7th

April 2016. In order to make the result of the writing test valid and reliable, the

writing test was assessed by the English teacher.


7

D. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This research aims to find out the answers from two research questions.

Firstly, the objective is to find out the students‟ responses to writing recount texts

using metacognitive learning strategies for the students in class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Secondly, the researcher attempted to find out whether

there is a correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟

responses to writing skills for writing recount texts in the class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The results of these research objectives could be found in

Chapter 4.

E. RESEARCH BENEFITS

This research is expected to be able to give several benefits to the students,

the teachers of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta, the future researchers and English

Language Education Study Program students.

1. The students in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

This research is beneficial to know the students‟ responses by using

metacognitive learning strategies in learning writing. The critical students would

create the meaningful learning which affects their cognitive, affective and

kinaesthetic aspects. For that reason, this research would create the better output

from the students.

2. The English teachers of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

This research is beneficial for the English teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta to inspire the teacher to use metacognitive learning strategies as a


8

strategy for teaching writing. Moreover, from this research, the English teacher

could develop the use of metacognitive learning strategies in the other skills of

learning English, for example listening, speaking and reading. From this research,

the English teacher could find another ways to overcome the students‟ difficulties

in learning writing.

3. Future Researchers

The aim of this research is also to give understanding and knowledge to

especially educational researchers. After they know the students‟ responses to

writing skills using metacognitive learning strategies and its correlation with

students‟ writing ability, it is expected that they can conduct further research in

relation with this topic. It is also expected that they can design creative materials

and creative strategies for teaching English, especially for writing ability.

4. The English Language Education Study Program Students

This study is also valuable to help the students of the English Language

Study Program (ELESP) as the references for their teaching. Furthermore, this

study could be the stimulation for the ELESP students to become more creative in

using prior knowledge to plan a strategy for approaching a learning task by using

metacognitive learning strategies as the teaching strategy in teaching writing

skills.

F. DEFINITION OF TERMS

This research is conducted under several terms to limit the discussion of

research. For that reason, the researcher would define the following terms:


9

1. Metacognitive Learning Strategies

According to O‟Malley (1987), metacognitive strategy is a strategy to help

the students in order to improve and develop their language skills. It is related to

the improvement of writing skills. Metacognitive refers to students‟ ability to be

aware of and monitor their own process. It can increase students‟ abilities to

transfer or adapt their learning to new contexts and tasks. It also includes a critical

awareness of one‟s thinking and learning. People can use a metacognitive theory

in the writing activity because it shows how the human brain processes and

produces various ideas and information.

2. Correlation

Correlational study is used to describe and measure the degree of

association between two or more variables or sets of scores (Ary et all, 2010). In a

correlational study, there are two types of correlation, namely positive correlation

and negative correlation. A positive correlation means that the increase of

independent variable will affect the increase of dependent variable and vice versa.

Meanwhile, a negative correlation means that the increase of independent variable

will affect the decrease of dependent variable and vice versa.

3. Recount texts

According to Hyland (2008), recount texts deals with past experiences or

events. It is created in a constructive format in the literacy study that tells the

author‟s personal experience or events. In a recount, the language features that are

used are past tense, time conjunction and the use of first person as the subject. In


10

this research, the researcher will asked the students to write the recount texts

based on the students‟ experiences in their school.

4. The Students’ Responses to Writing Skills

According to Ismail (2010), writing has always been seen as an important

skill in ESL classes because it is the area in which learners are expected to spend

adequate time to develop their writing skills and it reinforces grammatical

structures, vocabulary and idioms that the students have learned. The way writing

and writers are portrayed in a writing activity and it is seen as a process of

discovery as the writers try to find their way while they are struggling to think,

compose and put their ideas together. These images of what a writer is could have

a profound effect on students and how they perceive themselves as writers.

Therefore, it is important to know how students‟ perception as writers and

discover alternative teaching techniques; ways to motivate students, as well as

things teachers and parents can do to improve the ways in which they present

writing to their students and children.

5. Writing Skills

According to Richards (2014), writing is among the most important skills

that second language students need to develop because it involves composing

skills and knowledge about texts, contexts and readers. It also helps to develop the

idea that writers need realistic strategies for drafting and revising. In this research,

the researcher wants to know the students‟ responses to writing skills by using

metacognitive learning strategies. For that reason, the researcher wants to build

the meaningful writing learning which is related to their lives.


11

6. The Students in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta Academic Year

2015/2016

The students of class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta Academic Year

2015/2016 are the most cooperative students from the other eighth grader students

in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. There are thirty (30) students consisting of

sixteen (16) male students and fourteen (14) female students. Based on the

teaching practice, the students have better speaking, listening and reading skills

than writing skills. The students should learn to develop their writing skills.


12

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher would like to discuss theories related to the

study. This chapter includes the theoretical description and theoretical framework.

The theoretical description presents the discussion of any literature related to and

the students‟ responses to writing skills, metacognitive learning strategies, and

writing recount texts using metacognitive lerning strategy. The theoretical

framework summaries all relevant theories, which help the researcher solves the

research problems.

A. Theoretical Description

In this theoretical description, the researcher would like to discuss the theories

which are related to the research issue. The researcher limits the theories from

three specific theoretical descriptions. They are the students‟ responses to writing

skills, metacognitive learning strategies and writing recount texts using

metacognitive learning strategies.

1. The Students’ Responses to Writing Skills

According to Knoblauch and Brannon (2015), students‟ response is any

verbal or non-verbal act which is designed for students to fulfil the expectations

implicit in the questions, commands or request of others. From the definition

which is explained, it can be deduced that the students‟ responses to writing skills

can be defined as any verbal or non-verbal act produced in answer to their writing.


13

Writing is one of the important skills because it helps to give ideas

permanently and to stabilize what might otherwise be lost. According to Hyland

(2003), writing is a thinking process which is concerned with the act of writing. It

also becomes the way to give the ideas which is in the form of writing.

Furthermore, writing is one kind of expression in language which is created by

particular set of symbol, having conventional values for representing the wordings

of particular language which is drawn up visually. Therefore, in writing, the

writers need and want thoughtful commentary to show whether they have

communicated their ideas and intended meaning or not, so it does not lead the

readers to questions or discrepancies (Sommers, 1982).

According to Richards (2014), writing is among the most important skills

that second language students need to develop because it involves composing

skills and knowledge about texts, contexts and readers. It also helps to develop the

idea that writers need realistic strategies for drafting and revising. Moreover,

according to Sommers (1982), teachers know that most students find difficulties

to imagine a reader‟s response as a guide in composing. For that reason, the use of

teacher‟s comment on students‟ writing is to help the students to become

questioning reader because it will help them to evaluate what they have written

and develop control over their writing.

The teacher‟s comment on students‟ writing can assist them in the process

of composing a text. According to Sommers (1982), it creates students‟

motivation for doing something different in the next draft. In commenting on the

student‟s writing, the students get to know how to edit the sentences in order to


14

make their writing become more interesting. If it gives positive response for

students, students will follow every comment and fix their texts appropriately as

requested. Besides, the students‟ response is also known from the process of

revising, editing and proofreading their writing as a revision process (Sommers,

1982). Therefore, the teacher‟s comment encourage students to concentrate more

on their writing, so they can decide what is most important and what is least

important.

According to Heaton (1975), the writing skills require mastery not only of

grammatical and rhetorical devices but also of conceptual and judgement

elements. Grammatical skills are the ability to write correct sentence since

grammar is a description of structure of a language and the way in which

linguistics units, including words and phrase which are combined to produce

sentences in language (Nunan, 2003). It is different with stylistic skills because

according to Scott (2014), it gives students a greater critical awareness of the

creative possibilities of language. It is also the ability to manipulate sentence and

use language effectively (Heaton, 1975). Moreover, it helps students to provide

in-depth analysis of a wide range of writing and includes practical exercises to

develop writing skills. The other skills is mechanical skills which are the ability to

use correctly those peculiar to the written language e.g. punctuation and spelling.

According to Heaton (1975), it is the basic fundamental skills that the students

need to perform while judgement skill is the ability to write in an appropriate

manner for a particular purpose, including the ability to select, organize and order


15

the information. Furthermore, the writing skills that have been explained can

apply across grade levels among students.

In the teaching and learning process, an effective writing practice is

expected. Effective writing practices have a proven record of success. In other

words, they have been shown to be successful in enhancing students‟ writing on

multiple occasions (Graham, 2010). Primary sources for such practices are

scientific studies examining the effectiveness of specific teaching techniques.

They provide a trustworthy approach for identifying an effective practice, such as

investigations that provide direct evidence both that the intervention works and of

how much confidence can be placed in its effect.

In connection with this, teacher, as the facilitator, should help learner to

foster their autonomy through the use of group-work and pair-work and by acting

as more of resource than a transmitter of knowledge (Harmer, 2007). Besides, in

order to be able to respond, the students need to see things or explain orally even

though it will take time to brainstorm ideas and draft a piece of writing.

According to Harmer (2007), with the teacher‟s help in reviewing and editing

their writing in various ways, the students will be more focused on generating

more ideas, re-drafting, re-editing and so on. For that reason, if teachers want their

students to master their language skills, teachers need to make learning activities

enjoyable, which will make teaching more enjoyable too and far less exhausting

(Bright and McGregor, 1973).

According to Rubin and Thompson (1982), there are some characteristics

of learner in the learning activity and good learner characteristics are students who


16

can find their own way (without always having to be guided by the teacher

through learning tasks), who are creative, who make intelligent guesses, who

make their own opportunities for practice, who make errors work for them not

against them, and who use contextual clues (as cited in Harmer, 2007, p. 86). In

addition, it is suggested that teacher must encourage the students to respond to

texts and situations with their own thoughts and experiences, rather than just by

answering questions and doing abstract learning activities (Harmer, 2007).

Therefore, according to Harmer (2007), students‟ responses in the learning

activity will depend on how the teacher act and vary their behavior in giving the

materials in the learning activity.

2. Metacognitive Learning Strategies

According to Zhang (2013), metacognitive strategy is a strategy to help the

students in order to improve and develop their language skills. It is related to the

improvement of writing skills. Metacognitive refers to students‟ ability to be

aware of and monitor their own process. It can increase students‟ abilities to

transfer or adapt their learning to new contexts and tasks. It also includes a critical

awareness of one‟s thinking and learning. People can use metacognitive strategy

in the writing activity because it shows how the human brain processes and

produces various ideas and information.

Metacognitive refers to metacognition. According to El-Koumy (2004),

metacognition is the conscious awareness of one‟s own cognition and the

conscious control of one‟s own learning. Metacognition is one of the important


17

concept and a critical strategy to teach in the classroom. From all the research

over metacognition, it is a learned behaviour that can vastly improve students of

all performing levels. Metacognitive has also received a considerable attention by

language teaching theoreticians and researchers alike for three main reasons. The

first reason is that metacognitive knowledge develops good thinkers and lifelong

learners who can cope with new situations in this rapidly changing world. The

second reason is that integrating metacognitive knowledge into language

instruction develops learners who can take charge of their own learning. The final

reason is that a metacognitive knowledge base is essential for effective language

learning. As Devine (1993) puts it, a successful language learner is “one who has

ample metacognitive knowledge about the self as learner, about the nature of the

cognitive task at hand and about appropriate strategies for achieving cognitive

goals” (p. 109, as cited in Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in

reading comprehension, 2002).

According to Oxford (1990), there are three strategy sets in metacognitive

strategies, which include centering students‟ learning, arranging and planning

students‟ learning, and evaluating students‟ learning. It refers to awareness of

students‟ knowledge to understand and control students‟ cognitive

(Meichenbaum, 1985). It includes the knowledge to know when, where and why

to use particular strategies for learning and problem solving. Furthermore, it is

also the prior knowledge to plan a strategy for approaching a learning task,

including taking necessary steps solve the problems, reflecting and evaluating the

writing as needed. According to Flavell (1987), the metacognitive activities


18

include planning how to approach a learning task, such as using appropriate skills

and strategies to solve problems, monitoring the activities from self-assessing and

self-correcting in response to the self-assessment, evaluating the progress from the

learning activities and becoming aware of students‟ learning process.

Metacognitive refers to what individuals know about the approaches that

can be used for learning and problem solving as cognitive process (Flavell, as

cited in Speculations about the nature and development of cognitive process,

1987). In addition, according to Oxford (1990), metacognitive strategy goes

beyond cognitive process and provides a way for learner to coordinate their own

learning process. It includes learners‟ knowledge to control their learning,

including planning, strategy management, monitoring and evaluating their

progress or goals in the learning activities. Furthermore, there are three categories

of metacognitive knowledge, namely person variables, task variables and strategy

variables (Flavell, 1987). Person variables refer to learners‟ strengths and

weaknesses on processing information in the learning activities. Task variables

are learners‟ knowledge which is related to the process in completing the task.

Strategy variables are the strategy that learners use to complete the task, including

the strategy that they use before and after doing the task.

Metacognitive strategy has a role in the problem solving activities because

it is associated with the learners‟ strategy to solve the challenges that they have in

learning activities. According to Halpern (1996), learners need to apply

metacognitive strategies to monitor their learning process because successful

learners apply strategy to transfer their knowledge through the learning process.


19

The strategy that learners use helps them to think whether they understand their

learning topic or not. In the learning process, according to Meichenbaum (1992),

students need to be assisted by the teacher in order to help them directing their

learning, including what they have to do to complete their task.

As it is known that metacognitive strategy is a process that provides

learners to be successful thinkers, Fogarty (1994) suggests that students must

develop a plan before approaching a learning task, monitor their understanding

and evaluate their thinking after completing the task in the learning process.

According to Oxford (1990), teachers can help students by allowing them to talk

about their problems in the learning process, including sharing the effective

strategies for learners to help students reaching their goals and objective in the

learning activities. Besides, learners can monitor their learning by self-monitoring,

for example when they are writing, they make checklists to monitor their own

errors in spelling, punctuation, vocabulary, organization and content

(Oxford,1990). Moreover, learners can use self-evaluating effectively as the

progress of their own work to know whether they have improved since the last

learning or not.

3. Writing Recount texts Using Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Writing is one of the important skills for students. Moreover, there are

many media to teach writing for students. One of the media is by using recount

texts. It is a text that tells past experiences or events (Hyland, 2008). It can be

based on the author‟s personal experiences or historical events. According to


20

Hyland (2002), the purpose of recount texts is to tell a sequence of events so that

it entertains. This idea could guide the teacher to be more creative in using the

recount texts as the teaching media for students.

According to Nunan (2003), writing can be defined as product or process

that is considered as a complex process because it goes through different stages to

reach its final format. It involves mental processes, thinking and rethinking to

produce sentences. The process of writing is a way of looking at writing

instruction which emphasis students‟ writing. According to Harmer (2004), the

process of writing includes planning, drafting, editing and producing final version.

Teacher should use different strategies to encourage students to produce a good

writing.

Recount texts is a text genre which is used to retell a series of events or

experiences in the past for the purpose of informing or entertaining (Hyland,

2008). Moreover, there are many strategies that can be used by students and one

of them is metacognitive learning strategies that help students to plan, monitor

and evaluate. Since the students have to write about the past event or their

experience, the students can apply metacognitive learning strategies to review

their own progress in the form of writing.

Englert (2001) confirms that a related area of difficulty is limited

metacognitive knowledge and control. Learners may lack awareness of

appropriate strategies, or have difficulty exercising control over implementing and

monitoring them. As a result, this has contributed to evolving trends in the

teaching of writing. According to Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987), learners make


21

the transition from spoken to written communication. In conversation, verbal and

nonverbal signals from a partner constantly stimulate and modify further thought

and language production, but in the case of writing language production usually

has to be sustained by internal processes (p. 109). This kind of thought has also

contributed significantly to the teaching of writing.

According to Hyland (2003), writing activity assists learners in the process

of learning with its techniques, including generating, drafting, reshaping and

evaluating texts. The process includes brainstorming, actual writing and revision,

editing and publishing. On the other hand, according to Tompkins (2003), not all

writers use that process in their writing activity chronologically because some of

them tend to move back and forth the process as they desire. Some writers edit

portions of their written work as they proceed with writing while others complete

their writing first and then revise it. Therefore, Foster (2012) describes the writing

process as recursive in the sense that writers are flexible to deal with a selected

aspect of the process.

The writing process may be taught in a variety of disciplines besides the

Language Arts classrooms. Sobal (2001) defines the writing process as writing

that includes any activity that contributes to the final written product by including

research practices, reading practices, thinking practices, and many more. Teaching

students how to write in any discipline, may require the teacher to introduce the

particular ways of reading, thinking, researching, and writing in that discipline

and giving the learners opportunities to practice these processes by breaking them

down into discrete skills.


22

According to Raimes (1983), learners can learn a great deal about how

writing works if they concentrate not only on what the writer has written but also

on how writer has written it. Besides, during the writing process, writers must

continuously decide which activity to employ next (MacArthur, Charles A.,

Graham S., and Fritzgerald J., 2008). In fact, according to Hyland (2002), writing

is seen as a social act that the writer brings to writing which is influenced both by

the personal attitudes and social experiences. Moreover, it is central to writers‟

personal experience and social identities and writers are often evaluated by their

control of it. According to Oxford (1990), Metacognitive strategy supports

learners to a variety of metacognitive awareness to develop learners‟ writing

skills. Therefore, the goal for teaching metacognitive in writing should help

learners to develop their skills through the use of the strategies, so they can get

meaningful writing assignments in the learning process that helps them to enhance

good writing strategies.

In addition, writing recount texts contributes a shared experience for

students in the class that links to a variety of language activities. According to

Oxford (1990), by using metacognitive learning strategies, all students will plan,

monitor and evaluate to produce appropriate vocabulary, idiom and sentence

structure through their writing. After students receive the sufficient knowledge by

using the metacognitive learning strategies, they can create their own writing from

their past event or experiences. Nunan (2002) also notes that the appropriate

learning strategy could be the basis of many aspects in learning. In writing, it can


23

be used to control composition, sentence-combining, or sequence sentence to the

writing of recount texts.

