• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

COHESION AND COHERENCE OF ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING OF THE STUDENTS WITH NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE MAJORS.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2017

Membagikan "COHESION AND COHERENCE OF ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING OF THE STUDENTS WITH NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE MAJORS."

Copied!
30
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

COHESION AND COHEEENCE OF AEGUMENTATIVE WEITING OF THE STUDENTS WITH NATUEAL AND

SOCIAL SCIENCE MAJOES

A THESIS

Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

By:

BETHAEIA br. SEMBIEING PANDIA Eegistration Number : 2123121006

ENGLISH AND LITEEATUEE DEPAETMENT FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND AETS

(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

i

ABSTRACT

Pandia, Betharia br. Sembirinn.Renistration Number: 2123121006. Cohesion and Coherence of Arnumentative Writinn of the Students with Natural and Social Science Majors.

The objectives of this study were to investigate the way of how Natural and Social Science students used cohesion and coherence in their argumentative writing. The data needed to achieve the objective was the students’ writing that was elicited by assigning them to write two different topics related to their interest namely National Examination and Wearing Uniform. The cohesion was analyzed following Halliday and Hasan (1976); while the coherence was analyzed through the use of three principles of coherence by Carlos and Ceballos in Garing (2014) and text structure by Knapp and Watkins (200l). In addition, it was also aimed at seeking the influence of their majors on their using of cohesion and coherence. This study revealed that both Natural and Social Science students had different ways of using cohesion and coherence for each topics: National Examination and Wearing Uniform. It was concluded that Natural Science students had more cohesive and coherent writing on National Examination topic; while Social Science students presented more cohesive and coherent writing on Wearing Uniform topic. However, their majors did not influence the use of cohesion and coherence, but it was influenced by their interests on the given topics.

(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)

iv

E. The Significance of the Study ... 5

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 6

A. Theoretical Framework ... 6

c. Factors Affeecting Argumentation ... 18

4. Cohesion ... 19

a. The Nature of Cohesion ... 20

b. Factors Underlying Cohesion ... 21

c. Grammatical Cohesion... 21

1) Reference ... 21

2) