THE EFFECT OF TEACHING STRATEGIES AND ENGLISH
LEARNING ATTITUDE ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN
WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial
Fullfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
DINI FEBRIANI
Registration Number: 8106111006
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POST GRADUATE SCHOOL
I ABSTRACT
Dini Febriani. The Effect of Teaching Strategies and Students’ English Learning Attitude on Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. A thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. State University of Medan. 2015
The objectives of this experimental research are to investigate whether : (1) students’s achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using TTW (Think-Talk-Write) strategy is higher than that taught by using PLEASE(Pick, List, Evaluate, Activate, Supply, End) strategy, (2) the descriptive writing achievement of the students with positive English learning attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude, and (3) there is interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude on the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text. The population of this research is the students 2014/2015 grade X of SMAN 1 Besitang. The total number of the population is 180 students and 68 students areselected as the sample of this research by applying random cluster sampling with lottery technique. The experimental design used factorial design 2x2 with two experimental groups. The experimental group I is treated by using TTW strategy and the experimental group II is treated by using PLEASE strategy. The English learning attitude is conducted for classifying the students upon the positive English learning attitude and negative English learning attitude. Students’ achievement in writing descriptive text is measured by using writing test. The data is analyzed by applying two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at the level of significance α = 0.05. The result shows that (1) the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using TTW is higher than that taught by using PLEASE strategy, with Sig. value is 0.000 which is < 0.05, (2) the writing descriptive text of students with positive English learning attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude with Sig. 0,002 which is < 0.05, (3) there is no interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude with Sig. value is 0.079 which is <0.05. It means that the positive English learning attitude affects better to the students’ achievement in writing the descriptive text no matter what strategy is used. It can be concluded too that TTW strategy performs better and superior, which is suitable to be taught to any English learning attitude.
ABSTRAK
Dini Febriani. The Effect of Teaching Strategies and Students’ English Learning Attitude on Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Tesis. Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Negeri Medan. 2015
Penelitan ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptifyang diajarkan dengan strategi TTW (berpikir-berbicara-menulis) lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE (menentukan-mendata-mengevaluasi-mengaktifkan-menyediakan-mengakhiri), (2) hasil belajar dalam menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang memiliki sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar dalam menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang memilki sikap negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris, dan (3) terdapat interaksi antara strategi pembelajaran dan sikap siswa terhadap Bahasa Inggris dalam menulis teks deskriptif. Populasi penelitian ini adalah siswa kelas X tahun ajaran 2014/2015. Jumlah populasi penelitian adalah 180 orang siswa dan 68 orang siswa terpilih sebagai sampel yang diambil dengan menggunakan cluster random sampling dengan teknik lottery. Desain penelitian adalah penelitian eskperimen dengan faktorial 2x2 dengan dua kelompok eksperimen. Kelompok eksperimen pertama diajarkan dengan strategi TTW dan kelompok eksperimen kedua diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE. Tes sikap terhadap Bahasa Inggris dilakukan untuk mengelompokkan siswa ke dalam kelompok siswa dengan sikap positif dan negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris. Hasil belajar siswadalam menulis teks deskriptif diukur denagn menggunakan tes menulis. Data penelitian dianalisa dengan menggunakan ANAVA dua jalur pada taraf signifikansi α = 0,05. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa (1) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif yang diajarkan strategi TTW lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif yang diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE dengan nilai (Sig =0.000< 0.05), (2) hasil belajar siswa dalm menulis teks deskriptif pada siswa yang memiliki sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa yang memilki sikap negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris dengan nilai (Sig. 0,002 < 0.05, dan (3) tidak terdapat interaksi antara strategi pembelajaran dengan sikap siswa terhadap Bahasa Inggris dengan nilai (Sig.= 0.079 >0.05). Ini menunjukkan bahwa sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris mempengaruhi secara lebih baik terhadap kemampuan siswa menulis teks deskriptif apapun strategi yang digunakan. Disimpulkan juga bahwa strategi pembelajaran TTW lebih baik dan unggul serta cocok diajarkan pada berbagai sikap terhadap Bahasa Inggris.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Alhamdulillahi rabbil ‘alamin, All praises be to Allah SWT for the great blessing that have been continuously poured to the writer in the process of completing her study and this thesis.