By using metacognitive learning strategies, students and teacher could also

learn together and they would get new experience in learning how to write and

compose a good writing. Practice writing is one of important ways to improve

students‟ writing skill. Finally, the students prefer to remember their experiences

in order to help them in the writing process. The use of metacognitive learning

strategies in writing recount texts for junior high school provides the stimuli to

build the students‟ knowledge. Therefore, metacognitive learning strategies could

be a sufficient strategy to make the students create their imagination and creativity

in writing certain genres of writing.

B. Theoretical Framework

In this thesis, the researcher would answer two research questions based on

several related theories described in the theoretical description. The first research

question is related to the students‟ responses to writing recount texts when they

use metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

The second research question is whether there is a correlation between

metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ responses to writing skills for

writing recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Furthermore, in

answering this research question, the researcher synthetizes the theory of the

students‟ responses to writing skills, the metacognitive learning strategies and

writing recount texts using metacognitive learning strategies.


24

First, the researcher analyzed the students‟ responses to writing skills from

Knoblauch and Brannon (2015) who state that students‟ response is any verbal or

non-verbal act which is designed for students to fulfil the expectations implicit in

the questions, commands or request of others. Thereafter, Richard (2014) states

that writing is among the most important skills that second language students need

to develop because it involves composing skills and knowledge about texts,

contexts and readers. Graham (2010) also declares that in the teaching and

learning process, an effective writing practice is expected because they have been

shown to be successful in enhancing students‟ writing on multiple occasions.

In addition, one of the strategies that help students in writing is

metacognitive learning strategies. Zhang (2013) states that metacognitive strategy

is a strategy that helps the students to improve and develop their language skills.

Meichenbaum (1985) also states that metacognitive refers to awareness of one‟s

own knowledge to understand, control and manipulate one‟s cognitive. Flavell

(1987) also notes that metacognitive activities include planning how to approach a

learning task, using appropriate skills and strategies to solve a problem,

monitoring one‟s own comprehension of text, self-assessing and self-correcting in

response to the self-assessment, evaluating progress toward the completion of a

task, and becoming aware of distracting stimuli.

As for the second research problem, the researcher analysed the students‟

responses to writing recount texts when using metacognitive learning strategies

for the students in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The researcher

synthetised several specific theories about writing recount texts for junior high


25

school using metacognitive learning strategies. Nunan (2002) notes that the

appropriate learning strategy could be the basis of many aspects in learning

because it can be used to control composition, sentence-combining, or sequence

sentence to the writing of recount texts. By using metacognitive learning

strategies, students and teacher could also learn together and they would get new

experience in learning how to write and compose a good writing. In connection

with this, according to Harmer (2007), a teacher as the facilitator, should help

learners to foster their autonomy in order to be able to respond and with the

teacher‟s help in reviewing and editing their writing in various ways, the students

will be more focused on the learning activity. Besides, it is suggested that teacher

must encourage the students to respond to texts and situations with their own

thoughts and experiences (Harmer, 2007). Therefore, according to Harmer (2007),

students responses in the learning activity will be depend on how the teacher act

and vary their behavior in giving the materials in the learning activity.

C. Hypothesis

Based on the theoretical framework above, the hypothesis was made

whether there is a significant correlation between metacognitive learning

strategies and the students‟ responses to writing skills for writing recount texts in

the class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.


26

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher explains the research method, the research

setting, the research participants, the instruments and data gathering, the data

analysis techniques and also the research procedure from the research conducted

in this thesis. The first part of this chapter discusses the correlational research as

the research method. The second part of this chapter discusses the specific setting

of the research. The third part of this chapter explains all of the research

participants. The fourth part of this chapter discusses several instruments and data

gathering. Furthermore, the next part of this chapter discusses the analysis

techniques and the research procedure which summarize the overall process of the

research as the last part.

A. Research Method

The type of this research is quantitative research because this research uses

numbers to conclude the research result. According to Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh

(2010, p. 22), “Quantitative research uses objective measurement and statistical

analysis of numeric data to understand and explain the phenomena.” This research

is the correlational research because the aim of this research is to find out the

relationship between two variables. They are metacognitive learning strategies

and the students‟ writing skills. According to Fraenkel & Wallen (2008),

“Correlational studies investigate the possibility of relationships between two


27

variables, although investigation of more than two variables is common.” (p. 328).

Along with this perspective, this research aims to find out whether there is a

significant relationship between metacognitive learning strategies and students‟

writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

This research consists of one independent variable and one dependent

variable. The independent variable is metacognitive learning strategies and the

dependent variable is students‟ writing skills. The independent variable which is

symbolised as “X” is estimated to give contribution to the dependent variable

which is symbolised as “Y”, which is the outcome.

Figure 3.1 Research Design

Notes:

X : Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Y : Students‟ Writing Skills

: Correlation of X and Y

B. Research Setting

This research is conducted in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta and it is located

in Jl. Mas Soeharto No. 48, Yogyakarta. The observation of this research was

conducted during the researcher‟s teaching practice. This research was conducted

from November 18th

– December 3rd

, 2015 and continued on April 7th

, 2016.

There are 12 classes in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta and each grade consists of

four classes. Every class learn English, from the seventh grade up to the ninth

grade. There are 326 students in this school and the number of all eighth grade

students is 126 students.

X Y


28

C. Research Participants / Subjects

In this section, the researcher presents the research participants. This

section consists of two parts. The first part presents the population of the research.

The second part presents the sample of the research.

1. Population

In conducting research, the researcher always requires one or more groups

of subjects to obtain the representative of the groups of subjects that are

equivalent to one another and it is called population. Furthermore, Sprinthall

(1991, p. 27) has described the meaning of population as the entire group of

persons, things, or events that share at least one common trait. It means that

population is something that can be used as subjects in taking the source of the

data in the research. The population of this research is the eighth grade students of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta in the 2015/2016 academic year. The number of all

eighth grade students of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta is 124 students. The

distribution of each class is shown in the table below.

Table 3.1 the Number of Eighth Grade Students of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Class Male Female Total

8 A 14 16 30

8 B 16 16 32

8 C 16 15 31

8 D 17 14 31

TOTAL 63 61 124

2. Sample

According to Sprinthall, Schmutte and Sirois (1991, p. 28), “a sample is a

smaller number of observations taken from the total number making up a given


29

population.” Since the population is too large to be studied, the researcher can use

sample which is taken from the population. According to Creswell (2005), there

are two types of quantitative sampling strategies, namely probability sampling and

nonprobability sampling. Probability sampling consists of simple random

sampling, stratified sampling and multistage cluster sampling while

nonprobability sampling consists of convenience sampling and snowball sampling

(Creswell, 2005).

In this research, the researcher used probability sampling and the technique

which is used to select the sample is by using simple random sampling. According

to Creswell (2005), probability sampling is used as representative of the sample in

order to generalize the population. Besides, the researcher used random sampling

because “random sampling demands that each member must have an equal chance

of being excluded and that no member of the population may be systematically

excluded.” (Sprinthall, 1991, p. 28). The researcher chose one class which was

become the representative as the sample of this research, which is class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The researcher only chose one class because class

8A shared the major population characteristics. There are 30 students in class 8A

which will be used as the sample in this research.

Figure 3.2 Populations and Sample

Target

Population

sample sample


30

Notes:

Population : 8th

grade students of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Sample : class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

In this section, the researcher presents the instruments and data gathering

technique. This section consists of two parts. The first part presents the

instruments of the research. The second part presents the data gathering technique

of the research.

1. Instruments

According to Arikunto (2010), an instrument is a way to facilitate the

researcher to gather the data. There are some instrument varieties which become

the method in collecting the data and they are interview, observation,

questionnaire and documentation. Another instrument that is used to gather the

data was in the form of test, such as matching test, speaking test, and writing test

(Sudarsono, 1998). Furthermore, Ary et al. (2010, p. 201) also state “a test is a set

of stimuli presented to an individual in order to elicit responses on the basis of

which a numerical score can be assigned.”

In order to gain the source of the data, this research used four kinds of

instruments. The instruments were the observation, the metacognitive learning

strategies questionnaire, the writing test and the interview.

a. Observation

The researcher used the observation as the first instrument in this research

(see Appendix 7). The observation which was employed by the researcher was

naturalistic observation. It involves observing the participants in their natural


31

settings (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2009). According to Gall, Gall & Borg (2007, p.

263), “naturalistic observation provides more accurate data than that obtained

from research participants, which often biased by the set to give a socially

desirable response.” In addition, the researcher prepared the observation sheet to

record the learning activity in the classroom. It was also used to gather „live‟ data

which occurred from the natural situations in the learning activity. The main goal

of conducting the observation was to gather the data which are accurate, unbiased

and richly detailed information (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2006).

In this research, the researcher used inter-observer reliability to record the

data because the researcher observed the record data on the learning activity

individually (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2009). The data were collected only at one

point in time to obtain reliable data. Furthermore, the use of the observation was

to emphasize the data from the other instruments.

b. Metacognitive Learning Strategies Questionnaire

The metacognitive learning strategies questionnaire was used to gain data

about students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (see Appendix 5). The students‟

metacognitive learning strategies was obtained by adopting and modifying a short

form of the diagram of the metacognitive strategies which is made by Oxford as

cited in Language Learning Strategies (1990, p. 137). Oxford makes

metacognitive strategies by showing the strategies that learners can use to arrange

and plan their language learning in an efficient, effective way. Some strategies

that can help the learners in the learning process are centering their learning,


32

arranging and planning their learning and evaluating their learning. Below are the

indicators and sub indicators of metacognitive learning strategies questionnaire.

Furthermore, the blueprint of metacognitive learning strategies questionnaire is

presented in Appendix 21.

Table 3.2 the Indicators and the Sub Indicators of Metacognitive Learning

Strategies Questionnaire

No Indicators Sub Indicators

1. Centering students‟ learning 1. Overviewing and linking with already

known material

2. Paying attention

2. Arranging and planning

students‟ learning

1. Finding out about language learning

2. Organizing

3. Setting goals and objectives

4. Identifying the purpose of a language

task

5. Planning for a language task

6. Seeking practice opportunities

3. Evaluating students‟

learning

1. Self-monitoring

2. Self-evaluating

c. English Writing Test

In this research, a writing test was used to gain the data of students‟ writing

ability. Hyland (2002, p. 1) defines “writing is central to our personal experience

and social identities, and we are often evaluated by our control of it.” The writing

process will assist students to see the techniques that are used for generating,

drafting, reshaping and evaluating texts (Hyland, 2003). In this research, a writing

ability is measured by giving a test. There was only one test in this research

because one test is enough to measure the students writing test. Besides, the

results of the writing test were going to be correlated with the results of the

questionnaire to find out the correlation between the students‟ writing skills as the

dependent variable and the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies as the


33

independent variable. Since correlational study was aimed to find out the

correlation between two or more than two variables (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2008),

the researcher correlated the results of the two variables by using SPSS.v.21.

Moreover, in the test, the students were asked to write a recount text which was

related to their unforgettable experiences from their holiday. In connection with

this, the researcher modified a writing scoring rubric for writing composition tasks

from Brown (2007) as the assessment to obtain the students‟ achievement level in

the writing activity.

d. Interview

This research used interview as the instruments of the research. Ary et all.

(2002, p. 434) state “Interviews are used to gather data on subjects‟ opinions,

beliefs, and feelings about the situation in their own words”. On the other words,

it is used to obtain data which cannot be obtained through questionnaire. The

interview was used to find out about the students‟ response about using

metacognitive learning strategies in writing activity and the blueprint of students‟

interview is presented in Appendix 22. It also used to interview the English

teacher in order to strengthen the data about the teacher‟s response when using

metacognitive learning strategies in writing activity and the blueprint of students‟

interview is presented in Appendix 23. Based on the nature of response desired,

there are two basic types of question used in interview, which are close questions

and open – ended (Ary et al. 2002). In close questions, the respondents give

respond from the questions based on the options provided, while in the open –


34

ended question, the respondents are allowed to answer freely based on their

understanding.

In this research, the researcher used open – ended questions to gather the

data from both the students and the teacher, so they were free to give their answer.

In conducting the interview sections, the researcher used Indonesian language to

make the interview become more familiar, so they can give clear answers.

Furthermore, the researcher also used simple and creative language in order to

make the respondents understand and give the answer from the questions easily.

2. Data Gathering Technique

Before conducting the research, the researcher did the observation during

the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The observation was done

before the researcher started to do the teaching practice and it was dones every

Wedenesday and Friday in one month as the requirements from the school policy

and the univeristy. During the observation, the researcher was asked to fill the

observation sheet which was given from the university to observe the learning

activity in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Furthermore, in observing the learning

activity, the researcher also made the observation sheet to record the learning

activity (see Appendix 7) which was used as the reflection to prepare the

researcher for the teaching practice. It included how the teacher teach and deliver

the materials to the students and how the students response in the learning

activity. The researcher did the observation individually. In addition, the


35

researcher also made a reflection after observing the learning activity in order to

help the researcher in conducting the research.

In this research, the researcher administered an English writing test and

metacognitive learning questionnaire to the students as the data gathering

technique. The English writing test was given by asking the students to write

recount texts which were related to their experiences. Furthermore, the researcher

did the consultation with the lecturer and teacher to make an appropriate test.

Before making the writing test, the researcher should know the characteristics of

the learners. Besides, the researcher also did the review about recount texts to the

students before the test. In doing English writing test, the researcher gave the

topic to the students, namely “Unforgettable Holiday”. Every student was asked to

make a plan or list that the researcher had prepared before they started to write.

After they had done in making a plan, they would write the recount texts and use

their plan as their guidance in writing recount texts.

In assessing the students‟ writing test, the researcher provided rubrics for

writing test in order to make the assessing process easier (see Appendix 6). The

rubrics were made by compiling five competencies of the writing skills, namely

content, organization, grammar, mechanics and vocabulary. In the English writing

ability rubric which was used in this research, there were five writing

competencies in this rubric, namely content, organization, grammar, mechanics

and vocabulary. Every competency had four scores and each score had its

description of the competencies. The total score of five competencies was 20 and


36

it was multiplied by 5. Therefore, the minimum total score was 5 and the

maximum total score was 100.

For the metacognitive learning questionnaire, the data was obtained by

changing into number to be easier to analyse. The questionnaire used Indonesian

in order to prevent the misinterpretation of the statement in the questionnaire

among students if they were stated in English. The questionnaire had four options,

namely sangat setuju (strongly agree), setuju (agree), tidak setuju (disagree),

sangat tidak setuju (strongly disagree). The answers were changed into number

based on likert scale. Every statement had four scores and each score had its

description of the statements. The total score of 20 statements was 80 and it was

multiplied by 4. The minimum total score was 20 and the maximum total score

was 80. Furthermore, according to Azwar (2001, p. 99), likert scale is scale that is

used to measure someone‟s attitude, opinion, and perception through something,

someone, or event.

The other instrument was the interview to find out the students‟ response

and to strengthen the result findings from the teacher‟s response about using

metacognitive learning strategies in writing activity. They were chosen by the

English teacher based on their writing score in the learning process. They also

represented three categories of score which are the highest, middle and lowest

score. Both the students and teacher were interviewed during the break time or

outside their learning activity. The respondents were required to answer the

questions related to the research of metacognitive learning strategies in writing

activity which they had done though the learning process. The answers would be


37

in the forms of opinion, attitude, or feeling towards the topic. The interview with

the respondents took seven minutes each and it was intended to obtain and

strengthen the data of the respondents‟ response on the study of metacognitive

learning strategies to develop writing skills in the writing activity. Furthermore,

the researcher used recorder to record the respondents‟ answer as the most

efficient way to collect the interview data. It is also used to provide verbatim

record of the responses (Ary et all, 2002).

3. Validity and Reliability of Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Questionnaire and Interview

Since the research instruments should be valid and reliable, the

questionnaire which was used as the research instrument was constructed to be

valid and reliable. To measure the validity and reliability of the questionnaire, the

questionnaire was tested before it was used as a research instrument. Furthermore,

there were 30 respondents who were asked to fill the questionnaire from class 8A

of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. In this research, there was no try-out of English

writing ability test because the materials which were used as a research instrument

for the English writing ability test had been consulted to the thesis advisor and an

English teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta as expert judgement. On the other

hand, based on the consultation, the researcher needed to do the statistical study to

test the validity and reliability of the instruments. Therefore, it could be said that

the test of the English writing ability was valid and reliable.


38

a. Validity

Acording to Fraenkel and Wallen (2008, p. 453), “Validity refers to the

appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness of the inferences a researcher

makes.” In other words, the questionnaire is valid if the statements of the

questionnaire are able to reveal what is claimed to measure. There are three main

types of validity which are content-related evidence of validity, criterion-related

evidence of validity and construct-related evidence of validity (Fraenkel and

Wallen, 2008). Content-related evidence of validity is “validity that is estimated

by testing the content of the instrument by using rational analysis or personal

judgement” (Azwar, 2001). In other words, the content that researcher wants to

test should be the representative sample. According to Fraenkel and Wallen

(2008), criterion-related evidence of validity is related to the relationship between

scores obtain using the instrument and one or more other instruments or measures.

It refers to the validity of the instruments if there is a relationship between two

instruments. Constructed-related evidence of validity refers to “the nature of the

physiological construct or characteristics being measured by the instrument”

(Fraenkel and Wallen, 2008). It means the procedure of data collection whether

the variable being measured in the questionnaire underlies the current theories or

not. Therefore, the instruments which are measured in the research are implied by

theoretical definition.


39

In this research, Pearson‟s product moment correlation was used to get the

validity of the questionnaire items (Azwar, 2001) and the formula is shown below.

