PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI · (GAIL) to Improve SMA Students' Writing...

THE USE OF GROUP OF ACTIVITIES FOR IN

(GAIL) TO IMPROVE

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAMDEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF

i

GROUP OF ACTIVITIES FOR IN-DEPTH LEARNING

TO IMPROVE SMA STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

ByMaria Agnes Evata AgustianieStudent Number: 101214158

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAMDEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERSS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITYYOGYAKARTA

2015

DEPTH LEARNING

STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAMDEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

S TRAINING AND EDUCATION

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

A Sa$ana Pendidikan Thesis on

THE USE O「 GROUP OF ACil｀ lVITIES F()R IN-1)EPTII I′ EARNING

(GAII」 )TO ILIPROVE S卜 IA STUDENTS'ヽVRITINC SKlLL

By脂[aia A響■es Evata A罫 lstitlliC

‐Student NtlillllCri 101214158

,\;rprovctl l.rr'

Datc

Febttary 16,2015Drs.Pius Nurwidasa PHhatin,ン I.Ed,Ed.D.,


AS`Jりα″αP″″J:ditrJr Tllesis on

THE USE OF GROUP OF ACTiVITIES FORIN― DEPTH LEARNING(GAIL)

TOIMPROVE SMA STUDEヽ TS'WRITINC SKILL

Chairperson

Secretary

Member

Member

Member

雛M8ria A騨

“

Evata角要菫titti奪

Sttdent Nulllbcr:1012‡尋15霧

Dcた整ded be貴〕re tllc 3観 oFE脇鐵陽轟麟霧

on Februa町 20,20:聾

and Dcdlared A欽 ■露ablt‐

Boaだ of E凛懸ine轟

P.Kuswttdono.恥 ,D.

Drs.3arli Bttm,M.F_d.,Pll_D

DFS.鞣議SN攀陶 id凌豫 Ptthati穐争M.腱予醸。参´

P.Kuswandono、 Ph.D.

く:〕accilia TLltyandari,M.Pd.

YogyakanaF Fc―・20・ 2015

Factilty oF]=ξ 溶嘘蜘ctt TFaining and Edtlcatioll

Dharlna U霊ivc霧 :サ


STATEⅣIENT OF WORK'S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declared 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 scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, February 20, 2015

The Writer,

Maria Agnes Evata Agustianie10121,4158

IV


LEPBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN

PUBLIKASI KARYA ILⅣIIAⅡ UNTUK KEPENTINGAN ILⅣIIAⅡ

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

Nama : Maria Agnes Evata Agustianie

Nomor Mahasiswa : l0l2l4l58

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan

Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

"The Use of Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) to ImproveSMA Students' Writing Skill"

beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan

kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan,

mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan

data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di lnternet atau

media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya

maupun mernberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya

sebagai penulis.

Demikian pemyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.

Dibuat di YogyakartaPada tanggal: 16 Februari 2015

Yang menyatakan

脚Maria Agnes Evata Agustianie


vi

ABSTRACT

Agustianie, M. A. (2015). The Use of Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) to Improve SMA Students' Writing Skill.Yogyakarta: English Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Writing requires a harder effort from the students compared to the other skills: listening, reading, and speaking. Especially in Indonesia, students’ writing skill is still insufficient. They tend to produce a lot of errors and had a lot of difficulties. Some researchers found that the error that frequently appeared in writing was grammatical error, while the most challenging part was developing the ideas in their writing.

Therefore, the researcher designed a set of activities named Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) to help students produce better writing. GAIL works well with Eclectic Approach, the combination of Process-based writing and Genre-based writing, since it was made to reinforce every writing process.

The aim of this study was to prove whether GAIL improves SMA students writing skill. The population of this study was the students of SMA Kolese De Britto. For the study, only eleventh grade students of science class were observed as the sample.The main problem formulation of this study was: does GAIL improve SMA students’ writing skill?

To answer the research questions, the researcher applied the quasi-experimental method. There were two groups in this study: experimental and control groups. Pre-test was conducted before both groups got the treatment. Post-test was conducted after the experimental group got the treatment. The mean score of the experimental group (M=5.1) was slightly higher than the control group(M=2.6). Then result of t-test to compare the performance of both groups showed that the group that used GAIL did not differ significantly (M=5.1,SD=12.4) from the control group that used ordinary teaching-learning activities (M=2.6,SD=14.9),t(103) = 0.95, p > 0.05.

Based on the results of the t-test, it can be concluded that the researcher had enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis: GAIL improves SMA students’ writing skill. In addition, the experimental group performed better in the writing organization than the control group. However, the researcher did not have enough evidence to claim that GAIL significantly better than other teaching methods.

Key terms: GAIL, Eclectic Approach, Writing Skill


vii

ABSTRAK

Agustianie, M. A. (2015). The Use of Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) to Improve SMA Students' Writing Skill.Yogyakarta: English Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Menulis membutuhkan usaha yang lebih keras dari siswa dibandingkan kemampuan yang lain: mendengarkan, membaca, dan menulis. Khususnya di Indonesia, kemampuan menulis siswa masih belum mencukupi. Mereka cenderung melakukan banyak kesalahan dan menemui banyak kesulitan. Beberapa peneliti menemukan bahwa kesalahan yang umumnya dilakukan adalah kesalahan tata bahasa, sedangkan mengembangkan ide tulisan adalah hal yang dirasa paling menyulitkan.

Oleh karena itu, peneliti membuat sebuah kumpulan kegiatan bernama Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) untuk membantu siswa dalam membuat tulisan yang baik. GAIL sangat sesuai bila digunakan bersamaan dengan Eclectic Approach, perpaduan antara Process-based writing dan Genre-based writing, karena GAIL didesain secara khusus untuk memperdalam setiap tahapan dalam menulis.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah membuktikan apakah GAIL meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa SMA. Populasi dari penelitian ini adalah para siswa SMA Kolese De Britto. Dalam penelitian ini, hanya siswa kelas sebelas IPA yang diambil sebagai sampel. Rumusan masalah dari penelitian ini adalah: apakah GAIL meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa SMA?

Untuk menjawab pertanyaan tersebut, peneliti menggunakan metode eksperimen semu. Pre-test dilaksanakan sebelum kedua grup mendapatkan perlakuan khusus. Post-test dilaksanakan setelah kelompok percobaan mendapatkan perlakuan khusus. Hasil rerata nilai grup percobaan (M=5.1) sedikit lebih tinggi dari grup kontrol (M=2.6). Kemudian, hasil uji t untuk membandingkan nilai kedua grupmenunjukkan bahwa grup yang menggunakan GAIL tidak berbeda secara signifikan (M=5.1,SD=12.4) dari grup kontrol yang menggunakan kegiatan pengajaran biasa (M=2.6,SD=14.9),t(103)=0.95, p>0.05.

Berdasarkan hasil t-test, dapat disimpulkan bahwa peneliti memiliki cukup bukti untuk menolak null hypothesis: GAIL meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa SMA. Selain itu, grup percobaan menunjukkan performa yang lebih baik daripada grup kontrol dalam organization. Namun, tes signifikansi menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada bukti yang kuat untuk mengklaim bahwa GAIL lebih baik dari kegiatan pengajaran yang lain.

Kata kunci: GAIL, Eclectic Approach, Writing Skill


viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all I would like to thank God for giving me strength and courage in

the process of completing my thesis.

I am also thankful to my major sponsor, Drs. Pius Nurwidasa P., M.Ed.,

Ed.D, for his guidance, patience, and encouragement. I would also like to express

my gratitude to all PBI lecturers, who encourage and give me their meaningful

knowledge.

My deep gratitude also goes to Pak A. Denny, S.Pd, and all the teachers in

SMA Kolese De Britto Yogyakarta who helped me to collect my data. Without

them, it was impossible for me to conduct the research and collect the data. I

would like to thank SMA Kolese De Britto students, especially eleven science

graders, for their great cooperation during the research.

I would like to thank my parents, who always support me mentally and

financially. They always give me strength whenever I am down and are willing to

listen to my stories.

My sincerest thanks go to my friends: Endang Ratmawati Parhusip (Sr.

Ursula), Monica Surya Utami, Deliana Ciciliawati, Bayu Pamungkas and all my

PBI friends 2010. During the process of completing my thesis, they encouraged

and also supported me unconditionally. They were my candles when I was in the

dark and feeling cold. I would like to thank Laurensia Prista Karina, who had

helped me to assess the students’ writing. Last but not least, I also thank Bu Mita,

Olin and Ryo, for their willingness to spare their time and proofread my thesis.

Maria Agnes E. A.


ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ..........................................................iv

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ...........................................................v

ABSTRACT................................................ ..............................................................vi

ABSTRAK .................................................... ..............................................................vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS......... ................................. ................................................ix

LIST OF TABLES .....................................................................................................xii

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES............................................................................................xiv

CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1

1.1 Research Background ..................................................................................1

1.2 Research Problems...................................................................................... 5

1.3 Problem Limitation .....................................................................................5

1.4 Research Design .........................................................................................5

1.5 Research Objectives.....................................................................................6

1.6 Research Benefits ........................................................................................6

1.6.1 For Teachers ............................................................................................ 6

1.6.2 For the Researcher ................................................................................... 6

1.6.3 For the Future Research........................................................................... 6


x

1.6.4 For Students ............................................................................................. 7

1.7 Definition of Terms .....................................................................................7

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW ..........................................................9

2.1. Theoretical Description .............................................................................9

2.1.1 The Eclectic Approach as a Synthesis of Process-based Writing and

Genre-based Writing ...............................................................................10

2.1.2 Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) .................................12

2.1.3 Instructional Design in GAIL .................................................................13

2.1.3.1 Identifying Goals, Topics and General Purposes .................................14

2.1.3.2 Identifying Learners’ Characteristics ...................................................15

2.1.3.3 Illustrating the Learning Objectives .....................................................16

2.1.3.4 Identifying the Subject Content ............................................................17

2.1.3.5 Collating Learning Activities and Resources .......................................18

2.1.3.6 Evaluating the Materials .......................................................................18

2.1.4 Material Development Theory in GAIL.................................................19

2.1.5 Deep Learning in the Classroom.............................................................22

2.2 Theoretical Framework..............................................................................24

2.3 Hypothesis .................................................................................................26

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY .......................................................................27

3.1 Research Method .......................................................................................27

3.2 Research Setting .........................................................................................29

3.3 Research Population and Sample................................................................29

3.4 Instrument ...................................................................................................30

3.4.1 Pre-test and Post-test ...............................................................................32

3.4.1.1 Reliability Test......................................................................................32

3.4.1.2 Validity Test .........................................................................................34

3.4.2 The Rubric for Pre-test and Post-test.......................................................36

3.5 Data Gathering Technique..........................................................................37


xi

3.5.1 Preparation...............................................................................................37

3.5.2 Conducting the Pre-test............................................................................38

3.5.3 Conducting the Post-test ..........................................................................38

3.5.4 The Method of Collecting Data ...............................................................39

3.6 Data Analysis.............................................................................................39

3.7 Hypotheses ................................................................................................39

3.7.1 Operational Hypotheses...........................................................................40

3.7.2 Statistical Hypotheses..............................................................................40

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..........................42

4.1 Data Presentation ........................................................................................42

4.1.1 The Descriptive Statistic of Pre-test result ..............................................44

4.1.2 The Descriptive Statistic of Post-test result.............................................47

4.2 Data Analysis.............................................................................................51

4.3 The Discussion...........................................................................................53

4.3.1 The Factors that Influenced the Result of the Experiment ......................53

4.3.2 Analysis of the Aspect of Organization...................................................56

4.3.3 The Other Findings ..................................................................................57

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................58

5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................58

5.2 Recommendations.......................................................................................61

REFERENCES...........................................................................................................64

APPENDICES ...........................................................................................................68


xii

LIST OF TABLESPage

2.1. Techniques and Examples of Plus Category in Materials Adaptation................21

2.2. Techniques and Examples of Minus Category in Materials Adaptation.............21

2.3. Techniques and Examples of Zero Category in Materials Adaptation ...............22

3.1. Table of Coefficient Correlation Calculation Result ..........................................34

4.1. The Comparison Table of Pre-test and Post-test Score of Experimental and

Control Group .....................................................................................................43

4.2. The Distribution Table of Pre-test Result of Experimental Group .....................44

4.3. The Distribution Table of the Pre-test Result of Control Group.........................46

4.4.The Distribution Table of Post-test Result of Experimental Group.....................47

4.5. The Distribution Table of Post-test Result of Control Group.............................49

4.6. The T-test Result of Experimental Group...........................................................51

4.7. The T-test Result of Pre-test And Post-test of Control Group............................52

4.8. The Result of T-test.............................................................................................52

4.9. The Result of Significance Test of Organization Aspect....................................56


xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

2.1. Kemp’s Instructional Design Model ...................................................................14

2.2. The Theoretical Framework of the Research ......................................................25

3.1. Pre-test and Post-test Control Group Design ......................................................29

4.1. The Comparison of Pre-test and Post-test...........................................................43

4.2. The Distribution of Pre-test Result of Experimental Group ...............................45

4.3. The Distribution of Pre-test Result of Control Group.........................................46

4.4. The Distribution of Post-test Result of Experimental Group..............................48

4.5.The Distribution of Post-test Result of Control Group ........................................50


xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

1. GAIL Syllabus ...............................................................................................68

2. Task of Pre-test ...............................................................................................84

3. Task of Post-test .............................................................................................85

4. Assessment Rubric for Expository Writing ...................................................86

5. Score of Pre-test And Post-test by Raters.......................................................87

6.Research Recommendation from Sanata Dharma ...........................................91

7. Script of Asking Permission to Conduct Research.........................................92

8. Research Schedule ..........................................................................................93

9. The Pre-test Score of Experimental Group.....................................................94

10. The Pre-test Score of Control Group ............................................................95

11.The Post-test Score of Experimental Group ..................................................96

12. The Post-test Score of Control Group .........................................................97


1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The writer presents in the first chapter the reasons why this study is

conducted. In the following section, the writer presents the research background,

the research questions and the problem limitation. The research objectives and

research benefits are then presented before the writer finally closes the first

chapter with the terminology used here.