There are many people that have been assisted, giuded, motivated, encouraged, supported, and inspired her in this endeavor. She would like to express sincere gratitude to them.
Her thankfullness is directed to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning , M.Pd., her first advisor, for his valuable comments, encouragement, guidance, and patience for her in the process of finishing this thesis.
She is deeply grateful to Prof. Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd., her second advisor, for her detailed and constructive comments, and for her support throughout this thesis. Her respect and admiration to her can not be adequately expressed in words.
Special thanks are addressed to.Dr.Rahmat Husein M.Ed., and Dr.Sri Minda Murni, M.S., Head and Secretary of English Applied Linguistics Study Program, for completing the administrative requirements.
She is deeply indebted to Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A., Prof.T. Silvana Sinar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr.Rahmat Husein M.Ed, and Dr. Didik Santoso M.Pd., her reviewers for their valuable suggestions to be included in this thesis. In addition, her special gratitudes are delivered to all lectures at the English Applied Linguistics Study Program for sharing their knowledge and experiences.
She would like to express her deepest admiration to her lovely parents, Drs. Nurdin Ahmad and Dra. Dasni, her beloved sisters and brothers, Nur Fadhilah, S.Pd., Rasyidah, M.Pd., Muhammad Fauzi, S.T., Rahmatullah and Nashrullah who always pray for her, her beloved husband and daughter, Ansharullah and Aida Fathiya who have inspired her in the process of completing this thesis.
Her special gratitude is addressed to her beloved friends, Rahma Tirta, S.Pd., M. Jaini, S.Pd., and Neny Widya Sari S.Pd., for their full support and encouragement. Special gratitude is also addressed for her special friends Nurhalimah and Hestika Ginting for their full support and help.
Stabat, Februari 2016 The Writer
Dini Febriani
v
1.2The Identification of the Problem 7
1.3The Problems of the Study 9
1.4Objectives of the Study 9
1.5The Scope of the Study 10
1.6The Significances of the Study 10
CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Theoretical Framework 11
2.1.1Students’ Achievement in Writing 11
2.1.2 Writing 13
2.1.2.1The Nature of Writing 13
2.1.2.2The Steps in Writing Process 14
2.1.2.3 Assessing Writing Work 15
2.1.3 Writing Genres 17
2.1.3.1 Descriptive Text 18
2.1.4 Theories of Learning andTeaching Strategies 21
2.1.4.1 Theories of Learning 21
2.1.4.2 Teaching Strategies 22
2.1.5.3 The Principles of TTW Strategy 24 2.1.5.4 The Processes of TTW Strategy 24 2.1.5.5The Strenghts and Weaknesses of TTW
Strategy 29
2.1.5.5.1 Strenghts of TTW Strategy 29
2.1.5.5.2 Weaknesses of TWW Strategy 29
2.1.6Pick-List-Evaluate-Activate-Supply-End (PLEASE)
Strategy 30
2.1.6.1 Definition and Principle of PLEASE Strategy30 2.1.6.2 The Characteristics of PLEASE Strategy 31 2.1.6.3 The Principles of PLEASE Strategy 31 2.1.6.4 The Processes of PLEASE Strategy 32 2.1.6.5 The Strenghts and Weaknesses of PLEASE
Strategy 33
2.1.6.5.1 The Strenghts of PLEASE
Strategy 33
2.1.6.5.2 The Weaknesses of PLEASE
Strategy 34
2.1.7 English Learning Attitude 34
2.1.7.1Aspect of Language Attitude 38
2.1.7.2 Relevant Researches 40
2.2Conceptual Framework 42
2.2.1 The Differences between the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Taught by Using TTW
Strategy and Taught by Using PLEASE Strategy 42 2.2.2 The Differences between the Achievement in writing
Descriptive of the Students with Positive Students’ English Learning Attitudeand Students with
Negative English Learning Attitude 44 2.2.3 The Interaction between Teaching Writing Strategy
and Students’ English Learning Attitude on the
Students Achievement in Writing DescriptiveText 46
2.3. Hypotheses of the Study 47
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHOD
3.1 Research Design 49
3.2 Population and Sample 50
3.2.1 Population 50
3.2.2 Sample 50
3.3 Instrumentation 50
3.3.1 Questionnaire of Students’ English Learning Attitude 51
3.3.2 Writing Test 52
3.4 Scoring System of the Test 53
3.5 Procedures of the Treatment 53
3.6 Control of the Treatment 56
3.6.1 Internal Validity 56
v
3.7 Validity 57
3.7.1. English Learning Attitude Questionnaire 57
3.7.1. Writing Test 58
3.8 Reliability 58
3.8.1 English learning Attitude Questionnaire 58
3.8.2 Writing Test 58
3.9 The Technique for Analyzing the Data 59
3.10 Statistical Hypotheses 59
CHAPTER IV : DATA ANALYSISAND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Data Analysis 61
4.2 Requirement of Data Analysis 74
4.3 Hypotheses Testing 77
4.4 Discussions 78
4.5 The Limitation of the Research 83
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND
SUGGESTIONS
855.1 Conclusions 85
5.2 Implications 85
5.3 Suggestions 86
REFERENCES
87LIST OF TABLES
TablePagesTable 1.1 Average of Students’ English Score (Grade X) in SMAN 1
Besitang 3
Table 3.1 Factorial Research Design 2x2 49
Table 3.2 Indicators of Questionnaire of English Learning Attitude 52
Table 3.3 Scoring System of the Test 53
Table 3.4The Procedures of the Treatment of TTW and PLEASE Strategy 54 Table 4.1 Summary of the Research Data Description 61 Table 4.2Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Scores
Taught by Using TTW Strategy 62
Table 4.3 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Scores Taught
by Using PLEASE Strategy 63
Table 4.4 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ with Positive
English Learning Attitude 65
Table 4.5 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ with Negative
English Learning Attitude 66
Table 4.6 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Positive English Learning Attitude
Taught by Using TTW 68
Table 4.7 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Negative English Learning Attitude
ix
Table 4.8 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Positive English Learning Attitude
Taught by Using PLEASE 71
Table 4.9 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Negative English Learning Attitude
Taught by Using PLEASE 73
Table 4.10 Summary of the Result of Normality Testing 74 Table 4.11 The Result of Homogeneity Testing on Teaching Strategies 75
Table 4.12 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 76
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Pages
Figure 2.1 Teacher and Student Roles in Think-Talk-Write Strategy 28 Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Text by using TTW 63
Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descriptve Text by PLEASE Strategy 64
Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descripitve Text with Positive English Learning Attitude 66 Figure 4.4 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descripitve Text with Negative English Learning Attitude 67 Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Positive English
Learning Attitude Taught by Using TTW 69 Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English
Learning Attitude Taught by Using TTW 70 Figure 4.7 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English
Learning Attitude Taught by Using PLEASE 72 Figure 4.8 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English
xi
Figure 4.9 The Interaction between the Teaching Stategies and
English Learning Attitude on students’ Achievement
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Pages
Appendix A The Questionnaire 92
Appendix B The Validity and Realibility of Questionnaire 95 Appendix C Description of the Students’ Score in Writing
Decriptive Text 97
Appendix D Description of Basic Statistic Calculation 99 Appendix E Summary of the Research Data Description 114 Appendix F The Reliability Computation of the Writing Test 115
Appendix G Testing Hypothesis 117
Appendix H Lesson Plan for TTW Group 118
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
English as an international language has a significant role in the various
field of activities and wide influences in the world. Therefore the flow of its
growth has forced the students in Indonesia to master English. It has been
determined as the compulsory subject in National Curriculum.
In learning English the students as the language learners concerns with
four language skills, namely listening, speaking, reading and writing. They have
to master the four language skills in order to be competent in learning
English.Writing is one of the four language skills that should be mastered well.