Figure 3.3 Pearson’s Product-moment Correlation Formula

Notes:

rxy = the Pearson‟s product-moment correlation

X = the scores of Metacognitive Learning Strategies distribution

Y = the scores of students‟ writing skills distribution

N = the number of paired Metacognitive Learning Strategies and students‟

writing skills scores (subjects)

b. Reliability

According to Fraenkel & Wallen (2008), the reliability relates to “the

consistency of the scores obtained-how consistent they are for each individual

from one set of item to another” (p. 453). It refers to the reliability of the

questionnaire whether the responses of the subjects are consistent from time to

time. Furthermore, there are many procedures to test the reliability of a

questionnaire, which are retest method, equivalent-forms method, and internal-

consistency methods (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2008). In this research, in order to

find out the reliability of the questionnaire, the researcher use Cronbrach‟s

coefficient alpha to analyse the data which is included in internal-consistency.

According to Fraenkel & Wallen (2008), in calculating the reliability of items in

some essay tests where it is possible to have more than one answer and that are

not scored right versus wrong, the Cronbrach‟s coefficient alpha is used. In other

words, the Cronbrach‟s coefficient alpha is used to find out the reliability of an

𝑟𝑥𝑦 =𝑛 Σ𝑥𝑦 − Σ𝑥 Σ𝑦

𝑛. Σ𝑥2 − Σx 2 𝑛. Σ𝑦2 − Σ𝑦 2


40

instrument that the items scores are not 1 or 0, for example the questionnaire or

the essay tests. Below is the formula of Cronbrach‟s coefficient alpha.

Figure 3.4 Cronbrach’s Coefficient Alpha Formula

Notes:

r11 = the instrument reliability

k = the number of items

∑ 2 = the sum of the variances of the items score

2 = the sum of the variance of the test score (all k items)

E. Data Analysis Technique

The aim of this research is to find out the relationship between students‟

writing skills and metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI

1 Yogyakarta. The data analysis which was used to know the relationship between

students‟ writing skills and metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta is by using the Pearson‟s Product-moment Simple

Correlation formula. Therefore, in order to analyse the data, the researcher did

normality test and linearity test as the data analysis technique.

1. Normality Test

The normality test was used to see whether the data of the variables were

normality distributed or not. The normal distribution of the variables would be

tested using Kolmogorof-Smirnov test.

Figure 3.5 Kolmogorof-Smirnov Tests

𝑟11 = 𝑘

𝑘 − 1 1 −

∑𝜎𝑏2

𝜎2𝑡

𝐷𝑛 = 𝑀𝑎𝑥 𝐹𝑛 𝑥 − 𝐹 𝑥


41

Notes:

Dn = the maximum deviation

Fn(x) = the sample distribution function

F(x) = the specific population distribution function

2. Linearity Test

The linearity test was used to see whether the relationship between the two

variables was linear or not. The formula for linearity test is shown below:

Figure 3.6 Linearity Test

Notes:

Freg = the value of the regression line

N = the sample size

m = number of predictor

R = the correlation coefficient

F. Research Procedure

In order to conduct this research, the researcher did several procedures in

this research. Below is the explanation of how the research was conducted.

1. Observing the teaching and learning activities in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta

Before conducting the research, the researcher did the observation during

the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The observation was

conducted on Wednesday, 12th

August 2015 to record the teaching and learning

activity that might help the researcher in the research.

𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑔 =𝑅2 𝑁 −𝑚 − 1

𝑚 1 − 𝑅2


42

2. Asking the permission to conduct a research

In conducting the research, the researcher asked for permission to the

principal of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta by giving the letter of research

permission (see Appendix 1). It was given on Thursday, 12th

November 2015. The

researcher got the research letter from SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta on Friday,

11th

December 2015 (see Appendix 2).

3. Designing English writing test and metacognitive learning strategies

questionnaire

Before conducting an English writing test and distributing metacognitive

learning strategies questionnaire, the researcher designed a writing test and a

questionnaire about metacognitive learning strategies. The writing test was

designed based on the materials about recount texts which had been learned by the

students. In addition, metacognitive learning strategies‟ questionnaire was

designed based on the related theories about metacognitive learning strategies.

4. Doing the validity and reliability test

After making the instruments, the researcher did the validity and reliability

test in order to test the validity and reliability of the research instruments by using

SPSS.v.21 before giving the writing test and the questionnaire to the students. The

researcher realized that the researcher should do the try-out before giving the

questionnaire. On the other hand, the researcher did the try-out to one students of

English Language Education Study Program to know whether the instruments

were valid and reliable or not.


43

5. Setting the research place and range of time

In this procedure, the researcher made an agreement with the English

teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta to set the research place and range of

time. The place for conducting the research was in class 8A and in the listening

laboratory of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The research was conducted during

the English class. It was started on 18 November, 2015 and ended on 2 December,

2015.

6. Conducting English writing test and distributing metacognitive learning

strategies questionnaire

Before conducting the writing test, the researcher reviewed materials about

recount texts to students to remind them about the materials which were going to

be tested by the researcher (see Appendix 3). Then, in the same time after

reviewing the materials, the researcher did the writing test about the recount texts

on November 18th

, 2015 (see Appendix 4). After the writing test was done, the

researcher asked the English teacher to assess the students‟ writing test. Next,

after conducting the writing test, the researcher distributed the metacognitive

learning strategies to the students on 2 December, 2015.

7. Interviewing the representative of the students

The researcher did interview sections to some students as the

representatives of this research. There were five students who did the interview

section with the researcher. The students who did the interview sections were

chosen by the English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. It was chosen by

their score which are two from the lowest score, one from the middle score and


44

two from the highest score. The interview was conducted in order to find out the

students‟ responses to using metacognitive learning strategies in the writing

activity.

8. Doing the normality, linearity and hypothesis test

After gathering the research data, the researcher did the normality test, the

linearity test and the hypothesis test by using SPSS.v.21. The normality test was

used in order to know whether the data were normal or not. The linearity test was

used in order to know whether the data were linear or not. Furthermore, the

hypothesis test was used in order to know whether there is a correlational between

metacognitive learning strategies and writing skills or not.

9. Interviewing the English teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

In order to strengthen the data, the researcher also conducted an interview

to Mr. Krisna (pseudonym), the English teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

on Thursday, 7 April 2016. The interview was conducted to find out whether the

English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta has implemented metacognitive

learning strategies or not.

10. Analysing the data

The researcher could obtain the result after the researcher had done in

gathering the data. After the researcher gathered all of the data, the researcher

analysed the data and discussed the data analysis.

11. Drawing conclusions

As the last procedure, after analysing the data, the researcher drew

conclusion based on the research result which was supported from the related


45

theories. The conclusion was used to find out whether the research had answered

the problem formulation in this research or not.


46

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the researcher presents the implementation of

metacognitive learning strategies in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. In addition, the

researcher also presents the findings of the research, which show the answers

from two research questions. The research questions will be discussed based on

the data gathered by the writing test, questionnaire and interview. The findings of

the research will be explained in the form of data description, data analysis and

discussion based on the methodology discussed. In this section, the researcher

also discusses the findings by using the theoretical framework presented in

chapter II. Furthermore, the data will show the students‟ responses to writing

skills for writing recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta and

whether there is a significant correlation between metacognitive learning

strategies and students‟ writing skills or not.

A. The Implementation of Metacognitive Learning Strategies in SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

The researcher conducted an interview with Mr. Krisna, the English

teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta on 7 April, 2016 after doing the statistical

study. The interview was conducted to find out whether the English teacher in

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta has implemented metacognitive learning strategies

or not and it is important in order to strengthen the research result. Besides, it was


47

conducted to know the teaching strategies which have done by the teacher and

how the teacher implemented the strategies in the writing classes, especially for

students in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

Based on the interview result (see Appendix 20), Mr. Krisna confirmed

that metacognitive learning strategies had been implemented by using mind-

mapping in the writing classes. In implementing metacognitive learning strategies,

Mr. Krisna asked the students to organize their ideas in the mind map. In the

interview, Mr. Krisna said:

Yes, I have used metacognitive learning strategies. In here, I ask the

students to make the mind map, so I ask them to make the outline for each

paragraph. After that, they have to develop it into paragraph and finally,

they have to arrange it into a text.

In the interview, Mr. Krisna also explained that the implementation of

metacognitive learning strategies was supported by three phase technique. It was

used to help the students in writing activity. In the interview, Mr. Krisna

explained:

In here, I usually use three phase strategy. Firstly, I explain, give the

example, and finally they will produce their own writing.

Based on the interview, it is known that the English teacher has

implemented metacognitive learning strategies to help the students in producing

their own writing in the writing activity. The strategy that is used aims not only to

help students to overcome the difficulties in writing but also to develop their

writing skills. Therefore, this research would like to provide the students‟

responses to using metacognitive learning strategies and to find out whether there


48

is a correlation between students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and students‟

writing skills or not.

B. Data Description

This chapter discusses the research sample which was taken from the

population of this research. According to Creswell (2015), there are two types of

population, namely probability sampling and nonprobability sampling. In this

research, the researcher used probability sampling and it was drawn from the 30

respondents in class 8A. The researcher used probability sampling as

representative of the sample in order to generalize the population (Creswell,

2005). Before using probability sampling, the researcher had to know some of the

major population characteristics as explained in Chapter III. The technique which

is used to select the sample is by using simple random sampling. According to

Sprinthall (1991), “random sampling demands that each member must have an

equal chance of being excluded and that no member of the population may be

systematically excluded”. Therefore, simple random sampling was used to obtain

a sample that shared the characteristics in the same proportions as in the sample.

In addition, the researcher chose class 8A because the students in that class

were the researcher‟s students during the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Another reason was because the teachers in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta gave an opportunity to conduct the research. The research was

conducted from 10th

November – 3rd

December 2015 and 7th

April 2016.

Before conducting the research, the researcher asked the permission from

the teacher and principle in SMP BOPKRI 1 to conduct the research. After the


49

researcher got the permission, the researcher started to conduct the research. First,

the researcher conducted a writing test about recount texts. The researcher also

reviewed the material which was about recount texts writing in 40 minutes before

conducting the writing test. The test was to measure the respondents‟ writing

skills. After reviewing the material, the respondents did the test in 40 minutes.

The sample of students‟ writing test is presented in Appendix 10. Thereafter, the

researcher also asked the teacher to assess the respondents‟ writing test by

refering to the writing score rubric (see Appendix 6) in order to make the result of

the respondents writing test valid and reliable. The result of the writing test is

presented in Appendix 11.

After conducting the writing test, the researcher also asked the respondents

to answer the questionnaire. In the questionnaire, there were 20 items which were

going to be answered. The respondents answered the questionnaire in 10 up to 15

minutes. Furthermore, the questionnaire was used to measure students‟

metacognitive learning strategies and the result of students‟ metacognitive

learning strategies is presented in Appendix 12.

Hereafter, the researcher also used interview as the second instrument in

this research. The interview was conducted after the respondents did the writing

test. This test was used to support the relation between metacognitive learning

strategies and the students‟ writing skills for writing recount texts in class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Moreover, the researcher interviewed five

representatives from the respondents who were chosen by the teacher and the

result interview with the students is presented in Appendix 19. They were chosen


50

based on their writing score in the learning process which represented two lowest

scores, one middle score and two highest score. Since each respondent did the

interview in 6 up to 7 minutes, it was done in 35 minutes for five respondents.

Besides, the researcher also conducted an interview with the English teacher in

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta and the result interview with the English teacher is

presented in Appendix 20. It was conducted in order to strengthen the findings of

the research result and to find out whether the English teacher has implemented

metacognitive learning strategies or not.

The researcher did a statistical study based on the writing test and

questionnaire after conducting the research in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Before analysing the data by using SPSS.v.21, the researcher

organised all data in the form of table and did a statistical study as explained in

the following section.

C. Data Analysis

In this section, the researcher presents the data which answers the research

questions in the form of writing test, questionnaire and interview. This section

consists of two parts. The first section presents the findings of the students‟

responses to writing recount texts when they use metacognitive learning strategies

in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. The second section presents the

findings of the correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the


Yogyakarta.


51

1. The Students’ Responses to Writing Recount texts When They Use

Metacognitive Learning Strategies in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta

In order to answer the first research questions, the researcher conducted an

interview. The first question is related to the students‟ responses to writing

recount texts when they use metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. According to Knoblauch and Brannon (2015), students‟

responses to writing skills can be defined as any verbal or non-verbal act

produced in answer to their writing. In connection with this, according to Harmer

(2007), teacher, as the facilitator, should help learner to be able to respond

because the students need to see things or explain orally even though it will take

time to brainstorm ideas and draft a piece of writing. Based on the interview

result, Mr. Krisna, the English teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta confirmed

that in order to make the students to be able to respond, he encouraged the

students to understand the structure, the purpose and the characteristics of the text.

In the interview, Mr. Krisna said:

If it is for learning writing, I usually provide the students with an

understanding of the structure or arrangement of the text. After that, I give

the purpose of the text and the characteristics of the text, and I usually give

the previous example to them. Next, I ask them to understand the text, in

the context that they will look for the vocabulary which the might not

know yet, and they make small notes about the vocabulary. Finally, they

are asked to find the meaning, so they can understand what the text is

about.

Furthermore, based on the data presented in Appendix 19, it can be seen

that most of the students are classified to have good response to using


52

metacognitive learning strategies in the writing activity. In addition, based on the

data, it can be seen that the contributions of metacognitive learning strategies to

develop writing skills in the writing activity are classified into three, as follows:

a. To Center Students’ Learning

According to Hyland (2002), writing is central to the writer‟s personal

experience and social identities, and people are often evaluated by their control of

it. In addition, the writing process includes activity which contributes to the final

written product and one of them is by including the thinking practices (Sobal,

2001). In the beginning of the writing activity, the thinking process will assist the

students to develop their writing and it will also give contribution for the students

to get focused with what they will write or center their learning. Based on the

interview result, most of the students confirmed that they thought and got focused

before starting to write when they were asked to write by their English teacher in

the writing activity. It led the students before starting to write the text in writing

activity. According to the interview result, the students did several activities

before starting to write and they said:

Berpikir

What I did for the first time was thinking. (Student 1)

Langsung menulis sambil berpikir

I directly wrote while thinking. (Student 2)

Mikir-mikir susunan kalimatnya biar jadi apa.. biar jadi pas

I thought about the sentence organisation in order to make it suitable.

(Student 3)


53

Tanya-tanya dulu, kalau udah tau apa yang mau ditulis, ya ditulis

I asked about what I wanted to write to the teacher or friends and I

would write as soon as I had gotten the information. (Student 4)

Langsung membuat

I directly wrote. (Student 5)

Based on the students‟ responses above, it can be inferred that some

students did the thinking process before they started to write. Furthermore,

according to Tompkins (2003), not all writers use that process in their writing

activity as chronologically because some of them tend to move back and forth the

process as they desire. Besides, writing activity involves the knowledge to know

when, where and why to use particular strategies for learning and problem

solving. Therefore, using metacognitive learning strategies helps the students as

the prior knowledge to plan a strategy in a learning task, including taking

necessary steps in order to reflect and evaluate their learning process as needed.

b. To Arrange and Plan Students’ Learning

By using metacognitive learning strategies, the students can control their

learning, including strategy management their progress or goals in the learning

activities and writing makes it possible to gather, preserve, and transmit

information widely, with great detail and accuracy (MacArthur et all. 2008). It is

also associated with the learners‟ strategy to solve the challenges that they have in

learning activity. Since metacognitive learning strategies provide learners to be

successful thinkers, Fogarty (1994) suggests that students must develop a plan in

order to arrange and plan their learning. Based on the interview result, most of the


54

students confirmed that they develop a plan in writing the text. The plan guides

them in the writing activity. According to the interview result, the students made

plans in writing activity and they said:

Cari topik sama temanya. Iya. Ya itu membuat topik, tema yang mau

ditulis. Biar nanti nggak banyak kesalahan.

I tried to find the topic and theme. Yes, I make plan. I make the topic

and theme which will be written. I make planning to decrease the

mistakes. (Student 1)

Ya. Yang mau ditulis, terus apalagi.. Setelah ditulis itu bentuknya mau

kayak gimana gitu. Itu.. Agar lebih mudah kalau menulis.

Yes, I make plan. I make plans about the things that I want to write and

how the writing will be. I make planning to make it easier when writing.

(Student 2)

Nggak. Mikir kalimatnya, disesuaikan sama judulnya.

No, I do not make plan. I usually think about the sentence, so it can be

fit with the title. (Student 3)

Membuat. Ya, ceritanya mau gimana, kata-katanya. Ya biar.. keliatan

lebih mudah.

Yes, I make plan. I make plan about what the story would be and the

words that I would use in my writing. I make planning to make me

easier when I want to write. (Student 4)

Iya. Ya.. bagaimana membuat tulisan itu supaya baik.. ide pokoknya,

terus nanti mau diisi apa aja tulisannya. Supaya untuk memudahkan.

Yes, I make plan. I plan about how to produce good writing. I also pay

attention with the main idea and what the writing would be. I plan to

overcome the difficulties in writing. (Student 5)

Based on the students‟ responses above, most of the students make plan for

their writing in order to help them in the writing process. It helped the students to

complete the task in the writing activity. It also helped to improve the students‟


55

writing skills and encourage the students to solve the problem when writing.

According to Zhang (2013), metacognitive strategy is a strategy to help the

students in order to improve and develop their language skills. It is related to the

improvement of writing skills. Based on the interview result, most of students

confirmed that re-read what they have already written during the process of

writing. In the interview, the students said:

Iya. Iya, sering. Sering sekali. Biar koreksi kalau ada yang salah.

Grammar, EYD, kalimatnya.