1.1 Research Background

There are four skills in learning a language: speaking, listening, reading

and writing. Among these skills, writing is generally the most challenging skill for

the language learners; it is hard work (Tiedt, 1989). It is even more challenging

for students in senior high school; they are trying to write about the topic that is

not related to themselves (Davis & Winek, 1989). In addition, writings could

cause misinterpretation for the readers when the writer fails to communicate his or

her intention (Farooq, Uzair-Ul-Hassan, & Wahid, 2012).

In Indonesia, senior high school students’ writing skill is still inadequate;

they produce a number of errors in their writing (Megaiab, 2014). In his research,

Megaiab (2014) found that the most common error was grammatical mistakes.

Another researcher, Siahaan (2013) also reached a similar conclusion to one

additional point; sometimes the students were also confused with the schematic

structure of the text. In addition to these problems, the students have difficulties in

determining what to write (Lyman, 1943) due to the choices of topics that were


2

out of their day-to-day lives which proved to be challenging (Davis & Winek,

1989). Thus, to assist the students in improving their writing skill, the teachers

may apply some approaches.

There are several writing approaches that can be applied. Badger and

White (2000) highlighted the difference between two commonly used approaches;

genre-based and process-writing. In a process writing, the students are expected to

realize the importance of mastering each writing aspect. Unfortunately, it

generally disregards the goal and also the reasons for writing the text. On the other

hand, the genre based approach provides the clear purpose of writing. While

applying this approach, the teachers at the same time undervalue the skills needed

in a good writing. Even though both approaches are commonly used, they actually

address only a particular problem in ESL writing (Min, 2009). Another approach

that may be the “ideal approach which is now considered as the most effective and

successful in the teaching of writing” is the Eclectic Approach (Farooq, Uzair-Ul-

Hassan, & Wahid, 2012, p.185). It combines both approaches to teach writing

(Min, 2009). As a result, writing will have a clear purpose, and should be

completed through several prescribed steps.

The plus point of this approach is seen by SMA Kolese De Britto English

teachers. Based on several discussions that took place during the course of this

study, the teacher agreed that he implemented Eclectic Approach in the teaching –

learning process. The result of the combined approaches helped the students to

produce good writing. It can be concluded from the result of their writings; there

are some students who get high grades for their writing assignment.


3

Achieving good grades is not the end of students’ journey in written

English. The language has become an international language spoken by almost all

people in the world, which means it could provide better work opportunities for

the students (Whaley, 2014). He also explains that the international companies

would like to find the employee who is “adaptable and able to learn fast, someone

eloquent who can write well [in English]” (par.7). In order to fulfill this demand,

producing good and systematic ideas according to the standard is important (Laia,

2014). Furthermore, good writers have to be able to control their writings

(Koeswologito, 2014). Based on the facts presented, certainly the education

system must do something to open more opportunities (Whaley, 2014).

From the sources mentioned previously, it could be concluded that in order

to meet the global expectation, the students need to be able to produce systematic

writing which has good ideas. As the opposite of the expectation, in the beginning

of the discussion it had been mentioned that in Indonesia, structuring the writing

composition and developing ideas are the challenges for students. As the solution

to the problems, the teachers need to vary their teaching approaches in any way

that may help the students to achieve the highest score (Petrilli, 2011). Based on

this suggestion, as one of the paths to meet the global demands of proficient

human resources, the Eclectic Approach that is already applied in the school,

especially SMA Kolese De Britto then needs to be strengthened. The researcher

suggests deep learning as the supporting elements of the Eclectic Approach. Deep

learning itself is a type of learning which leads students to solve problems through

several steps of processing and analysing which in the end will change the way


4

students think, act, and behave (Jensen & Nickelsen, 2011). It includes the use of

prior knowledge to absorb or grab new materials (Weimer, 2012). Hopefully, by

adding it, the writing product produced by students will be better than before.

In order to implement deep learning in the writing class, the teachers have

to make the instructions applicable in the classroom context (Orlich, Harder,

Callahan, Trevisan, & Brown, 2009). Jensen and Nickelsen (2011) have of several

applicable activities. The researcher adapted some of these activities. The

activities itself consist of planning the standard and curriculum, pre-assessing,

building a positive learning culture, priming and activating prior knowledge,

acquiring new knowledge, processing with a purpose and making the choices for

processing. Due to the limitation of the time, the researcher only adapted the

activities. These activities were later on used in the experiment and called Group

of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL).

Noticing the learning phenomenon at De Britto, the researcher is interested

to study the application of GAIL to enhance the Eclectic Approach that has

already been used. Besides, the students here could produce better writing than

they did before. Specifically, the participants are only eleven Science graders. The

researcher chooses them by considering their English proficiency. Many of them

also have many interesting ideas. Seeing the potential possessed by the students,

the researcher would like to observe whether GAIL can improve the students’

writing skill.


5

1.2 Research Problems

Based on the research background mentioned previously, there is one

major research question in this research:

1. Does Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL) improve SMA

students’ writing skill?

However, this research would also like to answer this question:what aspect

improves the most ?

1.3 Problem Limitation

There are several factors that may influence the students’ writing skills,

such as writing motivation and background knowledge. However, this study will

only focus on the use of GAIL in improving the students’ writing skills. Several

other factors such as learning environment, age and experience may still be there,

but they will not be counted in the research.

1.4 Research Design

This study was quasi-experimental research that was conducted in SMA

Kolese De Britto. There were two groups in this research: the control group and

the experimental group (Ary, Jacobs, Sorenson, & Razavieh, 2010). The

researcher used GAIL to teach English in the experimental group. Meanwhile, the

ordinary teaching and learning which was commonly used in this school was

applied in the control group. The complete description of the research method will

be explained in chapter III. However, the analysis method will be summarized

briefly here. The results of the teaching and learning process of the experimental

and the control group will be compared. After that, the researcher will determine


6

whether there was a significant difference between the mean gain scores in the

experimental group and the control group by applying a t-test.

1.5 Research Objectives

The first objective of this study was to observe the different results of the

control group and treatment group. This difference was then calculated, to

measure the significance. The second objective was observing the improvement in

students’ writing skill after being treated using GAIL.

1.6 Research Benefits

1.6.1 For Teachers

This research may bring new alternative activities, such as Six Thinking

Hats, Make Meaning, and Walk in Others’ Shoes to maximize the students’

potential in learning, especially writing. These activities may bring the students

into higher achievement in the learning process.

1.6.2 For the Researcher

This research is expected to provide an emphirical data for the research.

The data is a valuable input to determine the effect of applying GAIL in the

control and experimental groups. Only after the research had been completed, the

result could be obtained.

1.6.3 For the Future Researchers

This research provides several things to explore in the scope of learning

skills. For instance, the researcher has already given a glimpse of deep learning

and how to implement the activities in the class. Other researchers may explore

further the application of deep learning in the classroom. In addition, some


7

theories and methods in writing are also presented. They can be the basic to create

a lot of new materials or methods, which may solve students’ writing problems.

1.6.4 For Students

The use of GAIL hopefully will maximize the potential of students’

writing. They may also have new or upgraded point of view about writing

activities and processes. In the end, GAIL will bring new ways to guide the

students to achieve their writings’ goals.

1.7 Definition of Terms

In this session, the researcher provides the definition of the terms used in

the research. The complete explanation is provided in chapter II.

1. Deep Learning

The definition of deep learning is solving problems in more than one step

and with multiple levels of analysis or processing so that students may apply the

content/skills in ways that change thinking, influence, or behaviors.

2. Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL)

GAIL is a set of adapted learning activities from Jensen and Nickelsen’s

(2011) concept to enhance deep learning. The researcher here adapts only the

activities in order to meet the need of the students.

3. Writing

Writing is a form of comunication to deliver thought or to express feeling

through written form (Harmer, 2001). There are two kinds of writing: writing as

supportive skill, and writing as creation of meaning. In writing as supportive skill,


8

students have to take notes, write lists and fill in the blanks. Writing as creating

meaning involves arranging words, sentences, and paragraphs into a good text.

All the explanations presented above provide sufficient information to get

a glimpse of the research. The complete discussion of the theories that built this

research will be provided in the next chapter.


9

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL REVIEW

In this chapter, the researcher discusses the basic theories of the topic. The

discussions are divided into three major sections: the theoretical description, the

theoretical framework and the hypothesis. In the theoretical description section, the

writer provides the theories related to the topic. Then, to present how the theories

answer the research questions, there is the theoretical framework. At the end of this

chapter, the writer presents the hypothesis of this research.

2.1 Theoretical Description

Theoretical description provides the discussion of Eclectic Approach as the

writing approach that was applied in SMA Kolese De Britto, the school the researcher

observed. This section also discusses GAIL; the group of activities adapted from

Deep Learning Cycles (DELC) by Jensen and Nickelsen (2011). The researcher also

applied Kemp’s (1997) instructional design as a guidance to assess the learners’ type

and construct the learning materials. At the end of this chapter, an explanation on the

relation between Eclectic Approach, GAIL, Instructional Design and Material

Development is presented.


10

2.1.1 Eclectic Approach As A Synthesis of Process-based and Genre-based

Writing

The initial theory of Eclectic Approach comes from Brown (2001). He stated

that the teachers could apply the approach that could accomodate the learners’ need.

The Eclectic Approach is considered the most efficient and effective approach as it

can cover the disadvantages of using one approach only (Min, 2009). This new

approach may combine one or more approaches, as long as it accommodates the need

of the students (Petrilli, 2011). In addition, the approach can be applied in all

language skills (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). Furthermore, it gives other benefits, such as

fun, enjoyable and innovative learning (Kumar, 2013).

Genre and process based writing are parts of Eclectic Approach in writing.

Process writing has several identifiable stages: pre-writing, outlining, drafting,

revising, editing and submitting (Sundem, 2007). Murray (1972) provides the

definition of each stage. Pre-writing takes place before the writing itself happens. It

allows the writer to pick a specific topic, audience, and form of writing. Drafting or

referred as “writing” by Murray (1972) is the fast-paced process where the writer

could know how much he or she knows. It produces a rough draft of what the writer

actually wants to write. The last stages, revising and editing, are simplified into one

term: rewriting. In this process, the writer will “research, rethink, redesign and

rewrite” (Murray, 1972: p.5) the draft. These four steps allow the students to

independently and creatively write and examine their own writing (Tiedt, 1989).


11

Another part of the Eclectic Approach is genre-based writing; it holds the idea

that writing serves a purpose and the language is used as a media to achieve this

purpose (Hyland, 2003). The purpose of the writing may vary: to get things done, to

tell a story, to describe something, etcetera. The writer here uses texts as the media to

convey certain information, to make relation with his or her readers, and to achieve

the purpose of the text itself. By combining these two approaches, the students will

set the purpose of their writing and also go through several steps in order to achive

the goal.

In the classroom, the Eclectic Approach encourages learner-centered activities

(Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Furthermore, Richards and Rodgers also suggest

specific roles of the teachers and learners in the class. For the learners, they have a lot

of opportunities to respond to the topic of discussion. In addition, they may also get

the information from the other students, not only from the teachers. Still from

Richards and Rodgers (2001), as the students are expected to be active (Brown, 2001),

the teachers then have to be creative in choosing the materials that would be given to

the students. The hardest job is combining the strengths from different activities into

an activity that will encourage students to learn independently (Jackson, 2011).

After understanding the nature of the Eclectic Approach, the researcher needs

to design the learning materials that will help the students to understand the materials

(Petrilli, 2011). This new material is called Group of Activities for In-depth Learning

(GAIL).


12

2.1.2 Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL)

GAIL is a set of activities which will strengthen each writing step in the

Eclectic Approach. In the process of making this set of activities, the researcher

applies Kemp’s (1997) Instructional Design and Tomlinson and Matsuhara’s (2004)

Material Development in order to get a strong theoretical basis. The detailed

information about these theories is presented in the following section. Presented

below is the explanation of GAIL itself.

The activities in GAIL are especially designed for SMA Kolese De Britto

students to meet their needs. There are three things that should be considered : the

suitability of the activities to the recent curriculum (Davison & Dowson, 2003), the

students’ learning styles (Kemp, 1997), and also the outcomes (Swain, 1995).

Suitability deals with the goal that GAIL is trying to achieve; it should meet the goal

which was set by the curriculum (Davison & Dowson, 2003). When the researcher

conducted the study, the school was implementing curriculum 2006. Therefore, GAIL

was designed based on the goals that were mentioned in curriculum 2006. Then, the

researcher should also consider the students’ learning styles and the outcomes. Based

on the researcher’s experiences while doing the internship program, the students

tended to analyze the problems given to them and the school emphasized cognitive

and affective outputs. Considering students’ tendency and output preference, the

researcher set the activities that required them to give a lot of reasonings and also pair

discussions (Jackson, 2011). Besides these three requirements, GAIL has several

other considerations.


13

Each activity in GAIL is chosen based on the aforementioned considerations

and aims to ahieve a certain goal. The goal of choosing activities as the main course

is active learning (Jackson, 2011); all the teachers need to do is directing and

confirming their understanding (Jensen & Nickelsen, 2011). Even if the teachers need

to explain, it should only contain enough information so the students can tell when

they have solved the problems (Ohlson, 2011). In addition, activities help the students

to follow the writing processes based on the steps provided (Petrilli, 2011). Therefore,

the researcher should choose the activities which meet the students’ need (Davison &

Dowson, 2003).

The assessments for GAIL are conducted in the beginning and also in the end

of the study. They are a part of evaluations in order to be able to make improvement.

For the syllabus of GAIL, please refer to APPENDIX 1. In the following section, the

detailed explanation of the steps of designing GAIL is presented.

2.1.3 Instructional Design in GAIL

In designing the material for the students, either it is new or adapted, the

teachers should follow certain steps, usually the one made by Kemp (1997). There are

eight steps that should be completed. However the researcher only took six steps. The

reason was because the other two steps were integrated in the six chosen steps.

Presented in figure 2.1. is the Kemp’s model.