Writing is sometimes used as a production mode for learning, reinforcing or
testing grammatical concept (Douglas:2001). Writing is a complex operation
requiring knowledge of text structure, syntax, vocabulary, and topic, and
sensitivity to audience needs; so it is not surprising that many students find
writing challenging. It is one of the most important language skills. It is a critical
skill for students in school, college, and lifelong(Warschauer, 2010). Writing is
also important for the instruction of foreign and second language learners for
threereasons. First, writing well is a vital skill for academic or occupational
success (National Commission on Writing,2003). Second, writing can be
aneffective tool for the development of academic language proficiency as learners
more readily explore advanced lexicalor syntactic expression in their written work
(e.g., Warschauer, 2010). Third, writing across the curriculum can beinvaluable
2
for mastering diverse subject matter, as written expression allows learners to raise
their awareness ofknowledge gaps, abstract problem-specific knowledge into
schemas that can be applied to other relevant cases, andelaborate mental
representations of knowledge that can be more easily retrieved, while
simultaneously allowingteachers to better understand the students’ state of
knowledge and thinking process and thus adjust instruction asnecessary (Yih and
Nah, 2009).
The Curriculum of Educational Stratified Level ( Kurikukum Tingkat
Satuan Pendidikan: KTSP) of Senior High School states that the students of senior
high school are expected to be able to write various genres such as narrative,
descriptive, and expository writing ( Depdiknas: 2006).
In reality, most of the students have less capability in learning English,
especially when they are asked to write a text. Writing a text in English is a
difficult task for them. They are always having some troubles in choosing the
appropriate words and lack of vocabulary. They are also weak in arranging the
elements of a good text. The difficulty of writing lies in generating and organizing
the idea.
The skills involved in writing are highly complex. Students have to pay
attention to the level skills of planning and organizing as well as the level skills of
spelling, punctuation, word choice, grammar and usage.
This goes in line with Ackerman (2006) who reports that up to 40 percent
of students in high schools are notdoing well in writing classes. Ackerman adds
3
classroom. Similarly, Witte (2007) states that students show little interest in
classroom writing activities andassignments.
This may be due to students being generally passive learners who consider
that their role isto absorb knowledge as it is presented to them in the traditional
classroom.As a consequence, this general agreement on the importance of writing
skill and the poor performance of students inwriting has provided the challenge
for educators and researchers to look for ways to teach and motivate students
towrite effectively. Educators should attempt to find ways that don’t cause a
writer’ block, and feel a responsibilitytowards their learners to create and maintain
environments that motivate learners to continue learning even after the class end.
Based on the researcher’s observation during four semester in the school
year 2012/2013 and 2013/2014, the students of State Senior High School
(Sekolah Menengah Atas Negeri: SMAN) 1 Besitang have difficulties in learning
English. The data obtained from SMA Negeri 1 Besitang show that the students
achievement in English including their achievement in writing skill does not
achieve the Minimal Mastery Criterion (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal : KKM).
Students should achieve score 70 as minimum score. But in fact most of the
students have low achievement in English, as shown in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1Average of Students’ English Score (Grade X) in SMAN 1 Besitang
Academic Year 2012/2013 2013/2014
Class / Semester I II I II
X1 68 68 66 67
X 2 66 67 65 66
4
Table 1.1 shows that the scores of those three different classes are divided
by the total number of the students that result the average scores of each
class.From table 1.1 it is concluded that the students’ achievement does not
achieve the minimal Mastery Criterion (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal: KKM )
determine which is 70.
Based on the observation in the classroom and interview with the teacher
and students, the researcher finds that the students have difficulties in learning
English especially when they are asked to write a descriptive text. They have
difficulties in writing and fulfill the characteristics of the descriptive text
including the social function, generic structure and language features.
A descriptive text is a text which describes particular person, things and
places. The basic competence that should be reached by the students of Senior
High School is to make them are able to arrange a descriptive text based on the
linguistic features and the generic structures of the text. There are two generic
structures of this text, they are identification and description. Meanwhile, the
linguistic features of a descriptive text are the use of spesific relevant, simple
present tense, adjective clause and relating verbs.