Yes, I re-read. I re-read very often. It was because I could correct the

mistakes I might make. I paid attention with the grammar, Perfected

Spelling System (PSS) and the sentences. (Student 1)

Iya. Takut misalnya.. Untuk lebih teliti lagi, mengoreksi kalau masih

ada yang salah. Kerapian, terus ukurannya harus sama biar lebih rapi

lagi

Yes, I re-read. I was afraid to make mistakes and wanted to correct my

mistakes. I paid attention with the contents because it should be same to

keep the neatness. (Student 2)

Suka. Enak aja dilihat, kalau menurutku. Penulisannya yang rapi, terus

habis itu kata-katanya, grammar

Yes, I re-read. In my opinion, I want to make it good to be read. I paid

attention with the neatness of the writing, the sentences and grammar.

(Student 3)

Kadang-kadang. Ya, agak malas sedikit.. Kerapian

Sometimes, I re-read it. It is because I am a little bit lazy to re-read. I

paid attention with the neatness of the writing. (Student 4)

Iya. Untuk memastikan. Grammar, urutannya, ehm.. struktur teksnya,

vocabulary.

Yes, I re-read. I wanted to make sure. I paid attention with the grammar,

the organization of the text and the vocabulary. (Student 5)


56

Based on the students‟ response above, most of the students re-checked

their writing by re-reading it during the process of writing activity. According to

Zhang (2013), it can increase students‟ abilities to transfer or adapt their learning

to new contexts and tasks. Furthermore, it also includes a critical awareness of

one‟s thinking and learning. Therefore, they need to apply metacognitive

strategies to monitor their learning process and their writing ability will be

developed.

c. To Evaluate Students’ Learning

According to Fogarty (1994), the evaluation that the students do after

completing the task will help them to monitor their understanding in the learning

process. Since metacognitive strategy goes beyond cognitive, Oxford (1990) also

states that it provides a way for learner to coordinate their own learning process.

The strategy also helps them in evaluating their progress or goals and they can use

self-evaluating as the progress of their own work. As the students finished their

writing, according to the interview result, most of them evaluate their writing by

using their own strategy. In the interview, the students confirmed:

Diperiksa kembali. Diganti. Biar lebih bagus.

I re-checked my writing. I made changes. I wanted to make it better.

(Student 1)

Iya. Biar keliahatan rapi, lebih bagus lagi

I re-checked. I made changes. I wanted to make it neat and better.

(Student 2)

Membaca ulang lagi. Iya. Diganti, biar aku enak membacanya

I re-read. I re-checked. I made changes in order to make it easier to be

read. (Student 3)


57

Membaca ulang. Iya. Ya iya, diganti. Ya, biar sesuai isinya.

I re-read my writing. I re-checked. I made changes. In my opinion, the

writing could be suitable and fit with the content of the writing. (Student

4)

Membaca lagi. Iya. Ganti. Ya, supaya hasilnya bagus.

I re-read my writing. I often re-read my writing. I made changes. I

wanted to make a good result. (Student 5)

Based on the students‟ responses, all students re-checked their writing after

they had done their writing task to check whether the writing had already been

appropriate or not. Metacognitive learning strategies help students to become

aware of evaluating their progress toward the completion of a task. It will help the

students to develop and improve their language skills, especially writing skills.

Therefore, it could be a good strategy that they can apply in the writing activity.

According to Nunan (2009), the appropriate learning strategy could be the

basis of many aspects in learning. Based on the interview result, most of the

students confirmed that they have not had any specific strategy, but they apply

their own learning strategy, especially for the writing activity. The strategy helps

the students to organise their ideas and decrease the difficulties in writing the text.

In the interview, the students said:

Ada. Membuat rencana, tulisannya dibuat sesingkat mungkin supaya

yang membaca mudah

Yes, I make plans and make the writing as shortest as possible so that

the reader can read easily. (Student 1)

Belum. Iya.. membuat.. apa ya namanya.. kerangkanya

No, I do not. Yes, I made the structure of the body. (Student 2)


58

Nggak ada, tetapi biasanya nyusun yang mau ditulis, biar jadi runtut

lagi

No, I do not have, but I usually organise the structure of the sentences

that I want to write in order to make it become more organized. (Student

3)

Nggak, langsung dikerjakan

No, I write what I want to write. (Student 4)

Iya, membuat prencanaan

Yes, I make planning. (Student 5)

According to Oxford (1990), metacognitive strategy supports learners to

varieties of metacognitive awareness to develop learners‟ writing skills. In this

research, metacognitive learning strategies can be used to control the composition

in writing recount texts. After students receive the sufficient knowledge by using

the metacognitive learning strategies, they can create their own writing from their

past event or experiences. Furthermore, according to Oxford (1990), by using

metacognitive learning strategies, all students will plan, monitor and evaluate to

produce appropriate vocabulary, idiom and sentence structure through their

writing. Based on the interview result, Mr. Krisna confirmed that the students

have good responses on using metacognitive learning strategies in the writing

classes. In implementing metacognitive learning strategies, Mr. Krisna asked the

students to organize their ideas in the mind map. In the interview, Mr. Krisna said:

When I use metacognitive learning strategies, they are quite enthusiastic

and active because maybe this is new and it helps them to develop their

own style of writing. Therefore, it helps them to make a text as creative as

they can.


59

The first question in the problem formulation was answered since there

were positive responses about metacognitive learning strategies for writing

recount texts in the class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Metacognitive

learning strategies help the students to overcome their difficulties during writing

activity. Therefore, the students can use metacognitive learning strategies as one

of the strategy that helps them to coordinate their learning process by self-

planning, self-monitoring and self-planning.

2. The Correlation between Metacognitive Learning Strategies and Students’

Writing Skills for Writing Recount texts in Class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta

This chapter discusses the data description between independent and

dependent variables based on the data gathering which was taken from the

population of this research. The researcher specified the data analysis into mean

(M), median (Me), Modus (Mo) and standard deviation (SD). The data analysis

showed the frequency from each variable which was in the form of the frequency

distribution table and histogram. The detail of the formula was presented as the

following. Furthermore, the complete data is presented in Appendix 17.

i. Computing the number of class interval

In order to measure the number of class interval, the researcher used

Sturges‟ formula. According to Hyndman (1995), Sturges‟ rule is used to over

smooth the histogram, especially for large samples. By using Sturges‟ formula,

the researcher will be able to measure the number of class interval. In other words,


60

Sturges‟ formula helps to produce the interval of the data through histogram.

Below is the formula.

Figure 4.1 Sturges’ Formula

Notes:

K = the number of the class interval

n = the number of respondents

log = Logaritma

Figure 4.2 the Calculation of Class Interval

ii. Determine the range of the data

In order to determine the data, the researcher made the distance of the data

from the lowest to the highest. It helps the researcher to classify the class of the

students‟ level in both metacognitive learning strategies and writing skills in class

8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

iii. Computing class length into the number of class

After determining the data, the researcher classified the result into five

categories which show the level of students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and

writing skills. The five categories are very low, low, fair, high and very high.

a. The Score of Metacognitive Learning Strategies

The researcher used questionnaires to measure the students‟ metacognitive

learning strategies. In the metacognitive learning strategies questionnaire, there

are 20 questions with four options, namely sangat setuju (strongly agree), setuju

(agree), tidak setuju (disagree) and sangat tidak setuju (strongly disagree). The

K = 1 + 3.3 log n

K = 1 + 3.3 log 30 = 4.874 ≈ 5

K = 1 + 3.3 log n


61

value of this option ranges from 1 to 4 scales with a minimum score of 20 and 80

for the maximum score. The researcher found that the lowest score was 40 and the

highest score was 78. It was taken by multiplying the 20 items with 1 for the

lowest score and 20 items with 4 for the highest score. The average score (mean)

was 59 and standard deviation was 6.33.

Since the result of this variable has a wide range, the researcher categorised

the students‟ score of metacognitive learning strategies into a group of frequency

after the data gathering was done. Five equal – grouped intervals were constructed

in the form of a grouped frequency distribution, starting from 40 as the lowest

scale in this research. Furthermore, the researcher analysed the students‟

metacognitive learning strategies by using SPSS.v.21. Below is the result of

interval class on students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and the complete data

is presented in Appendix 13.

Table 4.1 Students’ Metacognitive Learning Strategies Frequency

Distributions

No. Interval Frequency Percentage

1 40.01 – 49.50 2 7%

2 49.50 – 55.83 1 3%

3 55.83 – 62.17 3 10%

4 62.17 – 68.50 14 47%

5 68.50 – 79.89 10 33%

Total 30 100%


62

The data of the frequency distributions of the students‟ metacognitive learning

strategies in the table is presented in the following figure below.

Figure 4.3 Students’ Metacognitive Learning Strategies Frequency

Distributions

b. The Score of Students’ Writing Skills

The researcher gathered the data by using English writing test in the form

of written test to measure the students‟ writing skills. In the writing test, the

students were asked to write their experiences which were related to their holiday

since the topic was unforgettable holiday. They are also asked to write by using

metacognitive learning strategies. The researcher asked the teacher to assess the

students‟ writing test based on the scale of the assessment which had been made.

The minimum score for the writing test was 5 points or 20 and the maximum

score was 20 points or 100. It was obtained by multiplying the result of the score

with 4 in order to get the maximum total score of the writing test. After analysing

the data, the researcher found that the lowest score of the English writing test was


63

10 points and highest score was 19 points. The average score (mean) was 14.5 and

standard deviation was 1.5.

The researcher also categorised the result of the students‟ writing test into a

group of frequency after analysing the data. There were five equal – grouped

intervals which were constructed, starting from 10 as the lowest scale.

Furthermore, the researcher also used SPSS.v.21 in order to analyse the students‟

writing test. Below is the complete data of a grouped frequency distribution which

is presented in Appendix 14.

Table 4.2 Students’ Writing Skills Frequency Distributions

No. Interval Frequency Percentage

1 10 – 12.25 3 10%

2 12.25 – 13.75 3 10%

3 13.75 – 15.25 9 30%

4 15.25 – 16.75 6 20%

5 16.75 – 19.45 9 30%

Total 30 100%

The data of the frequency distributions of the students‟ writing skills in the table

were figured below.

Figure 4.4 Students’ Writing Skills Frequency Distributions


64

c. The Testing of Statistical Assumptions

In this section, the researcher discusses the testing of statistical

assumptions based on the data gathering and statistical study in this research. The

researcher analysed the testing of statistical assumptions into validity test,

reliability test, normality test and hypothesis test. The researcher tested the

statistical assumption by using SPSS.v.21. Below is the data analysis which was

from the statistical study.

1) Validity Test

In order to test the validity, Pearson‟s Product-moment Simple Correlation

(r) was used in this research. The test is used to test the validity of this research,

whether the data are able to reveal what is claimed to measure. In order to test the

validity, the researcher compared the probability of Degree of Freedom (DF = N –

2) in the r table with the result of the test in the significance of 0.05 for two-tailed

test. The validity test is valid if the validity value of the variable test is less than

the value of DF (r < r table). The validity test shows that the probability was 0.374

and based on the result, all of variables in X variable were less than 0.374.

Furthermore, the probability was 0.468 and based on the result, all of variables in

Y variable was less than 0.468. Therefore, based on the validity test calculation of

the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (X) and students‟ writing skills (Y)

variable, it was valid because it shows that the validity level was 100%. It means

that both variables were 100% valid. The result of the validity test is presented in

Appendix 8.


65

2) Reliability Test

The researcher used Cronbrach‟s coefficient alpha to test the reliability of

the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (X) variable and students‟ writing

skills (Y) variable. The test is used to find out the reliability of both variables. The

test is valid if the probability is larger than the r table (r > r table). Based on the

reliability result, it is found that the reliability value was 0.920 with 0.444 for the

probability. In this research, the probability value was larger than the value in the

r table, so it is found that the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (X)

variable and students‟ writing skills (Y) variable were reliable. The result of the

reliability test is presented in Appendix 9.

3) Normality Test

In this research, the researcher used Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to test the

normal distribution of the variables. The test is used to compare the observed

frequency distribution and the expected frequency distribution. It is found from

the normality test calculation of the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies

(X) variable that the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z value was 0.946 with 0.333 for the

probability. If the probability is larger than α = 0.05, it can be said that the

variable distribution is normal. In this research, the probability value was larger

than α, so the distribution of the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (X)

variable was normal.

The researcher also used the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to measure the

students‟ writing skills (Y) variable and it was found that the Kolmogorov-

Smirnov Z value was 0.984 with 0.288 for the probability. Since the probability


66

was larger than α, the distribution of the students‟ writing skills (Y) variable was

normal. Below is the result of normality test and the complete data is presented in

Appendix 15.

Table 4.3 the Results of Normality Test

No Variable Kolmogorov-

Smirnov Z

Probability Conclusion

1. Students‟

metacognitive learning

strategies

0.946 0.333 Normal

2. Students‟ writing skills 0.984 0.288 Normal

4) Linearity Test

The researcher used regression analysis in order to test the linear

relationship between the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies (X) variable

and students‟ writing skills (Y) variable. Based on the data analysis from the two

variables, it was found that the F value was 1.053 with 0.462 for the probability. If

the probability is larger than α = 0.05, it can be said that the variable distribution

is linear. The result of the relationship between the two variables was larger than

α, so it can be said that it was linear. Below is the result of linearity test and the

complete data are presented in Appendix 16.

Table 4.4 the Results of Linearity Test

F value p Conclusion

The relationship between

students‟ metacognitive learning

strategies (X) variable and

writing skills (Y) variable

1.053 0.462 Linear

Based on the result of the calculation, the data from the two variables were

normally distributed and the relationship was linear.


67

d. Hypothesis Test

There were independent variable (metacognitive learning strategies) and

dependent variable (English writing skills) which were analysed to answer the

research problems. In analysing the correlation between the two variables, the

researcher determined the hypothesis of this research, namely the null hypothesis

(H0) and the alternatives hypothesis (H1):

i. The null hypothesis (H0) was “there is no significant correlation between

metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing skills for

writing recount texts in the class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta”.

ii. The alternative hypothesis (H1) was “there is a significant correlation

between metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing skills

for writing recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta”.

In order to test the hypothesis, the researcher used Pearson‟s Product-

moment Simple Correlation (r). The researcher used SPSS.v.21 to analyse the data

of the research. The following is the result of the calculation analysis which shows

the correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing

skills for writing recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Below

is the summarised results of the Pearson‟s Product-moment Simple Correlation (r)

analysis and the complete data is presented in Appendix 18.

Table 4.5 the Summarised Results of the Pearson’s Product-moment Simple

Correlation (r) Analysis to Test the Hypothesis

Independent Variable Dependent Variable r P

Metacognitive learning

strategies

Writing skills 0.449 0.000


68

Based on the result, the correlation coefficient (r) shows the value of 0.627

with 0.000 for the probability. In the rtable, the sample size (N) for 30 was 0.449

with α= 0.01. The result shows that the correlation coefficient (r) value was larger

than rtable (0.627 > 0.449). Since the p < 0.005 and r > rtable, the null hypothesis

(H0) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. Therefore, it

shows that there was a moderate of positive and significant relationship between

metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing skills for writing

recount texts in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta.

The second question in the problem formulation was answered since there

is a positive correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and the


Yogyakarta. Metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing skills

have a relation. Therefore, the students have an opportunity to develop their

writing skills by using metacognitive learning strategies.

D. Discussion

In this section, the researcher discusses the result of the two research

questions which are presented above. The discussions are based on the theories in

theoretical framework presented in Chapter II and also, it is supported by some

other related theories. Furthermore, there are two parts in this section. The first

part discusses the findings of the first and the second research question in this

research. Hereafter, the second part discusses lesson learned of a correlational


69

study on metacognitive learning strategies to develop students‟ writing skills in

class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

1. The Findings of the Research

Based on the result of data analysis, it was found that the mean value of the

metacognitive learning strategies variable was 59.00 and it was taken at range of

40.00 – 78.00. On the other hand, the mean value of the writing skills was 14.50

and it was taken at range of 10.00 – 19.00. Based on the mean value result of both

metacognitive learning strategies and writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI

1 Yogyakarta, it can be said that the mean value was categorized to be fair.

According to the data analysis, it was found that the correlation coefficient

was 0.627 with 0.000 of probability at the significant level of 5%. The result

showed that there is a significant correlation between metacognitive learning

strategies and writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. It shows

that the metacognitive learning strategies gave significant effect through the

writing skills. Therefore, since there was positive and significant correlation, it

also shows that the progress of metacognitive learning strategies was followed by

the progress of writing skills.

According to Hyland (2003), writing is considered as one of the important

skills because it helps to explore the students‟ skill by expressing their ideas

through the writing activity. Since writing is known as a thinking process, there is

a close connection between writing and thinking that makes writing become a

valuable part of any language courses (Hyland, 2003). Through writing activity,

the students can explore their writing skills in producing new texts. According to


70

Sobal (2001), writing activity is the process that contributes to the final written

product by including research, reading and thinking practices. Teaching students

to write may require the teacher to practice these processes and it will help the

students to improve their writing skills. Based on the interview result, Mr. Krisna

stated that the students in class 8A are very enthusiastic and active in writing

activity and he said:

For writing classes in class 8A, they are very enthusiastic and active. They

often ask, for example about how about this and that. On the other hand,

since this is writing classes, they have difficulties in deciding the

vocabulary because sometimes, they have to ask about the vocabulary.

In connection with the writing activity, teaching students how to write in

any disciplines may help the students to learn about how writing works; especially

the students can concentrate not only on what they have written, but also how they

write it (Raimes, 1983). On the other hand, the teacher‟s role is important for the

students‟ response on writing, especially in providing the students to review and

revise their writing and it will also help the teacher to monitor the students‟

progress. Besides, according to Harmer (2007), with the teacher‟s help in

reviewing and editing their writing in various ways, the students will be more

focused in generating more ideas, re-drafting, re-editing and so on. In the

interview, Mr. Krisna confirmed that the students in class 8A are active and he

said:

Yes, they do. If it is in the context of active, for class 8A, they are very

active in giving ideas, asking or answering questions, but, as teacher, we

have to encourage them. Sometimes, when the students find difficulties,

there are some students who do not want to ask. Therefore, I have to ask

them in order to motivate them to start doing their work.