2.1.3.1 Identifying Goals, Topics a

There are three things that can be used as the sources of goals:

the students and the

that the goals should be flexible

after conducting a pre

students’ writing performance.

In this study, the researcher

Standard”, and the general purposes as “Basic Competencies”.

Standard and the Basic Competence we

applied at the school during this study. Further explanation in regards to the cu

implementation of Curriculum

Identifying Goals, Topics and General Purposes

There are three things that can be used as the sources of goals:

the subjects (Kemp, 1997). Still from Kemp, the important thing is

the goals should be flexible. Based on this suggestion, the researcher sets the goal

after conducting a pre-test, as a form of an assessment of the SMA Kolese De Britto

students’ writing performance.

In this study, the researcher refers the goals in GAIL

Standard”, and the general purposes as “Basic Competencies”.

ndard and the Basic Competence were taken from Curriculum

applied at the school during this study. Further explanation in regards to the cu

implementation of Curriculum 2013 will be laid out in Chapter V.

Revise

Figure 2.1. Kemp’s Instructional Design Model

14

There are three things that can be used as the sources of goals: the societies,

he important thing is

Based on this suggestion, the researcher sets the goal

SMA Kolese De Britto

AIL as “Competence

Standard”, and the general purposes as “Basic Competencies”. The Competence

from Curriculum 2006, as they were

applied at the school during this study. Further explanation in regards to the current

will be laid out in Chapter V.


15

2.1.3.2 Identifying Learners’ Characteristics

The materials designed by the teachers should help the students to learn on his

their own pace (Petrilli, 2011); thus, it is important to consider the academic and

social factors of the students (Kemp, 1997). Furthermore, Kemp (1997) explains that

the teachers should also think about the learning conditions and cognitive styles

mappings. GAIL was applied in SMA Kolese De Britto with homogenous academic

and social factors. The research itself took place in the same place, so it can be

concluded that the students had the equal learning environment. These students were

the eleventh grader science students of SMA Kolese De Britto. At the time the

research was conducted, they were learning about exposition text.

While considering the students’ characteristics, the researcher noted that there

are “a lot of factors that may affect the students’ writing results” (Weigle, 2002:

p.79). Some of them are motivation, interest, and learning environment (Biggs &

Moore, 1993). In the research conducted by Marton and Saljo (1976), the students

can perform unexpectedly well in reading test merely because they were interested in

the topic. However, providing media to motivate the students may not work give

satisfying result. A research conducted by Warnock, Boykin, and Tung (2011)

showed that there was no significant difference in students’ performance, even

though the students loved the media. Considering these facts, the result of GAIL

implementation is still uncertain, since GAIL only provides activities to strengthen

the steps in Eclectic Approach.


16

The activities in GAIL encourage the students to use their analysis in the

writing text. As Kemp (1997) suggests, the teachers also need to consider four

cognitive styles mapping. Set one describes the students who tend to seek from

theoretical symbols to get the meaning of something new. Set two mentions about the

ability to give meaning from their own experiences. Set three defines the students

who like to analyze and give reasoning towards something unfamiliar. The last set,

set four, is those who can explain something based on their memories. When the

researcher conducted the internship program in SMA Kolese De Britto, she found that

the students belonged to set three.

Each learning activity should help the students in one or another way (Petrilli,

2011). Therefore, the researcher should also set clear learning objectives (Kemp,

1997).

2.1.3.3 Illustrating the Learning Objectives

In Kemp’s Instructional Design, the learning objectives become very

important because learning itself should be the product or outcome of an instruction.

There are three groups of learning objectives suggested by Kemp (1997): cognitive,

psychomotor, and affective categories. In the process of making GAIL, the researcher

considers two categories only: the cognitive and affective. In general, the teaching-

learning activities in the Senior High School level focus more on the cognitive

category rather than the affective.

To support the cognitive category, the researcher considers Bloom’s

Taxonomy, as mentioned by Kemp (1997). Bloom has seven levels of cognitive


17

domain; knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

As for the affective domain, it becomes one of the priorities because SMA Kolese De

Britto embraces the ideas of working in pairs and groups with the aim to support each

other during the learning process. The significance of each of these domains will

relate closely to the subject content explained below.

2.1.3.4 Identifying the Subject Content

Kemp (1997) mentioned three things to consider in determining the subject

content: selection and organizing of the specific knowledge (facts and information),

skills (step-by-step procedures, conditions, and requirements) and attitudinal factors

of any topic. The first subject content (selection and organizing of the specific

knowledge) deals with the writing activities. The researcher here applies Tomlinson

and Matsuhara’s material development theory (2004). To choose the material in

GAIL, the researcher considered the result of the pre-test. At the same time, the

teachers’ expectation and the students’ writing skills are also included in the subject

content.

Skills described mainly about the processes and requirements of the Eclectic

Approach. The processes in the Eclectic Approach are pre-writing, outlining, drafting,

revising, editing, and submitting (Sundem, 2007). In the processes of writing, the

attitudinal facts in writing itself are integrated in the material design. Later on, the

steps in Eclectic Approach were strengthened by the activities in GAIL. Therefore, to

support the subject content, the researcer should choose the learning activities and

resources carefully, so they could serve the goals.


18

2.1.3.5 Collating Learning Activities and Resources

After listing the content, the teachers should find the most efficient and

effective activity and resource along with the best way to implement them (Kemp,

1997). Furthermore, Kemp also suggests that the teachers choose various materials,

each of them works best only in specific part. Referring to the recommendation, the

researcher adapted some activities from Jensen and Nickelsen (2001). These activities

are especially designed by the writers to enhance deep learning.

In adapting the materials for GAIL, the researcher also implemented Tomlison

and Matsuhara’s (2004) Material Development Theory. The teachers who adapt

materials from any resources sometimes make some changes in order to make them

work in the class (Jackson, 2011). Tomlinson and Matsuhara (2004) mention three

categories that are commonly used: plus, minus and zero. In this research, the

researcher applied minus category for the activities in GAIL, since there are some

modifications in the content of the adapted materials.

These adapted materials which are designed by the researcher may have some

flaws. Therefore, to make better materials, an evaluation process is needed.

2.1.3.6 Evaluating the Materials

After the materials are applied in the classroom, the outcomes need to be

measured (Kemp, 1997). Still from Kemp, how the teachers should evaluate is


19

written in the objectives. At the end of the meeting, the teachers need to assess the

students in order to know whether they have achieved the goal.

In this research, the evaluation was conducted two times; before (pre-test) and

after (post-test) GAIL (the treatment) was applied. The pre-test was done to measure

the students’ writing skill before the treatment. After the treatment was given, the

post -test was conducted. In order to maintain the equal aspects of the evaluation

(Kothari, 2004), both tests were assessed by using adapted rubric from Wagner

(2002).

As mentioned previously, the activites taken for GAIL were chosen by

considering material development theory by Tomlinson and Matsuhara (2004).

Presented below is the complete explanation of the theory.

2.1.4 Material Development Theory in GAIL

In designing GAIL, the researcher applied minus category. Applying this

category meant the researcher made some modifications in the content of the adapted

materials (Tomlinson & Matsuhara, 2004). The further reason for choosing minus

category was because the researcher decreased the level of difficulties of the

materials and omitted the part of sentences in the materials; these actions belonged to

minus category in Tomlinson and Matsuhara’s theory. In addition, these steps were

done in order to develop some materials that will meet students’ need (Jackson,

2011).

In developing the materials, the writer seeks to incorporate valid theories as

the basis of this part of the study. In doing so, the writer adapted Tomlinson and


20

Matsuhara’s (2004) materials development theory into the theoretical framework. The

writer intended to utilize this theory to complement Kemp’s (1997) adapted

instructional design steps. The materials evaluation and revision of Kemp’s (1997)

steps were the focus of Tomlinson and Matsuhara’s (2004) adapted theory. The writer

employed two out of five steps of materials adaptation from the mentioned authors,

which were: 1) the evaluation, and 2) the adaptation theory. These steps were used as

guidances to strengthen Eclectic Approach and to adapt the relevant ones from Deep

Learning Cycles as part of Kemp’s revision processes.

Tomlinson and Matsuhara’s (2004) materials evaluation measurements and

adaptation techniques were employed and linked to the first and last steps of Kemp’s

adapted instructional design. The materials evaluation measurements covered seven

inquiry points which were: 1) the appeal or attractiveness of the materials, 2) the

validity or whether materials teach worth teaching, 3) the ability of materials to

interest the learners (and the lecturers), 4) the ability of the materials to motivate the

learners or to stimulate the learners so they want to give time and energy to the

materials, 5) the potential learning values, 6) the preparation, delivery and assessment

assistance given to the lecturers, and 7) adaptation flexibility of materials by lecturers

to suit a particular context .

Furthermore, the materials adaptation theory section that was implemented

has three main categories: a) Plus (+), b) Minus (-) and or c) Zero (0) i.e.

modification without changing quantity. Shown below are the adaptation techniques

with each set of details explained in the tables under each category explained before.


21

a) Plus Category

Techniques Examples

Addition Lecturers may add different texts and or activities

Expansion Lecturers may expand texts and activities byincreasing the length, difficulty, depth, etc.

Table 2.7. Techniques and Examples of Plus Category in Materials Adaptation (Tomlinson and Matsuhara, 2004: 15-16)

The plus category allows the teachers to add and also expand the materials.

Adding materials may include adding the text, or any other activities that are related

to the materials adapted. Expanding text may result in increasing level of difficulty.

b) Minus Category

Techniques Examples

Deletion Lecturers may delete some texts and/or activities altogether.

Subtraction Lecturers may decrease the number of sentences in a text or a part of an activity.

Reduction Lecturers may reduce texts and activities by decreasing the length, difficulty, depth, etc.

Table 2.8. Techniques and Examples of Minus Category in Materials Adaptation (Tomlinson and Matsuhara, 2004: 15-16)

Minus category allows the teachers to modify the materials by deleting some

texts and activities and also decreasing the level of difficulty. Deleting some texts and

activities may include shortening the text or even deleting the texts completely.

Decreasing the level of difficulty may include lowering the challenge for the students,

as a result, the level of difficulty matched to the students’ level of understanding.


22

c) Zero Category

Techniques ExamplesModification Lecturers may make changes to instructions.Replacement Lecturers may swap one activity with another.Recognisation Lecturers may change the position of texts and

illustrations.Resequencing Lecturers may change the sequence of

activities.Conversion Lecturers may change the genre of a text to

move the content to a medium to another (e.g. from print to web page).

Table 2.9. Techniques and Examples ofZero Category in Materials Adaptation (Tomlinson and Matsuhara, 2004: 15-16)

Zero Category allows the teachers to use the materials as they are. Teachers

may change the sequence of the instructions and activities, but there is no need to add

or delete some parts of the materials.

Thus, by using both the evaluation and adaptation theory by Tomlinson and

Matsuhara (2004) within Kemp’s adapted instructional design steps, the writer had a

strong materials development theoretical basis in designing the writing materials in

GAIL.

2.1.5 Deep Learning in the Classroom

Deep learning is the type of learning in which the students solve problems

through several analysis and steps (Jensen & Nickelsen, 2011). It is related to

restructure the knowledge and to change the concept, which usually found in

cognitive learning theory (Chacon, 2005). Entwistle (2000), as cited from Chacon,

2005, notes the difference between deep learning and surface learning:


23

“In the deep approach, the intention to extract meaning produces active learning processes that involve relating ideas and looking for patterns and principles on the one hand (a holist strategy - Pask, 1976, 1988), and using evidence and examining the logic of the argument on the other (serialist).”(p.3)

The learning type also involves monitoring the development of one’s own

understanding (Entwistle, McCune & Walker, 2000). On the other hand, the surface

learning is just coping with the task and seeing the course as unrelated bits of

information which leads to much more restricted learning processes, in particular to

routine memorization (Weimer, 2012).

This description indicates that complex understanding will help the students to

solve complex problems. In order to do it, students should use their micro knowledge

(Weimer, 2012). Otherwise, “attempting to work with more complex principles

without a good grasp of the more basic principles from which they are built can only

lead to frustration” (Warren, 2004, p.3). Unlike the surface learning which can be

learned easily, getting into deep learning needs stairs (Rhem, 2010), or in the other

words, the teachers need to provide brief introduction about the topic. After that, the

teachers could give assessments that encourage and require the students to solve the

problems, in a way that the students will be encouraged to use and apply their

knowledge (Warren, 2004).

Why is it important to apply deep learning in the classroom? First, this

learning type will push the students beyond memorization of procedures and facts (a

report from the National Research Council, Education for Life and Work: Developing

Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century). It will put the students into a


24

condition where they can put or transfer their recent knowledge to think of a solution

of a new problem. Furthermore, Laird and his colleagues (2008), in their study found

that the more frequent deep learning practices improved the students’ self-reported

learning. From these two reasons, it can be concluded that deep learning helps the

students to develop themselves.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

Writing skill is the most difficult among four skills (Tiedt, 1989). Especially

for senior high school students, they encounter a lot of problems in their writing

(Megaiab, 2014). It is most likely because they write about something new or

different; the topic that is not related directly to themselves (Davis & Winek, 1989).

The researcher believes that by applying GAIL in the classroom, the students’

writing skill can be improved as shown from the experiment conducted during the

study. In addition to the aforementioned reason, GAIL can be utilized to strengthen

each writing step in the Eclectic Approach. Another advantage is that GAIL promotes

deep learning in the teaching-learning process. Deep learning itself is a type of

learning which helps the students to solve complex problems through several steps of

processing and analyzing which in the end will change the way the students think, act,

and behave (Jensen & Nickelsen, 2011). In the process of learning, the students use

their prior knowledge to work on any new material in a writing activity (Weimer,

2012).

To apply deep learning, Jensen and Nickelsen (2011) suggest that the teachers

utilize the applicable classroom activities. The researcher adapted the materials into


25

new material that later on were used in the teaching process during the study. To

support the process, the Instructional Design Theory by Kemp (1997) was

implemented. There are eight steps of designing a material: goals, topics, and general

purposes, learner characteristics, learning objectives, subject content, pre-assessment,

teaching-learning activities and resources, support services. Out of these eight steps,

the researcher only took six steps: goals, topics, and general purposes, learner

characteristics, learning objectives, subject content and teaching/learning activities

and resources. The reason for doing so is because the other two steps are integrated in

the six steps chosen by the researcher.