Besides that, there are problems that came from the teacher. The teacher
has low professional development, used inappropriate teaching strategies and
media. In teaching writing, the teacher mostly emphasizes his teaching on the
product of writing. The teacher starts the learning activities by explaining the
topic. A model is only provided very occasionally. The students then are asked to
write a text in a certain time allotted. The teacher waits for the students writing
5
the teacher to be graded. Consequently, students feel bored and do not interested
with the materials in writing. Therefore their writing achievement is unsatisfying.
Suitable teaching strategies are needed to achieve the goal of teaching
writing, because the achievement of the goal depends on the strategies that the
teacher applies. There are many strategies which can be applied in teaching
writing. Two of them are Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE strategies.
Think-Talk-Write is a strategy that facilitating the exercise of language
both oral and written fluently. This strategy based on the interpretation that
learning is a social action. Think-Talk-Write Strategy encourages the students to
think, talk, and write based on the particular topic. Think-Talk-Write Strategy is
used to develop the writing fluently and exercise the language before write them.
Think-Talk-Write Strategy was introduced by Huinker and Laughlin. According
to Huinker and Laughlin in Zulkarnaini (2011), “The think-talk-write strategy
builds in time for thought and reflection and for the organization of ideas and the
testing of those ideas before students are expected to write. The flow of
communication progresses from student engaging in thought or reflective dialogue
with themselves, to talking and sharing ideas with one another to writing”.
The second strategy is PLEASE strategy.“PLEASE” strategy is one of the
strategies suggested to be taught through SRSD model. The “PLEASE” strategy
was developed to address specific difficulties inparagraph writing which are
mostly related to prewriting planning, composition, andparagraph revision
(Welch, 1992). The “PLEASE” strategy is a mnemonic thatprovides learners with
a road map for writing a paragraph. It reminds learners to carryout several steps
6
strategy, “P”, stands for the action “PICK”. At this step students learnto Pick their
topic, Pick their audience and, Pick the type of the paragraph. Thesecond letter,
“L”, refers to “LIST”. Students are taught various techniques for ideageneration
about the topic before starting to write. The third step of the strategy,
“E”,represents “EVALUATE” for ongoing evaluation of the process. At this
stage,students are taught to check if their list is complete and how they can
organize theirnotes. The forth step, “A”, reminds students “ACTIVATE” their
paragraph with atopic sentence. Students are taught how to write a precise and
effective introductorysentence. The fifth step, “S”, cues students to SUPPLY
supporting ideas for their paragraphs based on the list that they have generated for
the second step. The finalletter, “E”, reminds students to END with a concluding
sentence and EVALUATEtheir work (Welch, 1992).
Yet the success of students’ writing achievement does not only depend on
the teaching strategies but also depend on the students’ attitude toward learning
English itself. Attitudes could be viewed as a tendency to respond positively or
negatively towards a certain thing, idea, person, situation etc. Gardner ( 1985)
defined attitudes as “ an evaluative reaction to some referent, inferred on the basis
of the individuals beliefs or opinions about the referent” As for education, Brown
(2000) noted that teachers should recognize that all students possess positive and
negative attitudes in varying degrees, adding that the negative attitudes can be
changed by thoughtful instructional methods, such as using materials and
activities that help students achieve an understanding and appreciation of the
foreign culture, a fact that might be reflected on the process of learning the foreign
7
Thus, attitudes could highly influence how individuals approach many
situations in life, including foreign language learning. It is believed that
individuals with positive attitudes usually progress more rapidly in foreign
language learning. Attitudes are closely related to our beliefs and are based upon
experiences, thus, the researcher believes that effective language teaching
strategies can encourage students to be more positive towards the learning process
in general and learning EFL in particular.
The two strategies was applied to different students’ learning attitude it is
affected to their achievement in writing. Besides those strategies, the researcher
carry the descriptive writing. It is based on Senior High School syllabus for tenth
grade. That is why the researcher considers conducting the research using that
genre of text.
Based on the gap between the expectation and the reality and also the
explanation of some theories above, there is an interest to conduct a research on
the effect of teaching writing strategies and the students’ learning attitude on the
students achievement in writing descriptive text.