71

Based on the result, metacognitive learning strategies help the students to

develop their writing skills. By having high metacognitive learning strategies, the

students can have a critical awareness of thinking and learning. According to

Halpern (1996), learners need to apply metacognitive strategies to monitor their

learning process because successful learners apply strategy to the transfer their

knowledge through the learning process. The students can apply metacognitive

learning strategies in the writing activity because it shows how the human brain

processes and produces various ideas and information. In SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta, the teacher has applied metacognitive learning strategies in the

writing classes.

As Devine (1993) puts it, a successful language learner is “one who has

ample metacognitive knowledge about the self as learner, about the nature of the

cognitive task at hand and about appropriate strategies for achieving cognitive

goals” (p. 109, as cited in Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in

reading comprehension, 2002). For that reason, it shows that metacognitive

learning strategies help the students to improve their writing skills. Furthermore,

Mr. Krisna explained:

In my opinion, it is very helpful in learning writing because they become

more creative in writing and developing the text that they have learned

before.

In here, metacognitive learning strategies are very helpful.

Based on teacher‟s statements above, it shows that metacognitive learning

strategies helps to develop the students‟ style of writing and especially, it helps

the students to produce a good text. Besides, since there was a positive significant


72

correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and writing skills, an

English teacher has to consider about using metacognitive learning strategies

when teaching writing in the learning activity. There are many media that can be

used by the teacher in the writing activity and one of them is by using

metacognitive learning strategies for writing recount texts. It can help teachers to

create a meaningful and creative activity in using the recount texts as the teaching

media for students. It can also help the students to be successful thinkers because

the students can review their own progress in writing through the past event or

experiences by applying metacognitive learning strategies. Therefore, the goal for

teaching metacognitive in writing should help learners to develop their skills

through the use of the strategies, so they can get meaningful writing assignments

in the learning process that helps them to enhance good writing strategies.

2. Lesson Learned of a Correlational Study on Metacognitive Learning

Strategies to Develop Students’ Writing Skills in Class 8A of SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

This research emphasized the use of metacognitive learning strategies to

develop students‟ writing skills. The research method used in this research was

correlational research which studied the relationship among two or more

variables. In this research, the researcher used two variables to identify the

relationship between students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and students‟

writing skills. The researcher conducted the correlational research in class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Besides, the researcher did the observation during


73

the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta before conducting the

research. After doing the observation, the researcher made some plans to conduct

the research.

In conducting the research, the researcher did the statistical study to test

the validity and reliability by using SPSS.v.21. The test was used to measure the

validity and reliability level of the research instruments. The result of the test was

100% valid and reliable. After the researcher did the statistical study, the research

started to conduct the research. It was started by giving the writing test and as the

researcher has said, the writing was assessed by the English teacher in SMP

BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Furthermore, the researcher also distributed the

questionnaire to measure the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies. After

analysing the data, the researcher also did the statistical study to describe an

existing relationship between the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and

the students‟ writing skills. The result shows that there is a positive relationship

between the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing

skills.

Hereafter, the researcher also conducted interview with some students and

the English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Based on the interview, the

researcher found that the English teacher used metacognitive learning strategies as

one of the strategies in the writing classes. Furthermore, the researcher found that

there were positive responses from the students about using metacognitive

learning strategies in the writing classes. Most of the students applied


74

metacognitive learning strategies to overcome their difficulties and develop their

writing skills in the writing activity.

In this research, the researcher has learned many things such as applying

some strategies which help the students in the learning process. By using good

strategies, it will help to encourage the students in order to develop their skills in

the learning process. In addition, one of the strategies that both the teacher and the

students can use in the learning activity is metacognitive learning strategies that

help the students to plan, monitor and evaluate their learning progress. It is also

proven by the research findings presented above. The researcher summed up that

there is positive relationship between students‟ metacognitive learning strategies

and the students‟ writing skills. In conclusion, this research on the correlational

study on metacognitive learning strategies to develop students‟ writing skills in

class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta was successful and there were good

responses from both the English teacher and the students in applying

metacognitive learning strategies in the writing classes.


75

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this chapter, the researcher presents the conclusions and the

recommendations from the research results. In the conclusions part, the researcher

concludes the research from the data analysis and research findings. In the

recommendations part, the researcher delivers the recommendations for the

English teachers, the students and future researchers who are going to conduct a

similar research.

A. Conclusions

This research was conducted in order to find out the students‟ responses to writing

a text when using metacognitive learning strategies for the students in class 8A of

SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta. Besides, the researcher attempted to find out

whether there is a correlation between metacognitive learning strategies and

students‟ writing skills for writing recount texts in that class.

The research method used in this research was correlational research which

studied the relationship among two variables, namely metacognitive learning

strategies as the independent variable and students‟ writing skills as the dependent

variable. Besides, the researcher used simple random sampling as the sampling

techniques to obtain a sample that shared the characteristics in the same

proportions as in the sample. The research instruments in this research were the

observation sheet, writing test, questionnaire and verifying interview. The


76

researcher did the observation during the teaching practice in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta before conducting the research. Since the researcher used the writing

test, the researcher was helped by the English teacher in SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta to assess the students‟ writing test. The questionnaire was used in to

measure the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies. The researcher asked the

students for doing the interview to find out the students‟ responses to using

metacognitive learning strategies. In addition, the researcher also did the interview

to the English teacher in order to strengthen the research findings. The researcher

conducted all research procedure including doing the observation and arranged the

permission letter from both university and SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta before

starting to conduct the research. In connection with that, the researcher had also

made the research instruments along with the guidance from the thesis advisor.

Therefore, the researcher did not only learn to write a thesis, but the researcher

also learned to conduct the research based on the regulation from the study

program.

Based on the analysis results, the researcher can draw two conclusions.

The first is that there are positive responses on writing recount texts from the

students when using metacognitive learning strategies in the writing classes

because it helps the students to center their learning, arrange and plan their

learning, and evaluate their learning. The second is that there is a significant

correlation between the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies and the

students‟ writing skills in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta (r = 0.627 > r

table = 0.449).


77

Furthermore, based on the findings, the teacher‟s role is important in order

to make the students able to respond in teaching and learning process. In the

writing activity, one of the strategies that can be applied is metacognitive learning

strategies. Metacognitive learning strategies help to coordinate the students‟

learning process by self-planning, self-monitoring and self-evaluating. The

findings show that there is a positive relation between students‟ metacognitive

learning strategies and students‟ writing skills. Moreover, metacognitive learning

strategies help teachers to create a meaningful and creative activity in using the

recount texts as the teaching media for students. In conclusion, the teacher as the

role model needs to consider the best strategy that will encourage the students in

the learning process in order to develop their learning skills.

B. Recommendations

Based on the research findings, there are positive responses when the

students use metacognitive learning strategies in class 8A of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta. Besides, there is a positive and significant relationship between

metacognitive learning strategies and the students‟ writing skills for writing

recount texts. In connection with the research findings, there are some

recommendations for English teachers, the students and future researchers who

are going to conduct similar research.

1. For the English Teachers of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

It is suggested that the teachers should consider the use of metacognitive

learning strategies to develop students‟ writing skills, especially in the writing


78

classes. Metacognitive learning strategies help the students to develop their

writing skills because by having high metacognitive learning strategies, the

students can have a critical awareness of thinking and learning. Teachers can work

together to encourage the students in the teaching and learning process by using

appropriate strategy. Since this research used recount texts which are related to the

students‟ experiences, the students will be more encouraged and motivated with

the strategy that helps them in overcoming the difficulties in the writing activity.

Besides, the teacher can work together with another teacher to conduct similar

research that will help them to know the relationship between the learning strategy

and the students‟ learning skills.

2. For the Students in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

It is important for the students to know what strategy they can apply to

develop their skills in learning writing. By understanding their own strategy, the

students will be able to be critical and creative in producing a text in the writing

classes. The researcher suggests that the students apply metacognitive learning

strategies in the learning activity, especially in the writing activity. Based on the

findings, the metacognitive learning strategies gave significant effect through the

writing skills. Therefore, the students should consider the use of metacognitive

learning strategies to help them in self-planning, self-monitoring and self-

evaluating.


79

3. For the Future Researchers

For future researchers who are going to conduct similar research in

metacognitive learning strategies, the researcher suggests that they could be more

specific, especially in the students‟ responses to using metacognitive learning

strategies. It is important for the future researchers to find other findings which

are related to the students‟ metacognitive learning strategies or the students‟

writing skills. It is also expected that the future researchers who want to conduct

the similar topic could apply another strategy which develops the students‟

writing skills, for example designing good materials and good strategies for

learning writing in English.


80

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: PT

Rineka Cipta.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in

education (8th

ed.). California: Wadsworth.

Azwar, S. (1980). Reliabilitas dan validitas: Interpretasi dan komputasi.

Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Azwar, S. (2003). Reliabilitas dan validitas (ed. 3). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Azwar, S. (2009). Metode penelitian. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Biemiller, A., & Meichenbaum, D. (1992). The nature and nurture of the self-

directed learner. Educational Leadership, 50, 75–80.

Bright, J. A. & McGregor, G. P. (1973). Teaching English as a second language.

London: Longman Group Ltd.

Brannon, L. & Knoblauch, C. H. (2009). On students‟ rights to their own texts: A

model of teacher response. College Composition and Communication, 33,

157-166.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to

language pedagogy (3rd

Edition). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative (5th

ed.). New Jersey: Pearson

Education, Inc.

El-Coumy, A. S. (2004). Metacognition and reading comprehension: current

trends in theory and research. Cairo: Anglo Egyptian Bookshop.

Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of

metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition,

motivation, and understanding (pp. 21–29). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Fogarty, R. (1994). How to teach metacognition. Palatine, IL: IRI/Skylight

Publishing.


81

Fogarty, R. J. (1994). Teach for metacognitive reflection. Thousands Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press.

Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in

education (7th

ed.). Boston: McGraw – Hill Higher Education.

Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical

thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th

edition).

Cambridge: Longman.

Heaton, J. B. (1975). Writing English language tests. London: Longman Group

Limited.

Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. London: Pearson

Education Limited.

Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. New York: Cambridge University

Press.

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI:

University of Michigan Press.

Hyndman, R. J. (1995). The problem with Sturges’ rule for constructing

histograms. Retrieved on 14 March 2016 from

http://robjhyndman.com/papers/sturges.pdf

Ismail, N. (2010). Exploring ESL students’ apprehension level and attitude

towards academic writing. Illinois: Common Ground Publishing LLC.

MacArthur, C. A., Graham S., and Fitzgerald J. (2008). Handbook of writing

research. New York: The Guildford Press.

Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: the writing process and

error analysis in students texts. Canada: Queen‟s University.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw

Hill.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should

know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

O'Malley, J. M. (1987). The effects of training in the use of learning strategies on

learning English as a second language. Cambridge: Prentice-Hall.


82

Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Sommers, N. (2010). Responding to student writing. National Council of

Teachers of English: College Composition and Communication, Vol. 33,

No. 2 (May, 1982), pp. 147–156.

Sprinthall, R. C., Gregory T. S. & Sirois, L. (1991). Understanding educational

research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Wahyuni, H. (2000). English education study program students’ metacognitive

learning strategies and reading achievements: A correlational study.

Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.


83

APPENDICES


84

Appendix 1. Cover Letter for the Headmaster of SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta


85

Appendix 2. Research Letter from SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta


86

Appendix 3. Recount Text Material


87

Orientation

Events

Conclusion

What? : holiday

Who? : my family; I; we

When? : last month

Where? : Yogyakarta

Why? (optional)

First, before going to Yogyakarta, we woke up early in the

morning to prepare everything. After everything got ready

and we had our breakfast, we left the house at six o'clock.

We arrived at Yogyakarta at 9.00 a.m.

Then, we went to Sadranan beach. We got there at 12 p.m.

I saw many foreign visitors because it was holiday. My

parents watched us playing with sand in the beach. We did

not swim since the wave was rough.

Next, after having lunch, we went on our picnic to the

museum and Malioboro shopping centre.

We were so happy

and it was my

fantastic

Finally, we drove back to Solo at 7 o'clock and arrived

home at ten.

Title:

Fantastic Holiday

to Yogyakarta


88

Appendix 4. Writing Test


89


90

Appendix 5. Questionnaire

PROGRAM STUDI PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS

UNIVERSITAS SANATA DHARMA

26 November 2015

PENGANTAR KUESIONER

Kepada:

Yth. Siswa-siswi Kelas VIII A

SMP BOPKRI I Yogyakarta

Siswa-siswi yang saya hormati,

Di tengah-tengah kesibukan siswa-siswi dalam mengahadapi ujian akhir

semester, izinkanlah saya memohon bantuan kepada siswa-siswi untuk berkenan

mengisi kuesioner ini. Kuesioner ini digunakan untuk penelitian saya yang

berjudul “A Correlational Study on Metacognitive Learning Strategies to Develop

Students‟ Writing Skills in Class 8A OF SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta”.

Jawaban yang diberikan akan dirahasiakan dan tidak berpengaruh pada

nilai mata pelajaran siswa-siswi di sekolah. Adapun penulisan identitas siswa-

siswi hanya untuk mempermudah dalam pengumpulan dan pengolahan data saja.

Jawaban terbaik yang saya harapkan adalah jawaban yang sesuai dengan

keyakinan dan keadaan yang dirasakan. Oleh karena itu, ketulusan dan kejujuran

dalam memberikan jawaban sangat saya harapkan.

Penelitian ini tidak akan berhasil tanpa bantuan siswa-siswi. Saya ucapkan

bantak terima kasih atas bantuan dan kerjasamanya.

Peneliti,

Agata Nina Puspita

NIM. 121214066


91

KUESIONER Nama : ____________________ Class/No. Absen :

____________________

Petunjuk Pengisian Angket:

1. Berikan pendapat Anda tentang pernyataan-pernyataan dalam kuesioner

dengan membubuhkan tanda centang (√) pada kolom-kolom yang tersedia.

2. Isilah sesuai dengan keadaan diri Anda sendiri.

Keterangan

STS : Sangat Tidak Setuju

TS : Tidak Setuju

S : Setuju

SS : Sangat Setuju

No. Pernyataan STS TS S SS

1. Saya mengingat kembali pengalaman saya dan

mengkaitkannya dengan tema penulisan.

2. Saya menggunakan pengalaman saya untuk

menyusun ide penulisan.

3. Saya merencanakan setiap kalimat yang akan saya

tulis.

4. Saya membuat daftar ide penulisan yang akan saya

tulis.

5. Saya menyusun tulisan berdasarkan urutan struktur

teks.

6. Saya mencari kosa kata yang akan digunakan untuk

mempermudah saya dalam menulis.

7. Saya mengerti dengan apa yang akan saya tulis.

8. Saya menggunakan perencanaan yang saya buat

sebagai panduan saya dalam menulis.

9. Saya mengembangkan ide pokok tulisan dengan

menyertakan contoh yang sesuai.

10. Saya fokus pada tulisan yang saya tulis.

11. Saya berhati-hati dalam menyusun perencanaan

penulisan.

12. Saya bertanya pada diri saya apakah saya menulis

sesuai dengan tujuan penulisan.

13. Saya membuat pembenaran apabila saya membuat

kesalahan dalam penulisan.

14. Saya membaca ulang tulisan saya untuk

menyesuaikan dengan perencanaan yang telah saya

buat.

15. Saya mencocokkan tulisan yang saya tulis dengan

perencanaan yang dibuat sebelum menulis.

16. Saya memeriksa kembali tulisan saya dan


92

menggantinya apabila kurang sesuai dengan tujuan

penulisan.

17. Saya memastikan bahwa tulisan saya telah

mencapai tujuan penulisan.

18. Saya memberikan informasi yang jelas dalam

setiap tulisan saya.

19. Saya menggunakan strategi yang tepat dengan

membuat perencanaan dalam menulis.

20. Saya mencoba untuk menggunakan strategi yang

lain apabila strategi yang saya terapkan kurang

sesuai.


93

Appendix 6. Writing Score Rubric

Rubric for Writing Recount texts

Excellent

4

Good

3

Inadequate

2

Inacceptable

1

Content Siswa

mengembangk

an ide

berdasarkan

pengalaman

atau fakta di

dalam setiap

susunan teks

dengan jelas.

Siswa hanya

mengembangk

an ide

berdasarkan

pengalaman

atau fakta di

dalam

orientation

dan events

dengan jelas.

Siswa hanya

mengembangk

an ide

berdasarkan

pengalaman

atau fakta di

dalam

orientation

dengan jelas.

Siswa tidak

mengembangk

an ide

berdasarkan

pengalaman

atau fakta di

dalam setiap

susunan teks.

Organizati

on

Siswa menulis

dengan

menggunakan

judul yang

sangat sesuai

dan susunan

teks yang

lengkap.

Siswa menulis

dengan

menggunakan

judul yang

sesuai dan

hanya menulis

orientation

dan events.

Siswa menulis

dengan

menggunakan

judul dan

hanya menulis

orientation.

Siswa tidak

menulis judul

yang sesuai

dan susunan

teks yang

lengkap.

Grammar Siswa menulis

dengan

menggunakan

tata bahasa

yang sesuai,

seperti kata

kerja dalam

bentuk

lampau, kata

ganti orang

pertama, dan

kata

keterangan

dengan benar.

Siswa menulis

dengan sedikit

kesalahan

dalam

menggunakan

tata bahasa

yang sesuai,

seperti kata

kerja dalam

bentuk

lampau, kata

ganti orang

pertama, dan

kata

keterangan

dengan benar.

Siswa menulis

dengan banyak

kesalahan

dalam

menggunakan

tata bahasa

yang sesuai,

seperti kata

kerja dalam

bentuk

lampau, kata

ganti orang

pertama, dan

kata

keterangan

dengan benar.

Siswa tidak

menulis

dengan

menggunakan

tata bahasa

yang sesuai,

seperti kata

kerja dalam

bentuk

lampau, kata

ganti orang

pertama, dan

kata

keterangan

dengan benar.

Mechanics Siswa menulis

dengan huruf

kapital, tanda

baca, dan

Siswa menulis

dengan sedikit

kesalahan

dalam

Siswa menulis

dengan banyak

kesalahan

dalam

Siswa tidak

menulis

dengan huruf

kapital, tanda


94

paragraf yang

benar dan rapi.

penggunaan

huruf kapital,

tanda baca,

dan paragraf

yang benar

dan rapi.

penggunaan

huruf kapital,

tanda baca,

dan paragraf

yang benar

dan rapi.

baca, dan

paragraf yang

benar dan rapi.

Vocabulary Siswa menulis

dengan

menggunakan

kosa kata yang

beragaram dan

tepat.

Siswa menulis

dengan sedikit

kesalahan

dalam

penggunaan

beberapa kosa

kata.

Siswa menulis

dengan banyak

kesalahan

dalam

penggunaan

kosa beberapa

kosa kata.

Siswa tidak

menulis

dengan

menggunakan

kosa kata yang

beragam dan

tepat.


95

Appendix 7. Observation Sheet Result

OBSERVATION SHEET

Date of Observation : Wednesday, 12th

August 2015

Time of Observation : 10.05 – 11.25 WIB

Setting : SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Participants : Class 8A

Material : Descriptive Text

ACTIVITY STUDENTS RESPONSE

Opening Activity

1. The teacher greets the students.

2. The teacher checks the attendance

lists.

3. The teacher asks about the

students‟ feeling.

4. The teacher gives brief explanation

about today‟s material.

5. The teacher asks the students to

open their English book to see the

pictures about some places which

are related to today‟s material.

6. The teacher asks the students to

give opinion about the materials

and relate with their own

experience

The captain of the class stands up and

knocks the table and all students stand

up to greet the teacher.

The students pay attention while

preparing the English book.

Some students answer the teachers‟

questions and the others are busy to

share their feelings with their friends.

The class is very crowded and the

captain tries to make the class pay

attention with teacher‟s explanation of

today‟s material.

Before continuing the lesson, the

teacher reminds the class rules and the

students become quite and actively

involved.

The students actively answer the

questions.

Even though their grammar is not good,

the students try to relate it with their

own experience.

The teacher corrects the students‟

mistakes and relates their answer with

today‟s material.

The teacher makes some jokes from the


96

students‟ answer and the whole class

are laughing.

Exploration (Eksplorasi)

1. The teacher explains the students

about the topic.

2. The teacher shows the example of

Descriptive text from the students‟

English book.

3. The teacher explains the functions,

the generic structure and language

features of Descriptive text.

4. The teacher reminds the students to

use simple present tense.

While the teacher is giving the

explanation, some students are busy to

prepare their own notes.

The teacher asks the secretary of the

class to write in the whiteboard about

today‟s material which are not shown

in the English book.

While the students are busy in writing

the material, the teacher shows the

example from the English book.

Some students keep continuing to write

and some students open the book to see

the example.

The teacher asks the students about

who have finished writing the material.

The teacher gives 10 minutes for

students to finish it.

Some students who have finished

started to talk with their friends and the

class becomes so crowded.

After the teacher makes sure that the

whole class have finished, the teacher

explains the material to the students

briefly.

The teacher reminds the students about

the tenses that they should use.

Elaboration (Elaborasi)

1. The teacher asks the students about

their understanding of Descriptive

text, such as the characteristics and

the generic structure of Descriptive

text.

2. The teacher writes some difficult

vocabularies which are found in the

Descriptive text and lets the

students to find out the meaning in

the dictionary.

3. The teacher discusses the right

answers of the vocabularies with

the students.

The teacher asks two students to give

their understanding about Descriptive

text.

The teacher asks the students about the

part that the students might not

understand.

The students keep silent.

The teacher writes ten difficult

vocabularies based from the

Descriptive text in the English book

and lets the students to find out the

meaning in the dictionary.

The teacher gives 10 minutes for the

students to complete the answers.

The teacher discusses the answer and

writes the answer in the white board.


97

The students actively answer and

compete with each other to answer the

questions and the class becomes so

crowded.

Confirmation (Konfirmasi)

1. Teacher asks the students to make a

Descriptive text in maximum 15

sentences.

2. Teacher assists the students while

they are writing their own text.

The teacher asks the students to make a

Descriptive text by using the generic

structure as their guidance.

The teacher checks the students work

and reminds if they make mistakes.

Some students ask directly to the

teacher.

When the class is crowded, the teacher

reminds the class rules again.

The teacher reminds that the students

have 15 minutes left to complete their

work.

The students ask the teacher to give the

extra times to complete their work.

Closing Activity

1. Teacher reminds the students about

what they have learned through this

meeting.

2. Teacher asks the students to submit

their work and do the exercises in

the English book for the next

meeting.

3. Teacher says thank you and greet

the students to close the today‟s

meeting.

5 minutes before the class is over, the

teacher asks the students about what

they have learned through this meeting.

Some students do not pay attention

because they are still busy in

completing their work.

When the teacher asks the students to

submit their work, the class becomes

crowded and some students ask the

teacher‟s permission to submit their

work in the teacher‟s room.

The teacher writes the students‟

exercises in the white board and asks

the student to complete the exercises

for the next meeting.

Teacher says thank you and close the

meeting by greeting the students.

Observer‟s Reflection:

In my opinion, through the learning activity, the teacher can encourage the

students to be more encouraged in learning English. In this occasion, the teacher

teaches about writing and the teacher delivers the material in a fun way, so the


98

students can be more active in answering the teacher‟s questions and they are

involved well. Since learning writing is not easy, the teacher needs to apply good

strategy to make the students to be motivated in learning process. Based on the

observation, I find some students have difficulties in arranging the sentence and

choosing appropriate words for their writing. The good thing is that the teacher

asks the students to follow the generic structure of the text as their guidance in

writing a text. Besides, another good thing is that the teacher is not correcting the

students‟ mistake directly, but the teacher tries to remind the students if they make

mistakes. Furthermore, based from the observer experience, the teacher gives

some jokes that make the students to pay attention with the teacher‟s explanation.

On the other hand, the teacher also asks the students to be more focused with the

learning activity by reminding them the class rules. In conclusion, I learn a lot that

as a teacher, we have to encourage and motivate the students and apply good

strategy, especially in delivering the material in the learning activity, so the

students can be more motivated and actively involved in the learning activity,

especially it will help them to produce a good writing.


99

Appendix 8. Validity Analyses

Correlations

MLS

Q1

MLS

Q2

MLS

Q3

MLS

Q4

MLS

Q5

MLS

Q6

MLS

Q7

MLS

Q8

MLS

Q9

MLS

Q10

MLS

Q11

MLS

Q12

MLS

Q1

Pearson

Correlation

1 ,611** ,613

** ,303 ,322 ,506

** ,389

* ,373

* ,177 ,242 ,223 ,290

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,000 ,000 ,104 ,083 ,004 ,033 ,043 ,350 ,197 ,236 ,120

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q2

Pearson

Correlation

,611** 1 ,372

* ,431

* ,436

* ,502

** ,326 ,278 ,494

** ,414

* ,382

* ,317

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,000 ,043 ,017 ,016 ,005 ,078 ,137 ,006 ,023 ,037 ,088

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q3

Pearson

Correlation

,613** ,372

* 1 ,181 ,338 ,144 ,332 ,318 ,226 ,361

* ,333 ,450

*

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,000 ,043 ,339 ,068 ,449 ,073 ,087 ,230 ,050 ,072 ,013

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q4

Pearson

Correlation

,303 ,431* ,181 1 ,487

** ,147 ,140 ,397

* ,685

** ,320 ,457

* ,340

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,104 ,017 ,339 ,006 ,438 ,460 ,030 ,000 ,085 ,011 ,066

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q5

Pearson

Correlation

,322 ,436* ,338 ,487

** 1 ,027 ,101 ,606

** ,420

* ,161 ,480

** ,228

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,083 ,016 ,068 ,006 ,889 ,594 ,000 ,021 ,396 ,007 ,226


100

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q6

Pearson

Correlation

,506** ,502

** ,144 ,147 ,027 1 ,570

** ,134 ,318 ,506

** ,166 ,100

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,004 ,005 ,449 ,438 ,889 ,001 ,480 ,087 ,004 ,382 ,601

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q7

Pearson

Correlation

,389* ,326 ,332 ,140 ,101 ,570

** 1 ,481

** ,315 ,587

** ,243 ,202

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,033 ,078 ,073 ,460 ,594 ,001 ,007 ,090 ,001 ,195 ,285

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q8

Pearson

Correlation

,373* ,278 ,318 ,397

* ,606

** ,134 ,481

** 1 ,351 ,235 ,633

** ,409

*

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,043 ,137 ,087 ,030 ,000 ,480 ,007 ,057 ,212 ,000 ,025

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q9

Pearson

Correlation

,177 ,494** ,226 ,685

** ,420

* ,318 ,315 ,351 1 ,514

** ,395

* ,298

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,350 ,006 ,230 ,000 ,021 ,087 ,090 ,057 ,004 ,031 ,109

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q10

Pearson

Correlation

,242 ,414* ,361

* ,320 ,161 ,506

** ,587

** ,235 ,514

** 1 ,517

** ,120

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,197 ,023 ,050 ,085 ,396 ,004 ,001 ,212 ,004 ,003 ,527

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q11

Pearson

Correlation

,223 ,382* ,333 ,457

* ,480

** ,166 ,243 ,633

** ,395

* ,517

** 1 ,323


101

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,236 ,037 ,072 ,011 ,007 ,382 ,195 ,000 ,031 ,003 ,082

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q12

Pearson

Correlation

,290 ,317 ,450* ,340 ,228 ,100 ,202 ,409

* ,298 ,120 ,323 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,120 ,088 ,013 ,066 ,226 ,601 ,285 ,025 ,109 ,527 ,082

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q13

Pearson

Correlation

,419* ,286 ,298 ,325 ,133 ,452

* ,100 ,111 ,132 ,420

* ,325 ,319

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,021 ,125 ,110 ,080 ,484 ,012 ,601 ,559 ,488 ,021 ,080 ,086

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q14

Pearson

Correlation

,362* ,451

* ,308 ,183 ,163 ,555

** ,337 ,348 ,472

** ,463

** ,502

** ,432

*

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,050 ,012 ,097 ,333 ,389 ,001 ,069 ,059 ,008 ,010 ,005 ,017

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q15

Pearson

Correlation

,430* ,408

* ,366

* ,391

* ,279 ,448

* ,260 ,376

* ,405

* ,524

** ,407

* ,370

*

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,018 ,025 ,046 ,033 ,135 ,013 ,165 ,041 ,026 ,003 ,026 ,044

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q16

Pearson

Correlation

,216 ,405* ,342 ,409

* ,320 ,299 ,422

* ,441

* ,610

** ,576

** ,284 ,159

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,252 ,027 ,065 ,025 ,085 ,108 ,020 ,015 ,000 ,001 ,129 ,402

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30


102

MLS

Q17

Pearson

Correlation

,382* ,471

** ,488

** ,471

** ,552

** ,120 ,357 ,588

** ,540

** ,360 ,503

** ,346

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,037 ,009 ,006 ,009 ,002 ,527 ,053 ,001 ,002 ,050 ,005 ,061

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q18

Pearson

Correlation

,283 ,135 ,387* ,376

* ,429

* -,031 ,313 ,406

* ,321 ,365

* ,489

** ,146

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,129 ,478 ,035 ,040 ,018 ,873 ,092 ,026 ,084 ,047 ,006 ,442

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q19

Pearson

Correlation

,130 ,493** ,177 ,598

** ,502

** ,378

* ,337 ,480

** ,661

** ,608

** ,631

** ,359

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,494 ,006 ,349 ,000 ,005 ,039 ,068 ,007 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,051

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLS

Q20

Pearson

Correlation

,130 ,502** ,377

* ,426

* ,448

* ,225 ,436

* ,435

* ,515

** ,633

** ,654

** ,433

*

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,493 ,005 ,040 ,019 ,013 ,233 ,016 ,016 ,004 ,000 ,000 ,017

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

TOT

AL

Pearson

Correlation

,581** ,686

** ,586

** ,634

** ,589

** ,518

** ,566

** ,658

** ,692

** ,704

** ,709

** ,531

**

Sig. (2-

tailed)

,001 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,001 ,003 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,003

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30


103

Correlations

MLSQ

13

MLSQ1

4

MLSQ1

5

MLSQ1

6

MLSQ1

7

MLSQ1

8

MLSQ1

9

MLSQ2

0

TOTAL

MLSQ

1

Pearson

Correlation

,419 ,362** ,430

** ,216 ,382 ,283

** ,130

* ,130

* ,581

Sig. (2-tailed) ,021 ,050 ,018 ,252 ,037 ,129 ,494 ,493 ,001

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

2

Pearson

Correlation

,286** ,451 ,408

* ,405

* ,471

* ,135

** ,493 ,502 ,686

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,125 ,012 ,025 ,027 ,009 ,478 ,006 ,005 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

3

Pearson

Correlation

,298** ,308

* ,366 ,342 ,488 ,387 ,177 ,377 ,586

Sig. (2-tailed) ,110 ,097 ,046 ,065 ,006 ,035 ,349 ,040 ,001

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

4

Pearson

Correlation

,325 ,183* ,391 ,409 ,471

** ,376 ,598 ,426

* ,634

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,080 ,333 ,033 ,025 ,009 ,040 ,000 ,019 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

5

Pearson

Correlation

,133 ,163* ,279 ,320

** ,552 ,429 ,502 ,448

** ,589

*

Sig. (2-tailed) ,484 ,389 ,135 ,085 ,002 ,018 ,005 ,013 ,001

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

6

Pearson

Correlation

,452** ,555

** ,448 ,299 ,120 -,031 ,378

** ,225 ,518

Sig. (2-tailed) ,012 ,001 ,013 ,108 ,527 ,873 ,039 ,233 ,003

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30


104

MLSQ

7

Pearson

Correlation

,100* ,337 ,260 ,422 ,357 ,313

** ,337 ,436

** ,566

Sig. (2-tailed) ,601 ,069 ,165 ,020 ,053 ,092 ,068 ,016 ,001

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

8

Pearson

Correlation

,111* ,348 ,376 ,441

* ,588

** ,406 ,480

** ,435 ,658

Sig. (2-tailed) ,559 ,059 ,041 ,015 ,001 ,026 ,007 ,016 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

9

Pearson

Correlation

,132 ,472** ,405 ,610

** ,540

* ,321 ,661 ,515 ,692

Sig. (2-tailed) ,488 ,008 ,026 ,000 ,002 ,084 ,000 ,004 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

10

Pearson

Correlation

,420 ,463* ,524

* ,576 ,360 ,365

** ,608

** ,633 ,704

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,021 ,010 ,003 ,001 ,050 ,047 ,000 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

11

Pearson

Correlation

,325 ,502* ,407 ,284

* ,503

** ,489 ,631 ,654

** ,709

*

Sig. (2-tailed) ,080 ,005 ,026 ,129 ,005 ,006 ,000 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

12

Pearson

Correlation

,319 ,432 ,370* ,159 ,346 ,146 ,359 ,433

* ,531

Sig. (2-tailed) ,086 ,017 ,044 ,402 ,061 ,442 ,051 ,017 ,003

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

13

Pearson

Correlation

1* ,398 ,307 ,317 ,171 ,165

* ,371 ,128 ,499

Sig. (2-tailed) ,029 ,098 ,088 ,367 ,384 ,043 ,500 ,005


105

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

14

Pearson

Correlation

,398* 1

* ,505 ,318 ,492 ,141

** ,494 ,468 ,664

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,029 ,004 ,087 ,006 ,457 ,005 ,009 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

15

Pearson

Correlation

,307* ,505

* 1

* ,500

* ,358 ,226

* ,400 ,379

* ,655

*

Sig. (2-tailed) ,098 ,004 ,005 ,052 ,230 ,029 ,039 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

16

Pearson

Correlation

,317 ,318* ,500 1

* ,536 ,333 ,502

* ,342

* ,650

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,088 ,087 ,005 ,002 ,072 ,005 ,065 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

17

Pearson

Correlation

,171* ,492

** ,358

** ,536

** 1

** ,493 ,460 ,628

** ,729

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,367 ,006 ,052 ,002 ,006 ,011 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

18

Pearson

Correlation

,165 ,141 ,226* ,333

* ,493

* 1 ,320 ,385

* ,525

Sig. (2-tailed) ,384 ,457 ,230 ,072 ,006 ,085 ,036 ,003

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

19

Pearson

Correlation

,371 ,494** ,400 ,502

** ,460

** ,320

* 1 ,718

** ,764

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,043 ,005 ,029 ,005 ,011 ,085 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

MLSQ

20

Pearson

Correlation

,128 ,468** ,379

* ,342

* ,628

* ,385 ,718

* 1

* ,734

**


106

Sig. (2-tailed) ,500 ,009 ,039 ,065 ,000 ,036 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

TOTAL

Pearson

Correlation

,499** ,664

** ,655

** ,650

** ,729

** ,525

** ,764

** ,734

** 1

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,005 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,003 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Correlations

WAT1 WAT2 WAT3 WAT4 WAT5 TOTAL

WAT1

Pearson Correlation 1 ,641** ,469

** ,720

** ,641

** ,875

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,009 ,000 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30

WAT2

Pearson Correlation ,641** 1 ,342 ,463

** ,365

* ,717

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,065 ,010 ,047 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30

WAT3

Pearson Correlation ,469** ,342 1 ,524

** ,682

** ,737

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,009 ,065 ,003 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30

WAT4

Pearson Correlation ,720** ,463

** ,524

** 1 ,701

** ,843

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,010 ,003 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30


107

WAT5


* ,682

** ,701

** 1 ,838

**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,047 ,000 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30

TOTAL


** ,737

** ,843

** ,838

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000

N 30 30 30 30 30 30


*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).