The clear relation between the Eclectic Approach, Instructional Design and

Material Development, is presented in figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2. Theoretical Framework of the Research

Pre-Test

Make a new materials (GAIL ) by using Kemp’s Instructional

Design (1997)

GAIL (Group of Activities for In-depth Learning)

Eclectic Approach (Brown,2001)

Better Writing

Stre

ngth

en

Group of Activities for In-depth Learning (GAIL)Adapted from Jensen and Nickelsen (2011)


26

2.3 Hypothesis

The conceptual hypothesis of this study is stated as follows: The use of GAIL

in senior high school will improve the students’ writing skills. The improvement can

be seen in the significant difference between the pre-test and post-test of the

experimental group.

After having the solid, relevant and related theories to construct the research,

the researcher needed to gather the data of the research. The questions about what

kind of research method used, what the population is, and also what kind of

instruments used will be answered in the next chapter.


27

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher discusses the methodology of the research.

The discussion covers five major sections: research method, research setting,

research population and sample, instrument, and data gathering technique. In

research method section, the writer provides the explanation of the method used.

Research setting covers the explanation of the setting chosen by the researcher.

Then, the research population and sample provides the researcher’s consideration

for choosing the population and sample. The researcher also explains the

instruments that are used to collect the data in one particular section. At last, the

researcher presents the technique to collect the data.

3.1 Research Method

In order to answer the research problem, quasi-experimental research was

used. There are two characteristics of the research. The first one is the direct

manipulation of one or more independent variables by the researcher (Fraenkel &

Wallen, 2006). The manipulation is the treatment given to the groups. For

example, one group gets no treatment, and another group gets special or different

treatment. This difference then would provide data for the researcher. Using the

collected data, the researcher could determine the “treatment effect” by

subtracting the result of each group (Kothari, 2004).

This research has two variables. The first one is independent variable. This

variable will affect or change the dependent variable (Kothari, 2004). The

independent variable in this research was the use of GAIL. These activities were


28

applied to those in treatment group, while the control group got ordinary teaching-

learning activities. The dependent variable is the variable that will be affected by

the independent variable (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006). The dependent variable in

this research was students’ writing skill.

The particular feature of quasi-experimental design is the lack of random

assignment (Gal, Joyce & Borg, 2007). Actually, the function of random

assignment is to ensure the balance in both groups. Eliminating it means the

researcher cannot randomly put the participants into the control and treatment

group. In the other words, the participants were already grouped.

Quasi-experimental research needs two groups to compare: the control

group and the experimental group (Ary, Jacobs, Sorenson, & Razavieh, 2010).

Treatment group is the group that receives the special treatment, whereas control

group is the group that receives either no or alternate treatment (Gal, Joyce, &

Borg, 2007). Between these two groups, the one that was observed was actually

the experimental group. It was because the experimental group received the

special treatment. However, the control group was also important. This group

provided the data for comparison. Later on, this data was calculated to determine

the significance of the test result.

To see the significant difference between two groups, the researcher

compared the mean of the pre-test (level of phenomenon before treatment) and the

post-test (level of phenomenon after treatment) (Kothari, 2004). The pre-test was

given to both groups before the students got the treatment. The purpose was to

measure the students’ writing skill. After the students got the treatment, they had


29

post-test. From the result of the post-test, the researcher analyzed and compared

the mean difference. In the end, the researcher was able to determine whether the

mean difference found was significant.

Figure 3.1. is the illustration of the research design (quasi-experimental

method):

Figure 3.1. Pre-test and Post-test Control Group Design

3.2 Research Setting

To see the effect of GAIL in senior high school students’ writing skill, the

quasi-experiment was conducted at SMA Kolese De Britto. Fraenkel and Wallen

(2006) suggest that the sample represents the population. Therefore, this school

was chosen. The students’ writing skill in this school is varied; there are some

students who can write very well, some are good enough, and the others still need

close guidance for their writing.

3.3 Research Population and Sample

In experimental research, there must be sample and population (Ary,

Jacobs, Sorenson, & Razavieh, 2010). The population of this research was the

students of SMA Kolese De Britto. For the sample, the researcher chose eleventh

grader Science students. The sampling design applied here is cluster sampling. It

requires small scale representation of the total population claimed as one sample

which represents the universe (Kothari, 2004). In determining the sample, the

Experimental Group

Control

X


30

researcher chose two classes as the experimental group and another two classes as

the control group. The experimental group consisted of 52 students and the

control group consisted of 53 students. All of the group’s members had pre-test

before they got the treatment and post-test after they got the treatment.

3.4 Instrument

The purpose of this study was to observe whether GAIL would improve

SMA students’ writing skill. It could be seen from the different performance

before and after the treatment (Kothari, 2004). Therefore, the tests before (pre-test)

and after they got the treatment (post-test) were necessary. In the other words, the

researcher used writing tests (APPENDIX 2 & 3) as the instruments to collect the

data for this study. The students’ writings were then assessed by using a rubric

(APPENDIX 4) explained further in the next paragraph. This rubric is the second

instrument used during the study.

There are several things to consider in creating writing assessment. The

first consideration is what scale that will be used. There are two kind of scales in

language assessment: holistic scale, and analytical scale (Hyland, 2003). Weigle

(2002) points out two basic considerations for choosing the scales. The first one is

whether the scale is made to assess single or general tasks and the second, whether

each script will be given a single or multiple scores. In each scale, the score

represents how well the students’ performance is.

Holistic scale refers to comparing the students’ writing with the other students’

work in the class (Sundem, 2007). Weigle (2002) explains the advantages and

disadvantages of this scale. Holistic scale is preferred because it gives the most


31

authentic, closest reaction of the readers to the text. However, this scale does not

give useful feedback for the students’ writings. The analytical scale, on the other

hand, provides the assessment of writing aspects (Brown, 2007). The advantage of

this scale is that it gives clear pictures of the students’ weaknesses and strengths in

writing, so the teachers could provide useful feedback (Hyland, 2003). The

disadvantage then, is that the score of one aspect may influence the score of the

other aspects (Weigle, 2002).

Another thing to consider is the criterion of the tests, since a good assessment

must assess what is being tested (Brown, 2001). Each writing scale has different

criterion which is designed based on the main focus of the scale (Weigle, 2002).

These criteria can be found in a rubric, the assessment instrument “that specify

how test takers are expected to proceed in taking the test” (Bachman, 1990: p.118).

For example, the analytic scale assesses is several aspects of writing. Therefore, in

the rubric, the detailed information for each score will be presented.

In choosing the scale and the criterion, the teachers should keep in mind that

they do not only assess the textual aspect, but the contextual also (Broad, 2003).

The teachers should adjust the points in the rubric, as it has to assess as many

aspects expected, especially in content assignment (Sundem, 2007). Therefore,

each school may have different writing rubric.

The English teacher in SMA Kolese De Britto applies the Eclectic Approach.

Bachman and Palmer (1996), as cited by Weigle (2002), notes that the rubric

should have the best possible combination of the relevant qualities in the given

situation. Furthermore, the analytic score is “particularly useful for second-


32

language learners” (Weigle, 2002: p.120), since they need more feedback for their

writing. Students’ writings were then assessed by using the rubric adapted from

Wagner’s book entitled Express Yourself. Presented below was the discussion of

the detail of the tests and also the rubric.

3.4.1 Pre-test and Post-test

To get the accurate data of the students’ improvement in writing, the pre-

test and the post-test were similar (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006). For both tests, they

had to write exposition text. The students chose the topic provided by the teachers.

In completing the text, each student passed several steps: pre-writing, outlining,

drafting, revising, editing, and submitting (Sundem, 2007). Another consideration

for the pre-test and the post-test is the reliability and validity of the test itself

(Brown, 2001). The explanation of the reliability and validity of the test is

presented below.

3.4.1.1 Reliability Test

A good test should be reliable (Brown, 2001). It means that the test should

be applied consistently to all student writings, and different readers or raters

should give similar or identical scores (Weigle, 2002). Hudges (1989) mentions

three commonly used methods to ensure a test reliability; the test-retest method,

the split-half method, and the inter-rater method. Furthermore, he explains that in

the test-retest method, the teachers need to conduct the test to the same groups

after a period of time. If the score of the tests do not differ greatly, then the test is

reliable. In this research, the test-retest method was not used because the students

(the participants of the research) did not have enough time to do the second test.


33

Besides, the school did not allow the research to be extended, since the students

are now in the twelfth grade.

The second method is the split half method. Cronbach (1947) describes

this method as splitting or dividing the measurement scale into two matched

halves. The teachers then need to calculate the correlation of these two tests

results. Hyland (2003) mentions that a test reliability is higher when the result is

closer to 1. Seeing the nature of spilt half method, it is best applied to multiple

choices. Therefore, the researcher did not use this method.

The last method is inter-rater reliability, in which the students’ writings are

assessed by several raters (Weigle, 2002). Similar to split half method, the

teachers then calculate the correlation of the test score given by the raters (Lado,

1961). Hudges (1989) also adds that even though the writing test tends to be

subjective, there will be fewer problem when the raters have agreement on the

ratings and the way they assess.

The researcher applies this method to ensure the test reliabilty in the

research. The raters are the researcher and one student of English Language

Education Program 2010. She was chosen as the rater because a rater should have

at least the basic knowledge of assessing writing and also get explanation of the

rubric used (Wang, 2009). After the raters assessed the students’ writing, the

researcher calculates the score by using SPSS ver.20 Full Version, applying

Pearson statistical test. This test aims to measure the relation between two

variables (the score from rater 1 and rater 2) (Norusis, 2000). Presented below is


34

Table 3.1 presents the of reliability coefficient of the test used in the research. For

the complete data of the score given by the raters, please refer to APPENDIX 5.

Table 3.1.Table of Correlation Coefficient Calculation Result

Group Correlation CoefficientPre-test Post-test

Experimental Group 0.77 0.84Control Group 0.84 0.88

The table above shows that the reliability coefficient of the pre-test for

experimental group is 0.77 and for the control group is 0.84. While for the post-

test, the reliability coefficient for experimental group is 0.84 and 0.88 for the

control group. Lado (1961) explains that higher coefficient (closer to 1.00)

indicates higher reliability. Taylor (1990) adds that 0.36 until 0.67 is the modest

or moderate correlation. Therefore, it can be concluded that the result of

correlation coefficient is strong, as it exceeds the moderate limit. Other than

reliability, there is another thing that is also an essential requirement of an

effective test (Heaton, 1975).

3.4.1.2 Validity Test

Validity of a test is the heart, the most important thing of the test itself

(Kenyon, 1998). It refers to “the extend to which inferences made from

assessment results are appropriate, meaningful and useful in terms of purpose of

the assessment” (Gronlund, 1998: p. 226). Furthermore, validity is “the potential

of the prompt for eliciting written products that span the range of the ability of

interest among test-takers” (White, 1994: p.221). It means, the prompt (the writing

task) given to the students should accommodate the slow learners to write

something and also give the chance for the advanced learners to explore the topic


35

of discussion. Validity of a test could be indicated from two types of validity:

content, construct and criterion validity (Heaton, 1975).

Content validity deals with measuring what has been taught in the class

and mentioning the objective of the test clearly (Brown, 2001). Based on this

explanation, the researcher already ensures the content validity of the test. The

reason is the researcher set the writing task by referring to the learning objectives

written in Curriculum 2006. In addition, the researcher also mentioned clearly the

objectives of the test. Therefore, the test in this research is valid in content.

Another type of validity is presented in the following paragraph.

Criterion Validity is the degree to which result on the test agrees with

those provided by some independent and highly dependable assessment of

students’ ability (Hudges, 1989). On the other words, a test meets criterion

validity if the scoring criteria has different range of assessment for each aspect

assessed (Brown, 2001). The test made by the researcher has clear range for each

aspect. Therefore, the researcher already fulfills the requirement of the criterion

validity. Detailed explanation of the rubric will be discussed in the next sub topic.

The validity of a test also relies on the construction (construct validity)

(Hughes, 1989). Weigle (2002) states that the construct validity must be

demonstrated in at least three ways. They are mentioning the task of writing that is

going to be tested, considering the scoring criteria which include the components

of writing and following the criteria closely when scoring the writing, especially

for the raters. In the writing test (APPENDIX 2 & 3), the researcher already

mentioned the task that the students were going to do. While distributing the test,


36

the researcher also handed the scoring criteria (rubric) which were used to assess

their writing. Also, as mentioned in the previous sub topic, the raters used the

rubric as the guidance for them to assess the students writing. In addition, the

prompt (writing question) was made based on TWE (Test of Written English),

which is well known for its validity (Brown, 2001). In conclusion, the test also

has construct validity.

Previously, the scoring criteria (rubric) to assess students’ writing has been

mentioned several times. To get detailed explanation of the rubric, the researcher

discusses it in the following sub topic.

3.4.2 The Rubric of Pre-test and Post-test

To determine the score of the students’ writings, the researcher a needed

rubric (Hyland, 2003). The researcher made some changes to the original rubrics

made by Wagner (2002). Basically, it was because the words used were too

difficult to understand. In making the adjustment or the changes to the rubric, the

researcher asked for suggestions from two parties. The first party was the teachers

and the facilitators of an English course. All of them graduated from English

Language Education Study Program Yogyakarta State University (YSU). The

second party was the English teachers for science program in SMA Kolese De

Britto.