1.2 The Identification of the Problem
According to the explanation presented in the background of the study, the
identification of the problems is stated as follows: (1) Does Think-Talk-Write
strategy significantly affect students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (2)
Does PLEASEstrategy significantly affect students achievement in writing
descriptive text? (3) Does students’ learning attitude significantly affect students’
8
taught by using Think-Talk-Write strategy? (5) How is the students’ achievement
taught by using PLEASE strategy? (6) Is the students’ achievement in writing
descriptivetext taught by using Think-Talk-Write strategy higher than the students
taught by PLEASE strategy? (7) Is the achievement of the students with positive
learning attitude inwriting descriptive writing higher than that of the students with
negative learning attitude? (8) How is the achievement in writing descriptivetext
of the students with positive learning attitude taught by Think-Talk-Write
strategy? (9) How is the students’ achievement in writing descriptivetext of the
students with positive learning attitude taught by using PLEASEstrategy? (10) Do
teaching writing strategies and students’ learning attitude significantly affect the
students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (11) What are the factors which
influence students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (12) Is there any
interaction between Think-Talk-Write and PLEASE strategies and students’
9
1.3 The Problems of the Study
This study explores the effect of Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE
strategy and students’ English learning attitude on students’achievement in
writing descriptive text. Thus this study attempts to find the answers to the
following questions:
1. Is students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by
usingThink-Talk-Write (TTW) strategy higherthan thatof PLEASE strategy?
2. Is the achievement in writing descriptive text ofstudents with positive
English learning attitude higher than that of negative English learning
attitude?
3. Is there any interaction between teachingstrategies and English learning
attitude to students’ achievement in writing descriptive text?
1.4 The Objectives of the Study
In line with the research problems above, the objectives of the study are to
find out whether:
1) Students’ achievement in writing descriptivetext taught by using
Think-Talk-Write (TTW) strategy is higher than thatof PLEASE strategy.
2) Students’ achievement in writing descriptive text of the students with
positive English learning attitude is higherthan that of negative English
learning attitude
3) There is interaction between teachingstrategies and English learning
10
1.5 The Scope of the Study
There are many teaching writing strategies that can be applied in teaching
writing. In this study the teaching strategies are limited to Think-Talk-Write
(TTW)and PLEASEstrategy. This study is limited to the writing process stage
prewriting. This study is also limited to the effect of students’ English learning
attitude on their descriptive writing achievement.Therefore, this study is limited
on the effect of TTW and PLEASE teaching strategies and students’ English
learning attitude on students’ achievement in writing descriptive text.
1.6 The Significances of the Study
Through this research, it is expected that the effect ofThink-Talk-Write
(TTW) and PLEASEstrategies and students' English learning attitude are clearly
revealed out. It is hoped that it can provide valuable informations, which may
have theoretical as well as practical value for English language teachers and
learners.
Theoretically, the result of this research support the theory
ofThink-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE strategies in improving the students’ ability in writing.
Meanwhile, practically the result of the research guides the English language
teachers in their attempt to decide the appropriate strategies that should be applied
in enhancing the students' descriptive writing achievement. The English teachers
can get informations of the application of Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE
Strategyas alternative teaching strategies in teaching writing. It is also expected to
give contribution for those who are interested in performing further study in other
85
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Based on the research findings and discussion stated before, it can be
concluded that:
1. The students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using
TTW is higher than that taught by using PLEASE Strategy.
2. The writing achievement of the students with positive English learning
attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English
learning attitude.
3. There is no interaction between teaching strategies and English
learning attitude to the students’ achievement in writing descriptive
text. It means that the positive English learning attitude affects better
to the students’ achievement in writing the descriptive text no matter
what strategy is used.It can be concluded too that TTW performs better
and superior, which is suitable to be taught to any English learning
attitude.
5.2 Implications
The first finding shows that the students’ achievement in writing
descriptive text taught by using TTW is significantly higher than that of the
students taught by using PLEASE Strategy. Thus, this result implies to the
English teachers’ choice of teaching strategy. It is better for the English teacher to
apply TTW in writing descriptive text because it encourages the students to
86
explore their capability to write a text by doing some steps that include the various
activities. They can make it in discussion then draw the conclusions as the guide
for them to begin write a text.