108

Appendix 9. Reliability Analyses

Case Processing Summary

N %

Cases

Valid 30 100,0

Excludeda 0 ,0

Total 30 100,0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha

N of Items

,920 20


109

Appendix 10. Samples of Students’ Writing Test


110


111


112


113

Appendix 11. Students’ Writing Score

No. Content Organization Grammar Mechanics Vocabulary Total

1 3 3 3 3 4 16

2 3 2 3 3 4 15

3 4 4 2 3 3 16

4 4 4 3 4 4 19

5 3 3 2 3 3 14

6 3 2 2 3 3 13

7 4 4 3 3 3 17

8 3 3 2 3 3 14

9 3 3 3 3 3 15

10 4 3 3 4 4 18

11 4 3 4 4 4 19

12 2 2 2 2 2 10

13 4 4 4 3 4 19

14 4 3 3 3 4 17

15 4 3 2 3 3 15

16 4 3 2 3 3 15

17 4 3 3 4 4 18

18 4 3 3 4 4 18

19 4 4 3 4 4 19

20 4 4 3 3 4 18

21 4 2 3 3 3 15

22 4 3 3 4 4 18

23 3 3 3 3 3 15

24 3 2 3 3 4 15

25 4 3 3 3 4 17

26 4 3 3 3 4 17

27 3 3 3 3 3 15

28 3 3 3 3 3 15

29 2 2 2 2 2 10

30 2 2 2 2 3 11

Total 104 89 83 94 103 473


114

Appendix 12. Metacognitive Learning Stretegies’ Questionnaire Result

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Total

1 4 3 4 2 2 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 64

2 4 3 4 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 63

3 3 2 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 62

4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 66

5 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 67

6 4 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 2 1 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 67

7 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 69

8 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 4 2 3 60

9 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 73

10 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 63

11 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 66

12 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 40

13 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 78

14 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 4 4 3 4 67

15 3 3 2 3 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 2 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 66

16 3 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 2 4 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 64

17 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 72

18 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 68

19 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 70

20 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 70

21 4 4 4 2 2 4 4 2 2 3 2 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 57


115

22 3 3 3 2 2 4 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 60

23 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 68

24 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 64

25 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2 56

26 3 3 3 2 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 63

27 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 78

28 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 71

29 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 40

30 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 57

Total 100 99 100 83 89 102 106 96 90 97 97 79 102 104 93 101 99 101 94 97 1929


116

Appendix 13. The Result Computation of Interval Class on

Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Min 40

Max 78

R 38

N 30

K 1 + 3.3 log n ≈ 5

s 6.33

Category Interval Interval Total Percentage

Very Low 40.01 49.505 40 50 2 7%

Low 49.505 55.835 50 56 1 3%

Fair 55.835 62.165 56 62 3 10%

High 62.165 68.495 62 68 14 47%

Very High 68.495 79.889 68 80 10 33%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

40.01 -49.50

49.50 -55.83

55.83 -62.17

62.17 -68.50

68.50 -79.89

Metacognitive Learning Strategies

Interval

F

r

e

q

u

e

n

c


117

Appendix 14. The Result Computation of Interval Class on

Writing Skills

Min 10

Max 19

R 9

N 30

K 1 + 3.3 log n ≈ 5

s 1.5

Category Interval Interval Total Percentage

Very Low 10 12.25 10 12 3 10%

Low 12.25 13.75 12 14 3 10%

Fair 13.75 15.25 14 15 9 30%

High 15.25 16.75 15 17 6 20%

Very High 16.75 19.45 17 19 9 30%

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 – 12.25 12.25 – 13.75

13.75 – 15.25

15.25 – 16.75

16.75 – 19.45

Students' Writing Skills

Interval

F

r

e

q

u

e

n

c

y


118

Appendix 15. The Statistical Assumptions Test of Normality Test

Normality Test

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

MLSQ WAT

N 30 30

Normal Parametersa,b

Mean 64,3000 15,7667

Std. Deviation 8,51834 2,50080

Most Extreme Differences

Absolute ,173 ,180

Positive ,087 ,120

Negative -,173 -,180

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z ,946 ,984

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ,333 ,288

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.


119

Appendix 16. The Statistical Assumptions Test of Linearity Test

Linearity Test

Report

WAT

MLSQ Mean N Std. Deviation

40,00 10,0000 2 ,00000

56,00 17,0000 1 .

57,00 13,0000 2 2,82843

60,00 16,0000 2 2,82843

62,00 16,0000 1 .

63,00 16,6667 3 1,52753

64,00 15,3333 3 ,57735

66,00 17,6667 3 2,30940

67,00 14,6667 3 2,08167

68,00 16,5000 2 2,12132

69,00 17,0000 1 .

70,00 18,5000 2 ,70711

71,00 15,0000 1 .

72,00 18,0000 1 .

73,00 15,0000 1 .

78,00 17,0000 2 2,82843

Total 15,7667 30 2,50080


120

ANOVA Table

Sum of Squares df Mean Square

WAT * MLSQ

Between Groups

(Combined) 127,700 15 8,513

Linearity 71,210 1 71,210

Deviation from Linearity 56,490 14 4,035

Within Groups 53,667 14 3,833

Total 181,367 29

ANOVA Table

F Sig.

WAT * MLSQ

Between Groups

(Combined) 2,221 ,072

Linearity 18,576 ,001

Deviation from Linearity 1,053 ,462

Within Groups

Total


121

Appendix 17. The Descriptive Statistics of the Variables

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Included Excluded Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

WAT * MLSQ 30 100,0% 0 0,0% 30 100,0%

Descriptive

Statistics

Metacognitive_

Learning_

Strategy

Writing_Skills

N Valid 30 30

Missing 0 0

Mean 59.00 14.50

Median 39.00 9.50

Mode 65.00 14.50

Std. Deviation 6.33 1.50

Minimum 40.00 10.00

Maximum 78.00 19.00

Sum 1929.00 473.00

a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is known.


122

Appendix 18. The Correlational Analysis

Correlations

MLSQ WAT

MLSQ

Pearson Correlation 1 ,627**

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000

N 30 30

WAT

Pearson Correlation ,627** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) ,000

N 30 30



123

Appendix 19. A Sample Result of Interview with the Students

The Interview Result

with the Students of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Hari/Tanggal : Kamis, 3 Desember 2016

Nara Sumber : Siswa SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Lokasi : SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Waktu : 09.30 WIB

Topik dari wawancara :

Pengunaan strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dalam pembelajaran writing.

Tujuan dari wawancara :

Untuk mencari hubungan antara strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dengan

kemampuan writing.


124

1. Kan kita tau nih, ada empat kemampuan yang diajarkan dalam bahasa

inggris sama seperti bahasa Indonesia, ada membaca, menulis,

mendengarkan dan berbicara. Menurut pendapatmu empat kemampuan

tersebut bagaimana? Diurutkan coba dari yang paling mudah ke sulit?

As we know, there are four skills which are learned in English Language and

it is the same as Indonesian language. There are reading, writing, listening

and speaking. What do you think about those four skills? Could you sort the

skills from the easiest to the most difficult?

Jawaban: Pertama tu, membaca, menulis, habis itu apa itu… berbicara,

mendengarkan.

Answer: The first are reading and writing. After that, there are speaking and

listening.

Terus kalau menurutmu, eh.. kalau menulis itu bagaimana? Sulit nggak?

Then, what do you think about writing? Is it difficult?

Jawaban: Nggak, mudah

Answer: No, it is not difficult.

2. Ketika kamu menulis, kamu akan menghasilkan tulisan. Kriteria tulisan yang

baik dan benar itu seperti apa?

When you are writing, you will produce writing. What are the criteria of good

writing?

Jawaban: Ada EYD (Ejaan Yang Disempurnakan), terus itu… enak dibaca

Answer: There are Perfected Spelling System (PSS) and easily to be read.

Faktor apa yang membuat penulis menghasilkan tulisan yang baik?

What are the factors that make a writer produces good writing?

Jawaban: Niat

Answer: The factor is the motivation from the writer.

3. Ketika kamu diminta menulis oleh Mr. Krisna atau Miss Dian (pseudonym),

hal apa yang kamu lakukan pertama kali?


125

When you were asked to write by Mr. DK or Miss Dian, what did you do for

the first time?

Jawaban: Berpikir

Answer: What I did for the first time was thinking.

4. Nah, ketika diminta untuk menulis… kan menulis dalam bahasa Indonesia

dan bahasa Inggris kan berbeda, ketika diminta untuk menulis dalam bahasa

Inggris, pendapatmu bagaimana?

Then, as we know that writing in Indonesian and English are different. When

you were asked to write in English, what do you think?

Jawaban: Biasa aja

Answer: I knew that I can do it.

5. Biasanya kamu menulis bahasa Inggris dimana?

Where do you usually write your English writing?

Jawaban: Di sekolah, di rumah, kalau di tempat les lebih ke membaca

Answer: I usually write in the school, house, and in the place where I do

training, I prefer reading.

Terus biasanya kalau kamu menulis itu dapat saran nggak dari gurumu?

Seperti tanggapan tentang tulisanmu

Then, when you were writing, did you get feedback from your teacher? Such

as a response about your writing

Jawaban: Nggak

Answer: No, I did not.

6. Sebelum menulis, hal apa saja yang kamu lakukan?

Before starting to write, what did you do?

Jawaban: Cari topik sama temanya

Answer: I tried to find the topic and theme.

Berarti membuat perencanaan?

Do you usually plan before you write?

Jawaban: Iya


126

Answer: Yes, I make plan.

Perencanaannya apa saja?

What are some things you do when planning?

Jawaban: Ya itu membuat topik, tema yang mau ditulis

Answer: I make the topic and theme which will be written.

Kenapa kamu membuat perencanaan?

Why do you make planning?

Jawaban: Biar nanti nggak banyak kesalahan

Answer: I make planning to decrease the mistakes.

Perencanaanmu itu detail?

How detail is your plan?

Jawaban: Detail

Answer: It is detail.

7. Ehm.. ketika kamu sedang menulis, kamu sering nggak mengubah

rencanamu? Misalnya ingin menulis seperti ini terus diganti

When you are writing, do you usually make any changes of your plan? For

example, you want to write this and then you change

Jawaban: Kadang-kadang

Answer: Sometimes, I make changes.

Kamu suka membaca kembali hasil tulisanmu?

Did you re-read what you have already written?

Jawaban: Iya

Answer: Yes, I re-read.

Seberapa sering kamu membaca kembali tulisanmu?

How often did you re-read your writing?

Jawaban: Iya, sering. Sering sekali.

Answer: Yes, I re-read very often.

Kenapa?

Why?

Jawaban: Biar koreksi kalau ada yang salah


127

Answer: It was because I could correct the mistakes I might make.

Ketika kamu menulis, hal apa saja yang kamu perhatikan, terutama dalam

bahasa Inggris?

When you were writing, what were the things that you paid attention,

especially in English?

Jawaban: Grammar, EYD, kalimatnya

Answer: I paid attention with the grammar, Perfected Spelling System (PSS)

and the sentences.

8. Ketika kamu sudah menulis, hal apa yang kamu lakukan?

As you were finishing up your writing, what did you do?

Jawaban: Diperiksa kembali

Answer: I re-checked my writing.

Kalau ada yang kurang sesuai, biasanya diganti atau nggak?

If there was any appropriate thing, did you make any changes?

Jawaban: Diganti

Answer: Yes, I made changes.

Kenapa kamu mengganti?

Why did you change?

Jawaban: Biar lebih bagus

Answer: I wanted to make it better.

9. Kamu punya kesulitan nggak ketika menulis?

Do you have any difficulties when writing?

Jawaban: Punya

Answer: Yes, I have difficulties.

Apa?

What is that?

Jawaban: Cari topiknya

Answer: I try to find the topic.

Terus bagaimana cara mengatasinya?


128

How do you overcome these problems?

Jawaban: Tanya teman, cari di internet, baca buku, baca referensi

Answer: I try to ask friend, find in the internet and read the book and

references.

10. Apakah kamu punya strategi khusus dalam menulis?

Do you have any strategy you use when writing?

Jawaban: Ada. Membuat rencana, tulisannya dibuat sesingkat mungkin

supaya yang membaca mudah

Answer: Yes, I make plans and make the writing as shortest as possible so

that the reader can read easily.

Sudah selesai terima kasih banyak.

It is done, thank you so much


129

Appendix 20. Result of Interview with the Teacher

The Interview Result

with the English Teacher of SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Hari/Tanggal : Kamis, 7 April 2016

Nara Sumber : Mr. Krisna

Lokasi : SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta

Waktu : 09.30 WIB

Topik dari wawancara :

Pengunaan strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dalam pembelajaran writing.

Tujuan dari wawancara :

Untuk mencari hubungan antara strategi pembelajaran metacognitive dengan

kemampuan writing.

1. Sudah berapa lama bapak mengajar di SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?

How long have you been teaching in SMP BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta?

Saya sudah mengajar selama 7 tahun.

I have been teaching for seven 7 years.

2. Setelah sekian lama mengajar, apakah pengalaman mengajar bapak yang

paling menarik selama ini?

After a long period of teaching, what is the most interesting teaching

experience?

Pengalaman yang paling menarik, setiap tahun saya menemukan karakter

dari murid yang berbeda dan itu membutuhkan strategi tersendiri untuk


130

mengajarkan, terutama disini bahasa Inggris, untuk setiap tahunnya harus

mempunyai strategi yang berbeda juga.

The most interesting teaching experience is that every year, I find characters

from students which are different and it needs a strategy of its own in

teaching, especially English. Therefore, every year, I must have different

strategy as well.

3. Bagaimana karakteristik siswa-siswi bapak di kelas 8A?

How are the characteristics of your students in class 8A?

Untuk kelas 8A terutama, mereka cukup aktif dalam pembelajaran bahasa

Inggris dan input mereka sebelumnya dalam belajar bahasa Inggris ini cukup

baik.

Especially for class 8A, they are quite active in learning English and their

input earlier in learning English is quite good.

4. Apakah bapak menemui kesulitan selama mengajar siswa-siswi ini?

Do you have any difficulties in teaching these students?

Saya tidak menemukan kesulitan yang cukup berarti untuk mengajarkan

bahasa Inggris kepada mereka.

I do not find any significant difficulties in teaching these students.

5. Bagaimana pendapat bapak tentang pembelajaran bahasa Inggris yang

diberikan selama ini?

What is your opinion about English language learning which is given?

Untuk pembelajaran bahasa Inggris yang diberikan selama ini, saya rasa

mereka cukup paham dengan apa yang sudah saya berikan dan mereka juga

mampu menerapkan dalam kehidupan mereka, seperti misalnya teks

procedure. Mereka sudah tahu tujuan teksnya itu untuk apa dan lainnya.

For the English language learning which is given during this time, in my

opinion, they are quite familiar with what I have given and they are also able


131

to apply it in their lives, such as procedure text. They have already known

what the purpose of the text it and many more.

6. Bagaimana bapak mengajar writing bagi siswa-siswi kelas 8A?

How do you teach writing for the students in class 8A?

Kalau untuk pembelajaran writing, biasanya saya memberikan pemahaman

dulu dimulai dari pola atau susunan dari teksnya. Setelah itu, saya berikan

tujuan dari teks tersebut, terus ciri-ciri kebahasaannya apa saja dan saya

biasanya memberikan contoh terdahulu kepada mereka. Setelah itu, mereka

saya minta untuk memahami teks tersebut, dalam artian disini mereka

mencari beberapa vocabulary yang mungkin mereka belum tahu, terus

mereka membuat catatan kecil mengenai vocabulary itu. Dan akhirnya

mereka diminta untuk mencari artinya sehingga mereka bisa paham isi teks

tersebut.

If it is for learning writing, I usually provide the students with an

understanding of the structure or arrangement of the text. After that, I give the

purpose of the text and the characteristics of the text, and I usually give the

previous example to them. Next, I ask them to understand the text, in the

context that they will look for the vocabulary which the might not know yet,

and they make small notes about the vocabulary. Finally, they are asked to

find the meaning, so they can understand what the text is about.

7. Bagaimana bentuk partisipasi yang diberikan oleh siswa-siswi bapak dalam

pembelajaran writing?

How do the students participate in your writing classes?

Untuk writing, mereka sangat antusias, untuk 8A ini sangat aktif sekali.

Mereka banyak bertanya, mengenai bagaimana pak kalau seperti ini

misalnya. Dan, mereka juga, karena disini belajar writing, dan kesulitan

mereka adalah pada bagian vocabulary-nya. Kadang mereka harus sedikit-

sedikit bertanya mengenai vocabulary.


132

For writing classes in class 8A, they are very enthusiastic and active. They

often ask, for example about how about this and that. On the other hand, since

this is writing classes, they have difficulties in deciding the vocabulary

because sometimes, they have to ask about the vocabulary.

8. Apakah mereka termasuk dalam siswa-siswi yang aktif dalam memberikan

ide, bertanya, atau menjawab pertanyaan?

Do they belong to the students who are active in giving ideas, asking

questions, or answering questions?

Ya, aktif. Kalau aktif, mereka sangat aktif sekali disini untuk 8A dalam

memberikan ide juga, bertanya juga, atau menjawab pertanyaan juga aktif.

Tetapi kadang kita harus memberikan sedikit dorongan dalam hal ini.

Kadang kalau mereka mengalami kesulitan, ada beberapa anak yang tidak

mau bertanya. Jadi, saya harus bertanya dahulu untuk memacu mereka untuk

memulai mengerjakan.