After the criteria for each aspect had been adjusted, the rubric was finally

ready to use. There were four aspects to assess: focus, organization, sources and

mechanical/grammar features (Wagner, 2006). Each aspect restricts the area that

should be assessed (Hyland, 2003). The focus here was to assess the content of


37

each paragraph: how many ideas presented by the writer and also how convincing

the idea was. When the writer combined all the paragraphs together, the

organization aspect was used. Then, the raters assessed the way the writer

developed the paragraph, began the text, presented the arguments, and finally

ended the discussion. On the other hand, sources tried to dig how much references

or information the writer gathered to build the arguments. A persuasive text,

especially exposition, would be better and convincing when it had a lot of

supports, evidences, or proofs (Wagner, 2002). The last aspect was the mechanical

or grammatical features. It assessed the writer’s grammar. Basically, it required

the writer to write the sentences effectively in good English. In short, these four

aspects were important to determine students’ writing skills in writing exposition

text.

The aspects mentioned above were divided into four categories: excellent

(A), good (B), acceptable (C), and attempted (D). From the order, it could be seen

that a very good persuasive text belonged to excellent category. On the contrary,

the writing which was not yet satisfying belonged to the attempted category. In

order to be in certain category, there were several criteria.

3.5 Data Gathering Technique

In order to collect the data, the researcher took several steps. These steps

of data gathering were discussed in the subsection below.

3.5.1 Preparation

Before the research could be conducted in the school, there were some

preparations that should be done by the researcher (Kothari, 2004). The first step


38

was to ask permission from the school to do a research in the school (APPENDIX

6). Then, the researcher also asked permission from the English teacher

(APPENDIX 7). After that, the researcher discussed the time to conduct the

research. In this case, the researcher followed the schedule given by the teacher.

Finally, an agreement about the time allocation was made (APPENDIX 8). The

next step was designing an assessment sheet or rubric to conduct the pre-test and

also the post-test. Last, the researcher came to school and conducted the

experiment. The experiment lasted from April 30, 2014 until May 13, 2014.

3.5.2 Conducting the Pre-test

To measure the students’ level in writing before they got any treatment,

the researcher conducted the pre-test (APPENDIX 2). It was done before the

meeting began. The test was conducted for all the students in the treatment and

control groups. In the pre-test, the students had to make an exposition text. The

submitted writings were then assessed by using the rubric that had been prepared

before. Then, the students received treatment based on their group.

3.5.3 Conducting the Post-test

After conducting the pre-test, the treatment was given to both groups. The

treatment group was taught by using GAIL and the control group was taught by

using the ordinary teaching-learning activities. The final result of these treatments

was measured by the post-test (APPENDIX 3). Similar to the pre-test, the

researcher gave the students an assignment to write exposition text. Then, their

works were assessed by using the same rubric used to assess the pre-test.

3.5.4 The Method of Data Analysis


39

When the data of the pre-tests and the post-stest were already collected,

the researcher then performed the data analysis. The result of pre-test was

compared to the post-test (Kothari, 2004). This comparison was then used to

determine whether GAIL improved the students’ writing skill. The detailed

information about how the data was calculated would be explained in data

analysis.

3.6 Data Analysis

The researcher collected the scores of the pre-test and post-test as the data

of the research. Then, the purpose of the research was to observe the effectiveness

of GAIL in improving students’ writing skill. Therefore, there were two types of

data calculation applied here: the comparison of mean and strengthen it by using t-

test for independent sample (Balnaves & Caputi, 2001). First, the data was

calculated by using SPSS V.20 full version. After that, the mean of the pre-test

and post-test for both groups was compared. Then, the researcher performed t-test

by using the data. This test was used to determine whether the mean difference

found was significant. The significance level was set at 0.05 for the analysis of the

data.

3.7 Hypotheses

In this study, there were two hypotheses that were tested: the hypotheses

of the first and the second research problems. The hypotheses were stated as

follows:


40

3.7.1 Operational Hypotheses

The operational hypothesis no.1 of this study was:

H0 = The mean score of the post-tests is lower than or the same as the

mean score of the pre-tests.

H1 = The mean score of the post-test is higher than the mean score of the

pre-test

The operational hypothesis no.2 of this study was:

H0= The mean gain difference between the pre-tests and the post-tests of

the experimental group is lower than or the same as the mean gain difference

between the pre-test and the post-tests of the control group.

H1 = The mean gain difference between the pre-tests and the post-tests of

the experimental group is higher than the mean gain difference between the pre-

tests and the post-tests of the control group.

3.7.2 Statistical Hypotheses

1. Ho = x 1 x 2

H1 = x 1 < x 2

Where x1 is the mean score of the pre-test and x2 is the mean score of rhe

post-test. Null hypothesis (Ho) will be rejected if there is a significant difference

between the pre-test and post-test mean score of the experimental and control

group.

2. Ho = MDexp ≤ MDcon

H1 = MDexp > MDcon


41

Where MD is the mean difference (gain) between pre-test and post-test. It

is the substraction of post-test score and pre-test score. Null hypothesis (Ho) will

be rejected if the mean difference (gain) of experimental group is higher than the

mean difference (gain) of the control group.

All the theories and explanations above discussed the methodology that

was applied to collect and also calculate the data. Further explanation about the

result of the calculation and findings will be provided in the next chapter.


42

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the result of the data calculation and also the

summary of the data. There are two parts in this chapter. The first part discusses

the result of the experiment. The pre-test scores, the post-test score and the

statistical result are shown as well. The second part discusses the methods that

may boost students’ writing.

4.1. Data Presentation

As a part of experimental research, the researcher had conducted several

tests to measure the students’ writing skill. The tests were the pre-test and the

post-test, which were conducted to both groups. By conducting the pre-test and

post-test, the researcher was able to measure the students’ writing skills before

and after the treatment. The experimental group was treated by using GAIL, while

the control group applied ordinary teaching-learning activities. The results then

were calculated by using SPPS ver.20. In the following paragraphs, the pre-test

score, the post-test score, and the statistical result of the data will be discussed and

analyzed.

Table 4.1. shows that the mean score of the pre-test and the post-test of

both groups is different. The difference of post-test and pre-test of experimental

group is 4.56 and 2.61 for the control group. The result suggested that the writing

performance of the experimental group is higher than the control group.


43

Table 4.1. The Comparison Table of Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental and Control Group

In figure 4.1., the researcher presents the performance difference of the

experimental and thec control group:

StatisticExperimental Group Control Group

Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test Mean: 62.47 Mean: 67.64 Mean: 63.06 Mean: 65.67

Std. Deviation: 9.14Std. Deviation:11.71 Std. Deviation: 9.64

Std. Deviation:13.09

Score Frequency Score Frequency Score Frequency Score Frequency44 1 47 2 44 1 44 147 3 50 4 47 3 50 350 1 53 6 50 2 53 353 5 56 7 53 3 56 656 8 59 2 56 9 59 259 4 63 5 59 5 63 863 5 65 1 63 6 66 366 8 66 7 66 10 69 869 6 69 2 69 4 72 372 3 72 3 72 5 75 375 5 75 1 75 3 78 478 2 78 4 78 1 81 491 1 81 1 91 1 84 2

Total 53 84 2 Total 52 91 188 1 94 291 2 Total 5294 197 1

Total 53

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

Pre-test Post-test

Control Group

Experimental Group


44

4.1.1 The Descriptive Statistic of Pre-test Result

Before the experiment began, both groups had to take part in the pre-test.

The tests were assessed by using the rubric adapted from Wagner’s book, which

focused on writing for senior high school students. Table 4.2. and figure 4.2. show

the descriptive statistic of pre-test for the experimental group.

Table 4.2. The Distribution Table of Pre-test Result of Experimental Group

Pretest

Frequency

Valid44.00 1

47.00 3

50.00 2

53.00 3

56.00 9

59.00 5

63.00 6

66.00 10

69.00 4

72.00 5

75.00 3

78.00 1

91.00 1

Total 53

The information in the table 4.2. presents the distribution of the pre test

results of the experimental group. The mode was 66. The mean score or the post-

test was 62.47, and the standard deviation was 9.14. The difference from highest

to lowest was 47 points, almost five times standard deviation, which ranges from

44 to 91. This reflects that the score distribution of the pre test of the experimental

group was quite clumped. For the complete score of the experimental group’s pre-

test, please refer to APPENDIX 9.

Statistics

Pretest

N Valid 53

Missing 0

Mean 62.4717

Std. Deviation 9.14962

Figure 4.1. The comparison of pre-test and post-test


45

Figure 4.2. The Distribution of Pre-test Result of Experimental Group

The graphic shows normal distribution of the pre-test results, as the

distribution is in bell shape. As seen above, the highest frequency belongs to 60

and 70.

As a comparison, the researcher also collected the pre-test results of the

control group. This group got no treatment. The distribution of the pre-test results

of the control group could be seen in table 4.3.

The information in table 4.3. presents the distribution of the post test result

of control group. There was bimodal: 56 and 66. The mean score for the post-test

was 63.05, and the standard deviation was 9.63. The difference from highest to

lowest was 53 points, almost five times standard deviation, which ranges from 44

to 91. This reflects that the score distribution of the pre tests of the control group

was quite clumped. For the complete score of control group’s pre-tests, please

refer to APPENDIX 10.


46

Table 4.3. The Distribution Table of the Pre-test Result of Control Group

Pretest

Frequency

Valid 44.00 1

47.00 3

50.00 1

53.00 5

56.00 8

59.00 4

63.00 5

66.00 8

69.00 6

72.00 3

75.00 5

78.00 2

91.00 1

Total 52

Figure 4.3. The Distribution of Pre-test Result of Control Group

The graphic shows negatively skewed distribution of the pre-test result, as

the distribution was slightly concentrated on the right side in the figure. As seen

above, the highest frequency belonged to 70.

Statistics

Pretest

N Valid 52

Missing 0

Mean 63.0577



47

4.1.2 The Descriptive Statistic of Post-test Result

The post-test was conducted after the researcher gave the treatment to the

experimental group. The test used in the post test was similar to the one used in

the pre-test. Table 4.4. and figure 4.4. show the descriptive statistic of the post-

tests of the experimental group.

Table 4.4. The Distribution Table of Post-test Result of Experimental Group

Post-test

Frequency

Valid 44.00 1

50.00 3

53.00 3

56.00 6

59.00 2

63.00 8

66.00 3

69.00 8

72.00 3

75.00 3

78.00 4

81.00 4

84.00 2

91.00 1

94.00 2

Total 53

The information in the table 4.4 presents the distribution of the post test

result of the experimental group. There was bimodal : 63 and 69. The mean score

for the post-test was 67.64, and the standard deviation was 11.70. The difference

from highest to lowest was 50 points, almost five times standard deviation, which

ranges from 44 to 94. This reflects that the score distribution of the post test of the

Statistics

Posttest

N Valid 53

Missing 0

Mean 67.6415



48

experimental group was quite varied. For the complete scores of experimental

group’s post-test, please refer to APPENDIX 11.

Figure 4.4. The Distribution of Post-test Result of Experimental Group

The graphic shows positively skewed distribution of the post-test result, as

the distribution was concentrated on the left side in the figure. As seen above, the

highest frequency was 70.

As the control group functioned as comparison, no treatment was given.

Table 4.5. and figure 4.5. show the descriptive statistic of pre-tests of control

group.


49

Table 4.5. The Distribution Table of Post-test Result of Control Group

Posttest

Frequency

Valid 47.00 2

50.00 4

53.00 6

56.00 7

59.00 2

63.00 5

65.00 1

66.00 7

69.00 2

72.00 3

75.00 1

78.00 4

81.00 1

84.00 2

88.00 1

91.00 2

94.00 1

97.00 1

Total 52

The information in table 4.5. presents the distribution of the post test

results of the control group. There was bimodal : 56 and 66. The mean score for

the post-test was 65.67, and the standard deviation was 13.08. The difference from

the highest to lowest score was 50 points, almost five times standard deviation,

which ranges from 47 to 97. This reflects that the score distribution of the post test

of the control group was quite varied. For the complete score of control group’s

post-test, please refer to APPENDIX 12.

Statistics

Posttest

N Valid 52

Missing 0

Mean 65.6731



50

Figure 4.5. The Distribution of Post-test Result of Control Group

Figure 4.5. shows positively skewed distribution of the post-test results, as

the distribution was concentrated on the left side in the figure. As seen above, the

highest frequency belonged to the score of 50 and 70.

The difference found in the mean score of the pre-tests and post-tests of

the experimental and control group did not automatically call for significant

difference. Therefore, to ensure that the difference was significant, the researcher

performed a t-test, that will be discussed in the next topic.


51

4.2 Data Analysis

There was sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis which says that

the mean score of post test was lower than the mean score of pre test. Therefore,

the alternative hypothesis was used for this research. The mean score of post-test

was higher than the mean score of pre-test. The difference between two mean

score was significant (t(25) = 3.02, p < .05). This finding became the evidence to

answer the first research question at the beginning of this research; GAIL

significantly improves SMA students’ writing skills.

The results of both pre-test and post-test scores from experimental and

control group were calculated by using SPSS ver.20. The aim was to observe the

significance of the mean gain difference by applying an independent t-test

(Balnaves & Caputi, 2001). Below is the result of the t-test of experimental group:

Table 4.6. The T-test Result of Experimental Group

One-Sample Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error

Mean

change 53 5,1698 12,44949 1,71007

One-Sample Test

Test Value = 0

T Df Sig. (1-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

Change 3,023 52 ,002 5,16981 1,7383 8,6013

The t-test results of the pre-test and the post-test of the experimental group

showed (M= 1.71, SD=12.44), t (52) = 3.02, p < 0.05. There was a significant

difference between the pre-test and post-test of the experimental group.


52

Table 4.7. The T-test Result of Pre-test And Post-test Score of Control Group

One-Sample Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

control_prepost 52 2,6154 14,91434 2,06825

One-Sample Test

Test Value = 0

T Df Sig. (1-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

control_prepost 1,265 51 ,106 2,61538 -1,5368 6,7676

As the comparison of experimental group’s performance, the t-test result

of the control group is also presented. The t-test result of the pre-test and the post-

test of the control group showed (M= 2.61, SD=14.91), t (51) = 1.26, p > 0.05.

There was no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test of the

control group. The researcher then performed the t-test to compare the pre-test and

post-test mean scores of both groups. This was done to find the comparison of the

experimental and control group.