The second finding of this research shows that the achievement in writing
descriptive text of the students with positive English learning attitude is
significantly higher than that of the students with negative English learning
attitude. Therefore, the teachers should pay more attention to the students’English
learning attitude so that the students can obtain better learning achievement.
Finally,the third research finding of this study shows that there is no
interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude. It implies
that positive English learning attitude can be taught by both strategies and they
perform better.
5.3 Suggestions
In line with the conclusion and implications drawn, there are some
suggestions given as follows:
1. The English teachers are recommended to apply both strategies, TTw and
PLEASE strategies to improve students’ achievement in writing
descriptive text
2. The English teacher should be aware to the students English learning
attitude as the important factor for the students in writing achievement,
positive encouragement of the teacher in applying the teaching strategies
can be a motivation for the students to have positive English learning
87
REFERENCES
Ackerman, J. D. 2006. Motivation For Writing Through Blogs. Master of Arts. Akincilar, Vildan. 2010.The Effect of ‘ PLEASE’ strtaegy Training through The
Self-Regulated StrategyDevelopment (SRSD) Model on Fifth Grade EFL Students’ Descriptive Writing: Strategy Training on Planning.A Disertation
Ansari.2003. Menumbuhkembangkan Kemampuan Pemahaman dan Komunikasi
Matematika Siswa SMU melalui Strategi Think Talk
Write,Disertation,(Online).
Ary, D., & Rajaviah, A. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. New York Holt, Rinchart and Winston
Baker, C. 1992. Attitudes and language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Badger, R. & G. White. 2000. A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2): 153-160.
Benson, M. J. 1991. Attitudes and Motivation towards English: A Survey of JapaneseFreshmen. RELC Journal, 22(1), 34-48.
Berwick, R. & Ross, S. 1989. Motivation after Matriculation: Are Japanese Learners still Alive after Examination Hell? JALT Journal, 11(2), 193-210
Best, J.W, and Kahn J. V. 2002. Research in Education I (7th ed) New York: Longman
Brown, H.Douglas. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th ed). New York: Longman
Brown, H.Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman
Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Longman
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., and Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar. An explorer‟s guide. 2nd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.
88
De Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M. 2005. Second language acquisition: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.
Derewianka, B. 1990. Exploring How Texts Work. Newton: Primary English Teaching Association.
Direktorat Pendididkan Menengah Umum. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional
D. Nessel, M Jones,and C.Dixon, 1989. Thinking Trough the Language Arts. Macmillan
Feng. R. & Chen, H. 2009. An Analysis on the Importance of Motivation and
Strategy in Postgraduates English Acquisition.
EnglishLanguageTeaching.2, 93-97.
Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. 1972. Attitudes and motivations in second languagelearning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House
Gardner, R. 1980. On the validity of affective variables in second language acquisition:conceptual and statistical considerations. Language Learning, 30 (2), 255-270.
Gardner, R. C. 1985. Social psychology and second language learning: The roles of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R.C. 2004. Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International AMTB Research Project. The University of Western Ontario, Canada
Gerot, L., and Wignell, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:GerdStabler.
Halmaheri. (2004). Mengembangkan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematika
Melalui Strategi Think-Talk-Write (TTW) dalam Kelompok Kecil (Studi Eksperimen di SMPN 3 Kuantan Kabupaten Kuantan Singingi Propinsi Riau). A Thesis.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Self-regulated strategy development: A part of the writing process. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, &J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277–309). New York: Academic Press.
Huinker , D.& Laughlin, C. 1996 „Talk your way into writing‟in P. Elliot&MKenny (eds) Communication in Mathematics‟, K-12 and beyond, National
89
self-regulated strategy development, Contemporary
EducationalPsychology, 30 (2), 207-241.
Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46, 643-697
Heaton, J.B. 1990. Writing English Language Tests London : Longman
Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. New York: Longman Group UK Limited
Huinker dan Laughlin .(1996) .Dalam Yamin dan Ansari .2009.Taktik
Mengembangkan Kemampuan Individual Siswa. Jakarta :Gaung Persada Pers
Kara, A. 2009. The Effect of a „Learning Theories‟ Unit on Students‟ Attitudes towards Learning.AustralianJournal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 100-113.
Karahan, F. 2007. Language attitudes of Turkish students towards the English languageand its use in Turkish context. Journal of Arts and Sciences Say, 7 May, 73-87.
Kame'enui, Edward. Et al. 2002Effective Teaching Strategies That
AccommodateDiverse Learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Menengah. 2013. Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional
Knapp, Peter and Megan Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar. Sydney: University of New South Wales.
Littlewood, W. (1983). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and second language learning, language acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Liu, M. 2007. Chinese students‟ motivation to learn English at the tertiary level, Asian EFL Journal
Malallah, S. 2000. English in an Arabic Environment: Current Attitudes to English among Kuwait University Students,International Journal of Bilingual Education andBilingualism, 3(1), 19-43.
90
Mukminatus, Zuhriyah. 2012. The Effectiveness of Think-Talk Write (TTW) to Teach Writing Viewed from Students’ Intelligence (An Experimental Study in the Fourth Semester of English Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Islamic University of Kadiri (UNISKA) Kediri in the Academic Year of 2011/2012).
Momani, M. (2009). The Jordanian Secondary Stage students Achievement in Reading Comprehension according to their views towards Learning English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Human Sciences, 42, 1-36. [Online]
Nafisah, N., and Kurniawan, E. (2007). Writing for General Commucication. Bandung: UPI Press.
Oscamp, B. 1977. Attitudes and opinions. Englewood Cliffs, N, J: Prentic-Hall.
Pardiyono. (2007). Pasti Bisa! Teaching Genre Based Writing. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset
Sanjaya, Wina. (2006). Strategy Pembelajaran : Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan. Jakarta : Kencana Prenada Media.
Santangelo, T., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2007). Self-Regulated Strategy Development: A validated model to support students who struggle with writing,Learning DisabilitieS: A Contemporary Journal, 5 (1), 1–20.
Silver and Smith .(1996). Dalam Yamin dan Ansari taktik mengembangkan kemampuan individual siswa .Jakarta :Gaung Persada Pers
Sullivan, N. & Robert, S. (2007). Effects of Japanese National Identification on Attitudes toward Learning English and Self-Assessed English Proficiency, Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the InternationalSociety of Political Psychology, Classical Chinese Garden,Portland,OregonUSA
Suleiman, M. F. 1993. A Study of Arab Students'Motivations and Attitudes for
Learning English as aForeign Language, Unpublished PhD Dissertation,
Arizona State University
The National Commission on Writing in America‟s Schools and Colleges.2003. The College Board.
Travers, John P. (1970). Fundamental of Educational Psychology. Scranton, Pennsylvania: International
91
Wenden, A. 1991. Learner strategies for learner autonomy. London: Prentice Hall
Widdows, S. & Voller, P. 1991. PANSI: A Survey of the ELT Needs of Japanese University Students,CrossCurrents, 18(2), 127-141
Warschauer, M. (2010). New tools for teaching writing. Language Learning & Technology14(1), 3-8
Welch, M. (1992). The “PLEASE” strategy: a metacognitive learning strategy for improving the paragraph writing of students with mild learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, (2), 119-128.
Witte, S. 2007. That's online writing, not boring school writing: Writing with blogs and the Talkback Project.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
Yamin,Martinis,dkk.2008. Taktik PengembangaIndividualSiswa.Jakarta:G.P.Pers
Yih, M. B., & Nah, E. A. 2009. Writing Web Logs in the ESL Classroom: A Study of Student Perceptions and the Technology Acceptance Model 47.
Asian Journal of University Education, Vol.5, No.1, June, ISSN
1823-7797
Zaragoza, N & Vaughn, S. 1992. The Effect of Process Writing Instruction on
three 2nd- Grade Students with Different Achievement Profiles. Learning
Disabilities Research, 7, 184-193