Yes, they do. If it is in the context of active, for class 8A, they are very active

in giving ideas, asking or answering questions, but, as teacher, we have to

encourage them. Sometimes, when the students find difficulties, there are

some students who do not want to ask. Therefore, I have to ask them in order

to motivate them to start doing their work.

9. Apakah bapak menghadapi kesulitan dalam mengoordinasikan siswa-siswi

bapak untuk berpartisipasi dalam pembelajaran writing?

Do you have any difficulties in coordinating your students to participate in

the writing classes?

Selama ini, saya tidak menemukan kesulitan yang cukup besar, tetapi hanya

beberapa kelompok kecil saja siswa yang mungkin kalau dalam hal ini

kurang dalam menguasai bahasa Inggris, sehingga mereka membutuhkan

dorongan yang lebih.

During teaching in the writing classes, I do not find any specific difficulties,

but only for several small groups of students who might not master in


133

English. Therefore, I have to encourage them because they need more

encouragement.

10. Bagaimana cara bapak mengatasi kesulitan dalam pembelajaran writing?

How do you overcome the difficulty in the writing classes?

Biasanya saya memberikan contoh untuk teks yang akan dipelajari disini,

sehingga mungkin dari contoh tersebut mereka bisa sedikit mencontoh dari

apa yang sudah mereka baca.

I usually give the example of the text which is going to be learned, so from

that example, they might follow the example that they have read.

11. Apakah bapak pernah menggunakan metacognitive learning strategies

sebagai salah satu metode pembelajaran dalam pembelajaran writing?

Do you ever use metacognitive learning strategies as one of learning method

in the writing classes?

Pernah, saya memberikan disini. Jadi, mereka diminta untuk istilahnya

membuat mind map, jadi saya minta untuk mencari garis besar per paragraf

dahulu. Setelah itu, mereka harus mengembangkan menjadi paragraf dan

akhirnya untuk disusun menjadi sebuah teks.

Yes, I have ever used metacognitive learning strategies. In here, I ask the

students to make the mind map, so I ask them to make the outline for each

paragraph. After that, they have to develop it into paragraph and finally, they

have to arrange it into a text.

12. Bagaimana bapak mengaplikasikan strategi pembelajaran tersebut?

How do you apply that learning strategy?

Ya disini, saya biasanya menggunakan three phase strategy, yang pertama

menerangkan dahulu, terus memberi contoh, terus yang terakhir mereka

memproduk sendiri.

In here, I usually use three phase strategy. Firstly, I explain, give the example,

and finally they will produce their own writing.


134

13. Bagaimana respon siswa-siswi ketika bapak menggunakan metacognitive

learning strategies?

How do the students response when you metacognitive learning strategies?

Ketika saya menggunakan metacognitive learning strategies, mereka cukup

antusias dan aktif karena mungkin ini merupakan sesuatu yang baru bagi

mereka dan juga ini mempermudah mereka untuk mengembangkan gaya

penulisan mereka sendiri. Jadi mereka bisa membuat sebuah teks sekreatif

mereka.

When I use metacognitive learning strategies, they are quite enthusiastic and

active because maybe this is new and it helps them to develop their own style

of writing. Therefore, it helps them to make a text as creative as they can.

14. Bagaimana pendapat bapak tentang penggunaan metacognitive learning

strategies? Apakah dapat membantu bapak untuk mengembangkan

kemampuan siswa-siswi dalam pembelajaran writing?

What is your opinion about the use of metacognitive learning strategies?

Does it help you to develop students‟ writing skills in the writing classes?

Ini sangat membantu dalam pembelajaran writing karena mereka menjadi

lebih kreatif dalam menulis dan dalam mengembangkan disini teks yang

mereka sudah pelajari sebelumnya.

Sangat membantu disini, sangat membantu sekali.

In my opinion, it is very helpful in learning writing because they become

more creative in writing and developing the text that they have learned

before.

In here, metacognitive learning strategies are very helpful.


135

Appendix 21. Questionnaire Blueprint

No. Statements Theories Category

1. Saya mengingat

kembali pengalaman

saya dan

mengkaitkannya

dengan tema

penulisan.

“Writing is central to our

personal experience and

social identities, and we are

often evaluated by our

control of it.

Hyland, Ken. (2002) (p.1)

Centering Students‟

Learning

2. Saya menggunakan

pengalaman saya

untuk menyusun ide

penulisan.

“Writing is seen as a social

act which is influenced

both by the personal

attitudes and social

experiences that the writer

brings to writing.”

Hyland, Ken. (2002)

Centering Your

Learning

3. Saya merencanakan

setiap kalimat yang

akan saya tulis.

“Writing process as writing

that includes any activity

that contributes to the final

written product by

including research

practices, reading practices,

thinking practices, and

many more.”

Sobal (2001)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

4. Saya membuat daftar

ide penulisan yang

akan saya tulis.

“People write lists to help

them remember what to

do.”

Raimes, Ann. (1983)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

5. Saya menyusun

tulisan berdasarkan

urutan struktur teks.

“Writing makes it possible

to gather, preserve, and

transmit information

widely, with great detail

and accuracy.”

MacArthur, Charles A.,

Graham S., and Fitzgerald

J. (2008)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

6. Saya mencari kosa

kata yang akan

“During the writing

process, writers must

Arranging and

Planning Your


136

digunakan untuk

mempermudah saya

dalam menulis.

continuously decide which

activity to employ next.”



J. (2008)

Learning

7. Saya mengerti

dengan apa yang

akan saya tulis.

“Writing involves dialogic

processes of invention.”



J. (2008)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

8. Saya menggunakan

perencanaan yang

saya buat sebagai

panduan saya dalam

menulis.

“Metacognitive strategies

include three strategy sets:

Centering Your Learning,

Arranging and Planning

Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L. (1990)

(p.136)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

9. Saya

mengembangkan ide

pokok tulisan dengan

menyertakan contoh

yang sesuai.

“One of the main problems

students have with

organizing writing in

English is in sorting out the

differences between

generalizations and specific

details or between a topic

and support.”

Raimes, Ann. (1983)

(p.123)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

10. Saya fokus pada

tulisan yang saya

tulis.

“Learners can all learn a

great deal about how

writing works if they

concentrate not only on

what the writer has written

but on how he has written

it.”

Raimes, Ann. (1983)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

11. Saya berhati-hati

dalam menyusun

perencanaan

“Students must develop a

plan in order to arrange and

plan their learning”

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning


137

penulisan. Fogarty (1994)

12. Saya bertanya pada

diri saya apakah saya

menulis sesuai

dengan tujuan

penulisan.

“Knowledge transforming

thus involves actively

reworking thoughts so that

in the process not only text,

but also ideas, may be

changed.”

Bereiter and Scardamalia.

(1987)

Arranging and

Planning Your

Learning

13. Saya membuat

pembenaran apabila

saya membuat

kesalahan dalam

penulisan.

“Writing is a thinking

process which is concerned

with the act of writing.”

Ken Hyland (2003)

Evaluating Your

Learning

14. Saya membaca ulang

tulisan saya untuk

menyesuaikan

dengan perencanaan

yang telah saya buat.

“A process-driven writing

course will give priority to

techniques for generating,

drafting, reshaping, and

evaluating texts, with each

unit of work perhaps

emphasizing a particular

element of the process and

assisting learners to see its

recursive nature.”

Hyland, Ken (2003)

Evaluating Your

Learning

15. Saya mencocokkan

tulisan yang saya

tulis dengan

perencanaan yang

dibuat sebelum

menulis.


are actions which go

beyond purely cognitive

devices, and which provide

a way for learners to

coordinate their own

learning process.”


(p. 136)

Evaluating Your

Learning

16. Saya memeriksa

kembali tulisan saya

dan menggantinya

apabila kurang sesuai

dengan tujuan

penulisan.

Metacognitive strategy

supports learners to a

variety of metacognitive

awareness to develop

learners‟ writing skills.

Oxford (1990)

Evaluating Your

Learning


138

17. Saya memastikan

bahwa tulisan saya

telah mencapai

tujuan penulisan.

Students must develop a

plan before approaching a

learning task, monitor their

understanding and evaluate

their thinking after

completing the task in the

learning process.

Fogarty (1994)

Evaluating Your

Learning

18. Saya memberikan

informasi yang jelas

dalam setiap tulisan

saya.

“By using metacognitive

learning strategies, all

students will plan, monitor

and evaluate to produce

appropriate vocabulary,

idiom and sentence

structure through their

writing.”

Oxford (1990)

Evaluating Your

Learning

19. Saya menggunakan

strategi yang tepat

dengan membuat

perencanaan dalam

menulis.

“Students may benefit from

having a range of planning,

writing, and revising

strategies to draw on.”

Ken Hyland (2003)

Evaluating Your

Learning

20. Saya mencoba untuk

menggunakan

strategi yang lain

apabila strategi yang

saya terapkan kurang

sesuai.

“As writers struggle with

what to put it down on

paper, they often discover

something new to write or

a new way of expressing

their idea.”

Raimes, Ann. (1983) (p.3)

Evaluating Your

Learning


139

Appendix 22. Interview Blueprint for Students

Interview Blueprint for Students


1. Seperti yang kita ketahui,

ada empat kemampuan

yang dipelajari dalam

Bahasa Inggris yaitu

membaca, menulis,

mendengarkan dan

berbicara.

Bagaimana menurut

pendapat Anda tentang

empat kemampuan

tersebut?

Bagaimana pendapat Anda

tentang kegiatan menulis?

Writing is among the

most important skills

that second language

students need to

develop because it

involves composing

skills and knowledge

about texts, contexts

and readers.

Richards (2014)

Students‟

Responses on

Writing Skills

2. Di dalam kegiatan

menulis, penulis akan

menghasilkan tulisan.

Menurut pendapat Anda,

apa sajakah kriteria tulisan

yang baik?

Apa yang membuat

seorang penulis

menghasilkan tulisan yang

baik?

The appropriate

learning strategy could

be the basis of many

aspects in learning. In

writing, it can be used

to control composition,

sentence-combining, or

sequence sentence to

the writing of recount

texts.

Nunan (2002)

Students‟

Responses on

Writing Skills

3. Ketika Anda diminta

menulis oleh guru Anda,

hal apa sajakah yang Anda

lakukan pertama kali?

“Metacognitive

strategies include three

strategy sets: Centering

Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L.

(1990) (p.136)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

4. Bagaimana perasaan Anda

ketika diminta untuk

menulis dalam bahasa

Inggris?

Students‟ response is

any verbal or non-

verbal act which is

designed for students to

Students‟

Responses on

Writing Skills


140

fulfil the expectations

implicit in the

questions, commands or

request of others.

Knoblauch and Brannon

(2015)

5. Dapatkah Anda

menceritakan pengalaman

Anda ketika menulis

dalam bahasa Inggris?

(kapan, dimana, apakah

guru memberikan umpan

balik?)

Teachers know that

most students find

difficulties to imagine a

reader‟s response as a

guide in composing.

Sommers (1982)

Students‟

Responses on

Writing Skills

6. Hal apa sajakah yang

Anda lakukan sebelum

menulis? Apakah Anda

membuat perencanaan

sebelum menulis?

- Jika ya:

Apa yang Anda

rencanakan? (ide

pokok, jumlah

paragraph, dll.)

Perencanaan apa yang

Anda lakukan?

(membuat list, mind

map)

Mengapa Anda

melakukan hal-hal

tersebut?

Apakah perencanaan

Anda sangat detail?

- Jika tidak

Hal apa sajakah yang

biasanya Anda lakukan

di awal proses

penulisan?

“Metacognitive



Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L.

(1990) (p.136)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

7. Ketika Anda menulis,

apakah Anda berpikir

tentang rencana yang

Anda buat (jika Anda

membuat rencana) saat

Anda menulis?

Apakah Anda membuat

rencana baru saat Anda

menulis?

“Metacognitive



Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L.

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies


141

Apakah Anda membaca

kembali apa yang telah

Anda tulis? (Jika ya atau

tidak, kenapa?) Hal apa

sajakah yang Anda

perhatikan ketika Anda

Metacognitive Learning

Strategies sedang menulis?

(1990) (p.136)

8. Ketika Anda sudah selesai

menulis, hal apa sajakah

yang Anda lakukan?

Apakah Anda memeriksa

kembali tulisan Anda?

Apabila ada yang kurang

sesuai, apakah Anda

menggantinya?

- Jika ya, mengapa Anda

membuat perubahan?

Apakah Anda biasanya

membuat perubahan

pada tulisan Anda?

- Jika tidak, bagaimana

pendapat Anda tentang

tulisan Anda? Apakah

Anda biasanya

membuat perubahan

pada tulisan Anda?

“Metacognitive



Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L.

(1990) (p.136)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

9. Apakah Anda mempunyai

kesulitan dalam menulis?

Jika ya, bagaimana cara

Anda untuk mengatasi

kesulitan tersebut?

Jika tidak, apa yang

biasanya Anda lakukan

ketika Anda mengalami

masalah saat menulis?

“Metacognitive



Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”

Oxford, Rebecca L.

(1990) (p.136)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

10. Apakah Anda memiliki

strategi yang digunakan

untuk mempermudah

dalam menulis?

The appropriate

learning strategy could

be the basis of many

aspects in learning.

Nunan (2002)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies


142

Appendix 23. Interview Blueprint for the Teacher

Interview Blueprint for the Teacher


1. Sudah berapa lama

bapak mengajar di

SMP BOPKRI 1

Yogyakarta?

“Many commentators use

the term facilitator to

describe a particular kind

of teacher, one who is

democratic rather than

autocratic, and one who

fosters learner autonomy

through the use of group-

work and pair-work and by

acting as more of a

resource than a transmitter

of knowledge.” (p. 108)

Harmer (2007)

Learning Strategy

2. Setelah sekian lama

mengajar apakah

pengalaman

mengajar bapak yang

paling menarik

selama ini?

“If teachers want their

pupils to master language

skills for themselves, so

that they can go on learning

long after they leave school

and teachers behind, we

had better make our

language activities

enjoyable, which will make

teaching more enjoyable

too, and far less

exhausting.” (p. 5)

Bright & McGregor (1973)

Learning Strategy

3. Bagaimana

karakteristik siswa-

siswi bapak di kelas

8A?

“Good learner

characteristics are students

who can find their own

way (without always

having to be guided by the

teacher through learning

tasks), who are creative,

who make intelligent

guesses, who make their

own opportunities for

Students‟ Responses


143

practice, who make errors

work for them not against

them, and who use

contextual clues.” (p.86)

Rubin and Thompson

(1982, as cited in the

Practice of English

Language Teaching)

4. Apakah bapak

menemui kesulitan

selama mengajar

siswa-siswi ini?

“Teachers know that most

students find difficulties to

imagine a reader‟s response

as a guide in composing.”

Sommers (1982)

Learning Strategy

5. Bagaimana pendapat

bapak tentang

pembelajaran bahasa

Inggris yang

diberikan selama ini?

“The appropriate learning

strategy could be the basis

of many aspects in

learning.”

Nunan (2002)

Learning Strategy

6. Bagaimana bapak

mengajar writing

bagi siswa-siswi

kelas 8A?

“Writing is a thinking

process which is concerned

with the act of writing.”

Ken Hyland (2003)

Learning Strategy

7. Bagaimana bentuk

partisipasi yang

diberikan oleh siswa-

siswi bapak dalam

pembelajaran

writing?

“Students need to be

assisted by the teacher in

order to help them

directing their learning,

including what they have to

do to complete their task.”

Meichenbaum (1992)


8. Apakah mereka

termasuk dalam

siswa-siswi yang

aktif dalam

memberikan ide,

bertanya, atau

menjawab

pertanyaan?

“Students must be

encouraged to respond to

texts and situations with

their own thoughts and

experiences, rather than

just by answering questions

and doing abstract learning

activities.” (p. 84)

Harmer (2007)


9. Apakah bapak

menghadapi

kesulitan dalam

mengoordinasikan

siswa-siswi bapak

untuk berpartisipasi

dalam pembelajaran

“One of the main problems

students have with

organizing writing in

English is in sorting out the

differences between

generalizations and specific

details or between a topic

Learning Strategy


144

writing? and support.”

Raimes, Ann. (1983)

(p.123)

10. Bagaimana cara

bapak mengatasi

kesulitan dalam

pembelajaran

writing?

“The appropriate learning

strategy could be the basis

of many aspects in

learning. In writing, it can

be used to control

composition, sentence-

combining, or sequence

sentence to the writing of

recount texts.”

Nunan (2002)

Learning Strategy

11. Apakah bapak

pernah menggunakan

metacognitive

learning strategies

sebagai salah satu

metode pembelajaran

dalam pembelajaran

writing?


include three strategy sets:

Centering Your Learning,


Your Learning, and

Evaluating Your

Learning.”


(p.136)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

12. Bagaimana bapak

mengaplikasikan

strategi pembelajaran

tersebut?

“Knowledge transforming

thus involves actively

reworking thoughts so that

in the process not only text,

but also ideas, may be

changed.”

Bereiter and Scardamalia.

(1987)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

13. Bagaimana respon

siswa-siswi ketika

bapak menggunakan

metacognitive


Students‟ response is any

verbal or non-verbal act

which is designed for

students to fulfil the

expectations implicit in the

questions, commands or

request of others.

Knoblauch and Brannon

(2015)

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies

14. Bagaimana pendapat

bapak tentang

penggunaan

metacognitive


Apakah dapat

membantu bapak

“Learners need to apply

metacognitive strategies to

monitor their learning

process because successful

learners apply strategy to

the transfer their

knowledge through the

Metacognitive

Learning Strategies


145

untuk

mengembangkan

kemampuan siswa-

siswi dalam

pembelajaran

writing?

learning process.”

Halpern (1996)


A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVE … · 2017-12-18 · keterampilan menulis siswa di kelas 8A...

Documents

Transcript of A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON METACOGNITIVE … · 2017-12-18 · keterampilan menulis siswa di kelas 8A...