An independent-sample t-test was conducted to compare the score of the

pre-test and the post-test of the experimental and control group. The writing skills

of the experimental group that used GAIL did not differ significantly (M=5.1,

SD=12.4) from the control group that used ordinary teaching-learning activities

(M=2.6, SD=14.9), t (103) = 0.95, p > 0.05. It is unlikely that there was

significant difference between the mean score of the experimental and control

group.

Table 4.8. The Result of T-test

Group Statistics

Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Mean E 53 5.1698 12.44949 1.71007

C 52 2.6154 14.91434 2.06825


53

Independent Sample Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df Sig. (1-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Mean Equal variances

assumed.965 .328 .953 103 .171 2.55443 2.67904 -2.75882 7.86768

Equal variances

not assumed.952

99.12

8.171 2.55443 2.68365 -2.77043 7.87929

Although there was an improvement in the experimental group, the

researcher did not have enough evidence to claim that GAIL is significantly better

than other teaching methods. In the following section, the researcher explained

about the external factors found during the research.

4.3 The Discussion

In this part, the researcher explained some external factors that were found

during the research. Below is the discussion of each point.

4.3.1 The Factors That Influenced The Result of The Experiment

This research was designed based on the researcher’s belief that GAIL

would improve the students’ writing skill. If the pre-test and post-test result for

both groups were compared, the mean difference would be seen (Balnaves &

Caputi, 2001). However, the results of the t-test showed that the difference was

not significant (M=2.6, SD=14.9), t (103) = 0.95, p > 0.05. Therefore, the

researcher would presume and discuss the factors that influenced the results of the

experiment. There were three factors: the school chosen, students’ adaptability,

and students’ writing skill.


54

The experiment was conducted in SMA Kolese De Britto Jogjakarta. This

school was well-known as one of the best private schools in Jogja, considering the

results of the national exam. The students here had similar ability and tended to

have similar characteristics. It was found while the researcher conducted the

internship program. The writing results gathered before the research conducted

showed that each class got at least 78 for report writing results. It may be one of

the influencing factors. By having students with similar characteristics, it would

be difficult to see the significantly different performance of the students. This

research may have different result if it was conducted in a school in which the

students had very different characteristics. The researcher still believed that the

significant difference could be expected.

One of the trademarks of De Britto students was their ability to adapt to

the new environment or treatment. It is reinforced to them by the teachers, either

the homeroom or the subject teachers (Admin, 2009). They learnt that every

teacher had different teaching style; therefore they should help themselves to

adapt. Seeing the situation, it would not be surprising if the students quickly

adapted to the new assessment sheet/rubric given by the researcher. In addition,

the students in both groups had minimum difficulty in achieving the criterion

provided.

Another reason was the writing skill of the students. When the researcher

did the internship program, she noticed that the students were weak only in some

writing aspects such as grammar and developing ideas. The students were having

almost no problem in choosing vocabulary and forming the text. It could be seen


55

from their writing process. Even in the first draft, their ability to form a text was

shown. They could provide appropriate information related to the topic and also

logical conclusion. As stated above, their problems were grammar and the ability

to develop the ideas. Sometimes they found difficulties in expressing their ideas in

written form. As a result, their writings were sometimes misleading or confusing.

The writing skill here became the problems because actually the students

were already good at some writing aspects. In the rubric the aspects assessed were

focus, organization, sources, and mechanical/grammar features. As stated in the

previous chapter, each aspect assessed different parts of the text. Focus assessed

the content in each paragraphs, while organization assessed the organization of the

text (introduction, arguments, conclusion and the transition). Sources were dealing

with facts and supportive statements quoted or cited by the students. The last one,

mechanical/grammatical features dealt with the grammar and punctuation errors

found in the text. In conclusion, the students were already good at focus and

organization. They were also not that hopeless in sources and grammar.

Considering these factors, the fact (that the mean difference was not significant)

was then not surprising.

Even though the result of the t-test was unlikely to show significant

difference, the researcher found that the experimental group performed much

better than the control group in organizing ideas.


56

4.3.2 Analysis of the Aspect of Organization

Group Statistics

Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

change_pre_post Con 52 ,0000 ,83431 ,11570

Exp 53 ,4717 ,85718 ,11774

Independent Samples Test

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. T Df Sig.

(1-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

change_pre_post Equal

variances

assumed

.001 .977-

2.857103 .0025 -.47170 .16512

-

.79917

-

.14423

Equal

variances

not assumed

-

2.857102.994 .0025 -.47170 .16507

-

.79908

-

.14431

The organization of the experimental group that used GAIL differed

significantly (M= 0.47, SD=0.85) from the control group that used ordinary

teaching-learning activities (M= 0.00, SD= 0.83), t (103) = - 2.85, p < 0.05. There

was a significant difference between the organization of the experimental and

control group. Specifically, these results suggested that the students that were

being treated by using GAIL had better writing organization than the students that

were being treated by using the ordinary teaching-learning activities.

Table 4.9. The Result of Significance Test of Organization Aspect


57

4.3.3 The Other findings

After the researcher collected the data, there were some interesting

findings noted. First, the use of peer-feedback in GAIL helped the students to

minimize grammar mistakes. Usually, the students thought that their writings

were understandable and already clear. By asking some friends to give feedback,

they knew what went wrong in their writings. Besides, they also got more

understandable and acceptable explanations from friends. It was very helpful for

them, because sometimes the teachers could not provide satisfying answer for

students. The effect of having peer-feedback activity was noisy class. The students

moved around the class to find a friend who can help them.

Another interesting finding was about the text sample provided by the

researcher. The use of contextual examples reinforced the students to use it as a

model in their writings. In the early meeting, the students and the teachers

analyzed and discussed the text together. Later, in drafting process, they referred

to the text as a model. Although this activity was not done by all of the students, it

showed that actually the students needed model. It helped them because then they

could compare their writings to the sample text. They could also find some

persuasive expressions.

The research findings had been discussed in detail in the previous

paragraphs. It presented the results of the data calculation, the chart of the tests ad

also the figures. In the next chapter, there will be some recommendation and

conclusion of the research.


58

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter summarizes the data analysis that has been discussed in

chapter IV. In addition, there are some recommendations for SMA English

teachers and also for future researchers who might be interested to improve or use

this activity. The first part is the conclusion of the data analysis, and the second

part is the recommendation.

5.1 Conclusions

After calculating the data and discussing the calculation result, the

researcher could draw the conclusion. The first conclusion is about the result of

data calculation of the pre-test and the post-test of the experimental and control

group. The second conclusion is about the writing aspect that improved the most,

as the second research problem. For the first conclusion, it can be concluded that

GAIL significantly improves SMA students’ writing skill. There was sufficient

evidence that the score of the post-tests was higher than the score of the pre-test.

Furthermore, the difference between two mean score was significant (t (25) = 3.02,

p < .05). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected, and the alternate hypothesis is

used for the research.

As the answer to the second research question, the researcher calculated

the research data of the control and experimental group. The t-test results of

organization of the experimental group that used GAIL showed significant

difference (M= 0.47, SD=0.85) from the control group that used the ordinary


59

teaching-learning activities (M= 0.00, SD= 0.83), t (103) = - 2.85, p < 0.05.

Specifically, these results suggested that the students that were being treated by

using GAIL had better writing organization than the students that were being

treated by using ordinary teaching-learning activities.

The results of this research give evidence that writing skill is the most

difficult among four skills (Tiedt, 1989). Especially for senior high school

students, they encounter a lot of problems in producing good writings (Megaiab,

2014). It is most likely because they write about a new the topic that is not related

to themselves (Davis & Winek, 1989).

In order to help the students, the English teacher in SMA Kolese De Britto

uses the Eclectic Approach. It is the combination of the most commonly used

approaches in writing; genre-based and process writing approach (Farooq, Uzair-

Ul-Hassan, & Wahid, 2012). Each approach has its own weakness, and an

effective approach should incorporate these approaches (Bagder & White, 2000).

Therefore, Eclectic Approach is chosen to achieve certain goal and accomodate

the learners (Brown, 2001).

To get even better results in writing, the researcher suggests deep learning

to enhance or to strengthen the teaching-learning process. Deep learning itself is a

type of learning which helps the students to solve problems by going through

several steps of processing and analysing which in the end will change the way

students think, act, and behave (Jensen & Nickelsen, 2011). In this learning type,

the students use their prior knowledge to get into the new material (Guskey, 2002).


60

In this research, the researcher encourages deep learning through activities

in GAIL. It emphasizes the use of activities to help the students improving their

writing skills. Each task or activity given serves a certain goal and also helps the

students to produce good writing.

In order to choose the suitable activities and design the suitable material

based on the students’ need, the researcher implemented Instructional Design

Theory by Kemp (1997). There are eight steps to design a material: goals, topics,

and general purposes, learner characteristics, learning ojectives, subject content,

pre-assessment, teaching/learning activities and resources, support services. Out

of these eight steps, the researcher only took six steps; goals, topics, and general

purposes, learner characteristics, learning ojectives, subject content and

teaching/learning activities and resources. The reason for doing so is because the

two omitted steps had actually been integrated in the chosen steps.

In adapting the materials, the researcher also applied Material

Development Theory by Tomlinson and Matsuhara. Out of the five theories

proposed by them, the researcher only took two theories as the complement for

Kemp’s theory; 1) the evaluation, and 2) the adaptation theory. The materials

evaluation measurements cover seven inquiry points namely: 1) the appeal or

attractiveness of the materials, 2) the validity or whether materials teach worth

teaching, 3) the ability of materials to interest the learners (and the lecturers), 4)

the ability of the materials to motivate the learners or to stimulate the learners to

want to give time and energy to the materials, 5) the potential learning value, 6)


61

the preparation, delivery and assessment assistance given to the lecturers, and 7)

adaptation flexibility of materials by lecturers to suit a particular context .

The materials adaptation theory section that was implemented has three

main categories: a) Plus (+), b) Minus (-) and or c) Zero (0) i.e. modification

without changing quantity. In GAIL, the researcher applied minus category. It was

because the researcher deleted some activities and lowered the difficulty of the

material.

After collecting and calculating the data, the result of the t-test showed

mean score difference of the writing performance of both groups. The null

hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, the alternate hypothesis is used.

5.2 Recommendations

Based on the result of this research, GAIL could improve the writing

organization of the students; the experimental group performed significantly better

than the control group. However, the t-test calculation showed that the pre-test

and post-test mean score was unlikely to have a significant difference. As a result,

the researcher did not have enough evidence to claim that GAIL will improve the

students’ writing skill in other schools. To have research and writing improvement,

the researcher wants to give several recommendations to the future researchers

and also teachers.

The first recommendation would be for the next researcher. It would be

better for the next researcher to make research of specific problem. As a result of

this research showed siginifant difference in organization aspect, it can be

assumed that this kind of research probably works better for specific case. For


62

example, the next researcher may apply GAIL in CAR or case study. By applying

GAIL in these two cases, hopefully the next researcher would help the students to

improve their writing’s performance significantly.

For the teachers, it is recommended to use GAIL in order to strengthen the

writing organization of the students. Furthermore, after conducting the research in

SMA Kolese De Britto, the researcher found that Eclectic Approach is helpful for

the students. Therefore, the researcher also recommended the use of Eclectic

Approach in the classroom.

Inspite of how helpful GAIL is to help the students, the teachers may apply

other methods if they found specific writing problems. Those two methods are

Task-Based Learning and Content-Based Instruction. After conducting the

research at SMA Kolese De Britto, the students needed more practices in

determining the steps to complete the task. Sometimes, they skipped some

important steps or even completed the steps randomly. Therefore, the suggested

approach was Task-Based Language Teaching. This method focused on the steps

to acquire or to achieve the goal. Basically, it worked by dividing the way to

achieve the goal into several steps. Each step was presented in form of tasks. By

being able to complete the tasks, the students were expected to be able to achieve

the goal. Tasks fostered “processes of negotiation, modification, rephrasing, and

experimentation” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 228). In the other words, this

approach would encourage the students to use any information they had to

produce an expected output. Besides, these processes were beneficial in producing

a good writing.


63

Another suggested method is Content-Based Learning. The topic of

discussion in the research was exposition text. This text belonged to persuasive

test, as the purpose was to persuade the readers. In order to write persuasive text, a

lot of contextual examples would be very helpful. These examples might be the

model for the students, or provide the examples of persuasive sentences.

Therefore, it was suggested to apply Content-Based Instruction. This method used

the contents (texts, pictures, and videos) related to the topic in the teaching

process (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). It would be the suitable method, especially when

the researcher had theme-based teaching. Basically, the researcher should provide

different activities for the theme. Any content might be used, as long as it was

related to the theme. Another positive point from this approach was it supported

the idea that “language is purposeful”. This strength would help the students to

understand the purpose of language used in each text provided. They would be

familiar with the language and have less difficulty to produce similar text.

In the latest curriculum, the students are expected to be creative and cope

with complex problems, since the the materials will be closely related to one

another (Mulyasa, 2013). Therefore, GAIL will still be applicable, as it reinforces

the students to apply their knowledge to solve complex problems.


64

REFERENCES

Admin (2009). Pendampingan akademik. in Akademik. Retrieved August 28, 2014, from http://www.de-britto.sch.id/content.php?id=104

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorenson, C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to research in education (9th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal , 54 (2), 153-160.

Balnaves, M., & Caputi, P. (2001). Introduction to quantitative research method(4th ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Biggs, J. B., & Moore, P. J. (1993). The process of learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Broad, B. (2003). What we really value: Beyond rubrics in teaching and assessing writing. Utah: USU Press.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles (3rd.ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Education ESL.

Chacon, F. J. (2005). Proceedings of EDUCAUSE 2005: Facilitating deep learning in the adult online learner. Orlando: Empire State University.

Cronbach, L. (1947). Test "reliability": Its meaning and determination. Psychometrika, 1 (12), 1-16.

Davis, S. J., & Winek, J. (1989). Improving expository writing by increasing background knowledge. Journal of Reading , 33 (3), 178.

Davison, J., & Dowson, J. (2003). Learning to teach English in the secondary school (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Farooq, M. S., Uzair-Ul-Hassan, M., & Wahid, S. (2012). Opinion of second language learners about writing difficulties in English language. A Research Journal of South Asian Studies , 27(1), 183-194.

Fraenkel, J. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th ed.). New York: The Mc Graw-Hill Companies.

Gall, M.D., Joyce, P. G., & R. Borg, W. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.


65

Gronlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Guskey, T.R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers andTeaching: Theory and Practice. 8(4), 389-391.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Pearson Education Ltd.

Heaton, J. (1975). Writing English language tests. Singapore: Longman Group Limited.

Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Jackson, R. R. (2011). How to plan rigorous instruction (2nd ed.). Washington DC: ASCD Publication.

Jensen, E., & Nickelsen, L. (2011). Deeper learning: 7 strategi luar biasa untuk pembelajaran yang mendalam dan tak terlupakan (M. Benjamin, Ed.). Jakarta: PT Indeks.

Kemp, E. (1977). Instructional design. Belmont: Fearon Pitman Publishers.

Kenyon, D. (1998). Approaches to validation in language assessment. (A. Kunnan, Ed.) Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum.

Koeswologito, S. (2014, June 1). A world of promising opportunities awaits Indonesia’s travel bloggers.Retrieved August 8, 2014, from Jakarta Globe: http://www.thejakartaglobe.com

Kothari, C. (2004). Research methodology (2nd ed.). New Delhi: New Age International Publishers.

Kumar, C. P. (2013). The eclectic method-theory and its application to the learning of English. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications , 3 (6), 1-4.

Lado, R. (1961). Language testing: the construction and use of foreign language tests. Hongkong: Longman Group Limited.

Laia, K. C. (2014, May 25). More and more are writing in Indonesian. Retrieved August 7, 2014, from The Jakarta Globe:http://www.thejakartaglobe.com


66

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Lyman, H. S. (1943). Meeting the theme-writing difficulty. The English Journal , 14(2), 339-341.

Marton, F. & Saljo, R (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11.

Megaiab, M. M. (2014). Proceedings of 2014 WEI International academic conference: The English writing competence of the students of Indonesian senior high school. Kuta: The West East Institute.

Min, H. T. (2009). A principled eclectic approach to teaching EFL writing in Taiwan. Bulletin of Educational Research , 55 (1), 63-64.

Mulyasa, H.E. (2013). Pengembangan dan implementasi kurikulum 2013. Bandung: PT Rosdakarya.

Murray, D. M. (1972). Teach writing as a process, not product. The Leaflet, 71(3), 11-14.

Norusis, M. (2000). SPSS 10.0: guide to data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ohlson, E. J. (2011). A simulation approach to veritistic social epistemology. Episteme, 8(2), 127–143.

Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., Trevisan, M. S., & Brown, A. H. (2009). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction (9th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.

Petrilli, M. J. (2011). All together now? International Journal of Learning and Media , 11(4), 45-55.

Reason, R. D., Cox, B. E., McIntosh, K., & Terenzini, P. T. (2010). Proceedings of The Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research:Deep learning as an individual, conditional, and contextual influence on first-year student outcomes. Chicago: AIR 2010 Forum.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Siahaan, J. (2013). An analysis of students' ability and difficulties in writing descriptive text. Journal of English and Education , 1(1), 114-121.


67

Sundem, G. (2007). Improving students’ writing skills. Huntington Beach: Shell Education.

Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16 (3),371-391.

Taylor, R. (1990). Interpretation of the correlation: A basic review. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography , 6 (1), 35-39.

Tiedt, I. M. (1989). Writing from topic to evaluation. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tomlinson, B., & Masuhara, H. (2004). Developing language course materials. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

Wagner, E. (2002). Express yourself (1st ed.). New York: Learning Express.

Wang, P. (2009). The inter-rater reliability in scoring composition. English Language Teaching , 2 (3), 1-2.

Warnock, S. H., Boykin, N. J., & Tung, W. C. (2011). Assessment of the impact of smart board technology system use on student learning, satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Research in Education , 21 (1), 1-20.

Warren, K. (2004) “Why has feedback systems thinking struggled to influence strategy and policy formulation? Suggestive evidence, explanations and solutions”. Systems Research and Behavioral Science. (21)4, 1-5.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weimer, M. (2012). Deep learning vs. surface learning: getting students to understand the difference. White Board , 4 (12), 1.

White, E. (1994). Teaching and assessing writing: recent advances in understanding, evaluating and improving students performance (2nd Edition ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Whaley, F. (2014, January 21).Jargon hurts the poor. Retrieved August 7, 2014, from Asian Development Blog: http://blogs.adb.org

Zen, D. (2005). Proceedings of 3rd International Annual LATEFL China Conference: Teaching ESL/EFL writing beyond language. Tonghua: Southeast Missouri State University


APPENDICES


APPENDIX l

GAIL SYLLABUS


68

APPENDIX 1GAIL Syllabus

School : SMA Kolese De BrittoSubject : EnglishKelas / Sem. / Prog. : XI (Eleven) Science / 2 Standard Competence : Writing

6. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks esei berbentuk report, narrative, dan analytical exposition dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari.12.Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks fungsional pendek dan esei berbentuk narrative, spoof dan hortatory exposition dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari

Basic Competence : 6.2. Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk: report, narrative, dan analytical exposition.

12.2 Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk: narrative, spoof, dan hortatory exposition

Time Allocation : 8 x 45’ (8 meetings) 1 x 45’ (six thinking hats) 1 x 45’ (MAKE meaning + text analysis) 1 x 45’ (outlining: walk in other’s shoes) 1 x 45’ (writing draft) 1 x 45’ (peer-feedback / TELL) 1 x 45’ (editing draft +teacher feedback) 1 x 45’ (editing) 1 x 45’ (final editing + submission)

Classroom Activities:


69

Group Discussion, Power Point Presentation,Individual Work, Writing

Meeting Topic Basic Competence

Learning Objectives

Learning Materials

Learning Activities by using GAIL

1

(30/04/1

4)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

(Finding

supporting

arguments

or idea)

Students

are able to

find as

many

supporting

ideas as

possible to

support the

topic given.

The students are able to:

Collect as many arguments as possible related to their scope.

Find as many supporting arguments as possible for one argument.

Share their opinion

Exposition

Text:

- Six

Thinking

Hats

- Six

thinkin

g hats

2

(30/04/1

4)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

(Analyzing

Students

are able to

break down

the ideas

found in


Analyze the exposition text provided

Exposition

Text:

- MAKE

meaning

- MAK

E

meani

ng

- Text


70

the text) the text

provided.

by the teachers.

Break down the ideas of the writers

Analyzethe way the writer compose his or her writing.

- Expositio

n Text

Sample

Analys

is

3

(02/05

/14)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

(Outlining

new idea)

Students

are able to

make their

own outline

for their

own text.


Construct the frame of their exposition text.

Find additional information for their text by asking friends

Exposition

Text:

- Walk in

Others’

Shoes

Walk in

Others’

Shoes

4

(06/05

/14)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

Students

are able to

develop


Write their first

Exposition

Text:

- Students’

Writing

draft


71

y?

(Writing

first draft)

their

outline into

paragraphs.

draft of the chosen topic.

Write their own draft

text

outline

5

(07/05

/14)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y? (Getting

feedback

from

friends)

Students

are able to

notice the

mistakes in

their

writing

pointed out

by their

friends.


Examine the mistakes in their friends’ work

Judge why certain sentence, phrase or idea is wrong

Share suggestions or comments on their friends’ work.

Exposition

Text:

- TELL /

Peer

Feedback

TELL/ Peer

feedback

6

(07/05

/14)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

Students

are able to

revise their

work based


Rewrite their first draft

Exposition

Text:

- Students’

draft

Revising

draft +

Feedback

from


72

(Revising

and getting

feedback

from

teachers)

on the

feedback

given by

their

friends.

based on the suggestion or comments from their friends

Revise their work based onthe suggestion from their friends

- TELL

worksheet

teachers

7

(09/05/1

4)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

(Revising)

Students

are able to

revise their

work based

on the

feedback

given by

teachers.


Rewrite their first draft based on the suggestion or comments from the teachers.

Revise their work based onthe suggestion from

Exposition

Text:

- Students’

draft

- Teachers’

s

feedback

Revising


73

the teachers

8

(13/05

/14)

Media: A

Problem in

Democrac

y?

(Finding

supporting

arguments

or idea)

Students

are able to

revise their

work based

on the

feedback.


Rewrite their work based on the feedback

Finish their writing.

Exposition

Text:

- Students’

draft

- Teachers’

s

feedback

- TELL

worksheet

Final

Revision +

Submission

Note: The topic provided is just a guidance. Students may choose different topic

for their writing.


74

SIX THINKING HATS

White Hat : Please find facts about the topic

Red hat : Please mention your opinion about the topic

Yellow hat : Please find positive things about the topic

Grey hat : Please find negative things about the topic

Green hat : Please find new ideas or solutions for the topic

Blue hat : Please find people’s opinion about the topic


75

MAKE Meaning

My topic: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………......................

Applying this topic in my life: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….............................................

Knowledge I have about this topic: …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Experience I have about this topic: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..


76

Walk in other’s shoes

Name: Friend’s name:

Topic:

Why I have this perspective: Why do you have this perspective?

I got the information from Where do you get the information?

I will use these facts or ideas below to

change other’s perspective

Is there any ideas or facts that could

possibly change your perspective?

What do you get / understand from the interview result?

I will put these new information into my writing:


77

TELL (Activity for giving feedback)

Name: Name:

T (Thankful for) : good things that the writer has done or provided in the first

draft

E (Evaluate) : things that could be improved in their writing

L (Learned) : things that should be learned / known by the writer

L (List of actions) : What could the writer do to improve their writing


78

THE SAMPLE OF STUDENT’S WORK

SAMPLE 1

Teenagers and Social NetworkingMost teenagers today, cannot seem imagine life without modern

technology and social network. Social network has change the way of life for almost teenagers. Teenagers today, use most of it for share status, share picture even comment on someone status. The way teenager today, is completely different than the way teenagers ten or twenty years ago.

Social network also gives negatives effects for teenagers. When we used social network there were a lot negatives effects such as cyber bullying, sex matter and many more. One of the most serious problems related to these sites concerned safety issues and reports of sexual interactions between adults and minors. Other issues related to privacy concerns include false information poster by online users and unwanted sexual solicitation. Regular use of social sites also increase rick of teen using alcohol.

Social network also can be distracting grades, socialization, and behavior of a teenagers. Teenagers who often checked their social media such as twitter, facebook, etc have a lower grade than teenagers who seldom open social media. Those teenagers who use social media more often are more likely to display narcisstic behavior, anti social, aggressive, and depression. Teenagers use most of his/her time using handphone, computer, laptop, etc. They also never go around to play with other in his/her neighborhood

However, social media also have a lot of positive effect for teenagers. Social networking sites enable users to keep up with their friends and can decrease feelings of being alone. Social networking also creating profile or home page enables creative expression. Social networking offers the opportunity to discuss school assignments or topics that may be more difficult when we discuss in person. However, these positive are counterbalanced by risk, such as sharing information with the wrong people because once the information is posted, it might can interfere with the spreaders(the one making status) and could be problematic.

Social network gives a lot negatives effects for teenagers. When teenagers use most time using social network also can be distracting their grades, socialization, and their behavior. But social networking sites also gave positive effect for teenagers when they it in a righteous manner, and can be split time by hours learning and life with its neighbors.


79

SAMPLE 2

Cuting Tree in Indonesia

Cuting tree become culture the citizens in Indonesia. In general, people in Indonesia own habit employing the trees especial the people living in the forest. However, this impact the nature become broken. If forest broken will engender disaster adverse human.

Cuting tree can occur because the people want employing the tree. Anyone have change to cut the tree. It is because wood sale is very profiteble.However, the people employing tree without take care of the environment. This is cause the damaged environment. Acctually cut down tree that is not banned but should be still done without excessive.Excessive cuting tree as logging will result in the balance of forest broken.

InIndonesiathere are somany bad impact from cuting tree with excessive. The degraded forest would be many source of disaster in Indonesia. If forest is cuting tree not recovered therefore forest become dry. In hill, area like this will go eassy embankments. Also in rain season will be made flood. It can happen because there are not tree to absorb water.

In the last, Cuting tree become culture the citizens in Indonesia. Cuting tree in Indonesia be happen because the people want employing the tree. But this is become so many bad impact in Indonesia.


80

SAMPLE 3

Social Media and Gadget

Right now, technology is developing continuously. Technology make the

people know about social media. People know that social media can access with

gadget. Some people who know and use social media not only in Indonesia, but

almost all of people in the world.

Now, we can easily access social media via gadget in everywhere. Social

media mustn’t access in schools, offices or home. We can access in public places.

Like in public park, cafés, mini markets, department stores, cinemas, libraries, and

etc. When we need to access social media, we usually just need modem and wifi

or not at all.

Social media can easily access not only by computers and laptops, but we

can use tablets and handphones or smartphones too. Often we access social media

use computers and laptops in schools, offices, or homes. But if we access social

media in public places sometimes we use laptops will not effective and efficient.

Laptops heavier than tablets and handphones or smartphones. So, we usually use

tablets and handphones or smartphones because easier for carry it.

We mustn’t use letter to communicate with other people that live in a far

place. There are social media to help communicate with other people in a far place.

Not only between cities, but we can communicate with social media between

countries and between continents. If we communicate use social media not same

we communicate use letter which need a long time. Especially we communicate

use letter and sent it with distance until between continents.

In conclusion, we know that access social media via gadget can do in

everywhere. We can communicate with other people without think about distance.

Not only access by computers and laptops, but can access by tablets and

handphones or smartphones.


81

SAMPLE 4

Exercise

Do you like to exercise? Exercise is very important for us. Exercise has

positive impact for our bodies. Nevertheless, a lot of people think that exercise

just a waste of time. Actually, with exercise our body will be more healthy. In

addition, we feel happy when doing exercise and it is very good for our body.

According to a survey from The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy

(CSP) , people who exercise regularly will have better immunity. Why ? Because

when we train, our bodies will be stronger. That's why our immune system will

rise. If we are healthy, our daily activity will not be disturbed. Not like people

who less exercise. People who less exercise are esay affected by disease.

In addition , exercise can prevent the occurrence of stress. People who

exercise will feel happy. The endorphins hormone will stimulate our brain and

make us feel happy . Fatigue in activities in school or in the office can be treated

with exercise . Then not infrequently many companies that have sports teams to

eliminate fatigue .

So , we must do exercise regularly. We don’t need to do heavy exercise

but we have to do regularly. Exercise is very necessary for our body . Whatever

the kind of sport, if we are enjoy it, it will be very useful.


82

SAMPLE 5

Gadget Make People Stupid

This life is very close with gadget. Along with the growing era, these objects are increasingly required public. Gadget has many benefits in our life because they can help the people’s activity. Actually, gadget is not always a useful thing but it can make users being stupid and lazy.

Initially, the social life was exclusive. Since there are gadgets, people can communicate without borders. We can know all people that we do not know before. However, due to the easier communication, people increasingly difficult to distinguish a good friend or not, because it is less to fin outthe background of the people we don’t know clearly. Because of that, there were often undesirable moment that started from the introduction through the media that is now more easily accessible with gadget.

According to a research, one of the three men under 30 years in Britain couldn’t remember their telephone numbers for a long time. This is because people think that was not important to remember it. Moreover with the help of digital technology, we shouldn’t remember about little things. Just to look for them, we can use search engine on the internet, we can get the information easily. So that people do not requires toil, to finish the work, this is makes people are very dependent on gadgets.

Actually gadget is necessary in our present life, but it would be better if we can further refine the usability of the gadget. Humans should be able to use reason to not feel fooled by the gadgets by way of reducing the use of gadgets for small things that can be done alone. Don't let our time is empty because it will be filled by playing with gadget, try to find some job that can make us not too focused on gadgets.

Source :http://thegreat-technology.blogspot.com/2014/02/cara-teknologi-membodohi-manusia.html


83

SAMPLE 6

How the Internet Affects Children

The internet is a vass source of information. It is very useful but the internet can also be very dangerous when used unproperly. It has many mature and influental contents that may give bad influences, especially to children. Children can be easily exposed to these types of contents and influence them negatively.

Children are very easily influenced by the stuff that they see or hear, which means that seeing or hearing the wrong contents might give negative impacts to the children exposed to it. Since the internet has no limit to how much information that is uploaded and there is also hardly any limitations to what the contents are, there are no sure way to gaurantee that children won't be exposed to such negative contents. Such content such as porn are one of the must influential things for children. Children may be curious after seeing such contents, therefore it may lead to them doing sex and such stuff. According to many articles on the internet based on research on the effects of the internet to children, all of them states that child development is very much affected by the internet.

One of the other things on the internet that can influence children is cyberbullying. According to research that is stated on Wikipedia, cyberbullying is already done by children and adolescents at a young age. Cyberbullying can make children feel uncomfortable and it can even make the feel unsafe, even under the roof of their own homes. Cyberbullying can be commited anywhere such as in games, social networks, and several websites on the internet. People who are cyberbullied are usually more stressed out. Children unready to take such critic are easily stressed. the Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace also states that victims of cyberbullying are affected psychologically and have been known to be lonely, have low self-esteem, and also be distrusted by people. In extreme cases, victims may even commit murder or suicide.

Even though the internet is useful, we must be able to use it properly and protect our selves from such content. Since children are more easily exposed and are unaware of such things, parents should also supervise their children more so their children won't experience such influences. Parental lock and limiting some sites can also be another solution so children won't be exposed to such contents.


APPENDIX 2

TASK OFPRE―TEST


84

APPENDIX 2

TASK OF PRE-TEST

Text type: Exposition

Please choose one of the following topics and write an essay based on your

chosen topic.

1) Social media, gadget, and other modern electronic devices are now a part of our lifestyle. The facilities provided by these devices help many people in doing their activity. Nowadays, almost everyone has this gadget; elementary school students, teenagers, workers, and grandparents. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

2) Fast food store can be found almost every where in the cities. Its cheap price , instant time-making andgood taste have tempted many people to buy this product. However, many researchs report that it contains a lot of dangerous chemicals. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

3) Nowadays many people realize the importance of healthy lifestyle. Some of the good habits for healthy lifestyle are exercising, eating healthy foods, being vegetarian, etc. However, some other people choose unhealthy lifestyle, such as smoking, eating junk food, skiiping exercise, etc. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

4) One of the impact of urbanization is the overflowing environment destruction. Almost in every corner of the city, people can find piled up trashes. Trees are cut to make empty land for people. These activities may cause a lot of health problems. However, a lot of new stores and buildings are built every day. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.


APPENDIX 3

TASK OFPOST―TEST


85

APPENDIX 3

TASK OF POST-TEST

Text type: Exposition

Please choose one of the following topics and write an essay based on your

chosen topic.

1) Social media, gadget, and other modern electronic devices are now a part of our lifestyle. The facilities provided by these devices help many people in doing their activity. Nowadays, almost everyone has this gadget; elementary school students, teenagers, workers, and grandparents. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

2) Fast food store can be found almost every where in the cities. Its cheap price , instant time-making and good taste have tempted many people to buy this product. However, many researchs report that it contains a lot of dangerous chemicals. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

3) Nowadays many people realize the importance of healthy lifestyle. Some of the good habits for healthy lifestyle are exercising, eating healthy foods, being vegetarian, etc. However, some other people choose unhealthy lifestyle, such as smoking, eating junk food, skiiping exercise, etc. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.

4) One of the impact of urbanization is the overflowing environment destruction. Almost in every corner of the city, people can find piled up trashes. Trees are cut to make empty land for people. These activities may cause a lot of health problems. However, a lot of new stores and buildings are built every day. Write an essay identifying this phenomena and analyzing why this phenomena happens.


APPENDIX 4

ASSESSMENTRUBRIC FOREXPOSIT10NWRITING


86

APPENDIX 4

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC FOR EXPOSITION WRITING

Exceptional“A”

Well done“B”

Acceptable“C”

Attempted“D”

Focus - The writer takes a strong position

- There are more than 3 arguments, each supported by at least 2 supporting details

- The writer takes clear position

- There are 3 arguments, and some details, but not fully or well-developed

- The writer does not clearly state the position

- There are 2 reasons only with few supporting details

- The writer does not state his position

- The reasons are not related to the topic

Organization - The topic introduction is well-defined

- The thesis statement is clear

- The paragraphs are clearly developed

- The transitions provide logical development

- The conclusion paraphrase the introduction or provide strong suggestion

- The topic introduction is good.

- The thesis statement is adequate

- The paragraphs are short, not fully developed

- The transitions are not logical

- The conclusion reintroduce the introduction or provide one-sided suggestion

- The introduction is present but not fully developed

- The thesis statement is weak

- The paragraphs are not developed

- Transitions are not clear

- The conclusion highlights the arguments only or provide ambiguous suggestion

- There is no introduction

- There is no thesis statement

- The thesis statement is weak

- The paragraphs are more likely to be a group of ideas.

- Transitions are not used or placed correctly

- The conclusion mention new argument or provide illogical suggestion

Use of resources

- The writer chooses the appropriate information carefully from many sources and paraphrase it.

- The writer chooses the appropriate information from some sources and directly cite it.

- The writer only uses little supporting material

- There is no evidence of outside sources used

Mechanics / Grammatical features

- There is no grammatical error.

- The writer uses correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

- The sentence structure is varied

- The vocabulary used in the text is rich and related to the topic

- There is few errors

- The writer makes a few mistakes in spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

- The writers try to vary the sentence

- The vocabulary used in the text is varied and related to the topic

- There are many sentence repetitions

- There are many errors in spelling, punctuation, and capitalization

- The writer mostly uses monotonous sentences with little variation

- The vocabulary used in the text is the common vocabulary

- The grammatical errors deliver the wrong ideas.


APPENDIX 5

PRE―TESTSCORE OF

EXPERIMENTALAND CONTROLGROUPS BYRATERS


87

APPENDIX 5

PRE-TEST SCORE OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS BY RATERS

Pre-test score

NameExperimental Group Control Group

Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 1 Rater 2student 1 69 66 63 69student 2 69 66 63 66student 3 75 75 63 69student 4 53 50 81 75student 5 56 56 75 75student 6 69 66 75 69student 7 69 66 50 50student 8 56 59 75 78student 9 62 69 63 63student 10 69 72 75 75student 11 63 63 69 56student 12 69 69 63 66student 13 56 63 63 66student 14 69 66 63 59student 15 30 66 88 91student 16 75 72 50 47student 17 69 63 50 47student 18 75 72 59 56student 19 56 56 56 59student 20 56 59 69 69student 21 56 56 50 44student 22 50 47 69 69student 23 62 91 72 72student 24 50 47 56 56student 25 75 78 50 47student 26 69 72 66 63student 27 68 66 69 66student 28 75 72 66 69student 29 69 66 44 63student 30 66 63 56 56student 31 63 63 56 53student 32 50 59 75 72student 33 50 50 56 56student 34 56 56 50 53student 35 56 53 63 63


88

Pre-test score


Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 1 Rater 2student 36 66 63 56 53student 37 56 56 63 66student 38 56 53 75 72student 39 63 66 75 69student 40 56 59 56 66student 41 56 59 56 53student 42 47 47 63 59student 43 56 56 66 63student 44 66 69 63 56student 45 56 56 56 56student 46 69 66 53 59student 47 50 44 50 53student 48 75 75 69 78student 49 56 56 69 75student 50 56 53 56 66student 51 75 69 63 66student 52 56 56 63 56student 53 75 75


89

THE POST-TEST SCORE OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS BY RATERS

Post-test Score


Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 1 Rater 2student 1 56 69 56 59student 2 56 69 56 53student 3 69 56 63 56student 4 50 63 69 72student 5 50 63 75 78student 6 75 72 56 53student 7 69 69 56 53student 8 50 53 69 66student 9 50 63 69 69student 10 63 72 81 84student 11 63 63 63 66student 12 75 78 56 56student 13 63 63 56 56student 14 69 81 50 47student 15 69 63 81 97student 16 75 84 63 56student 17 63 59 50 50student 18 81 91 56 56student 19 69 69 50 50student 20 56 56 69 66student 21 75 75 56 59student 22 56 50 56 65student 23 75 78 69 63student 24 69 69 75 81student 25 56 59 63 63student 26 75 66 81 84student 27 50 50 56 53student 28 75 75 50 63student 29 81 94 75 78student 30 69 66 50 47student 31 56 53 63 63student 32 75 81 63 66student 33 44 44 56 53student 34 56 53 69 69


90


Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 1 Rater 2student 35 63 63 63 66student 36 69 69 63 63student 37 56 56 50 66student 38 69 66 75 75student 39 75 81 50 50student 40 81 94 75 78student 41 69 81 50 50student 42 75 72 56 53student 43 56 56 75 72student 44 56 56 69 63student 45 63 56 63 66student 46 56 63 56 56student 47 50 50 56 56student 48 69 69 81 91student 49 69 69 81 91student 50 75 75 81 94student 51 75 78 75 78student 52 81 84 50 72student 53 75 78


APPENDIX 6

RESEARCHRECOMMENDAT10N

FROM SANATADHA… A

UNIVERSITY


91

APPENDIX 6


APPENDIX 7

SCⅢPT OFASICNG

PEⅢMISSION TOCONDUCTRESEARCH


92

APPENDIX 7

SCRIPT OF ASKING PERMISSION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH

Good morning. My name is Maria Agnes Evata A. I want to ask your

permission to conduct a research in your classes. It is a quasi-experimental

research. I make a new material for writing named GAIL, Group of Activities for

In-depth Learning. I want to know whether this material improves students’

writing skill. In this new material, I set a lot of activities that will help the students

to improve their writing. For example, the activity for the first meeting would be

Six Thinking Hats. This activity requires the students to find as many arguments

as possible for the topic they have chosen. Hopefully, it will help them in

brainstroming ideas for their own writing.

I also want to add that this research is not obligatory; the students could

withdraw from the group anytime they wanted.


APPENDIX 8

RESEARCHSCHEDULE


93

APPENDIX 8THE RESEARCH SCHEDULE

Meeting XI IPA 1 XI IPA 4

1. Six Thinking Hats 30 April 2014 30 April 2014

2. MAKE meaning (Pre-

writing) + Text Analysis30 April 2014 30 April 2014

3. Outlining: Walk in

Others’ Shoes2 May 2014 2 May 2014

4. Writing draft 6 May 2014 3 May 2014

5. TELL/ Peerfeedback 7 May 2014 7 May 2014

6. Revising draft + Feedback

from teachers7 May 2014 7 May 2014

7. Revising 9 May 2014 8 May 2014

8. Final Revising +

Submission13 May 2014 10 May 2014


APPENDIX 9

THE PRE‐TESTSCORE OF THEEXPERIMENTAL

GROUP


94

APPENDIX 9

THE PRE-TEST SCORE OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

No. Name Pre-test Score No. Name Pre-test Score

1 Student 1 66 28 Student 28 72


























27 Student 27 66


APPENDIX 10

THE PRE―TESTSCORE OF THECONTROLGROUP


95

APPENDIX 10

THE PRE-TEST SCORE OF THE CONTROL GROUP

No. Name Pre-test Score No. Name Pre-test Score




























APPENDIX ll

THE POST―TESTSCORE OF THEEXPERIMENTAL

GROUP


96

APPENDIX 11

THE POST-TEST SCORE OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

No. Name Post-test Score No. Name Post-test Score



























27 Student 27 50


APPENDIX 12

THE POST‐TESTSCOR、E OF THE

CONTROLGROUP


97

APPENDIX 12

THE POST-TEST SCORE OF THE CONTROL GROUP

No. Name Post-test Score No. Name Post-test Score




























PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI · (GAIL) to Improve SMA Students' Writing...

Documents

Transcript of PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI · (GAIL) to Improve SMA Students' Writing...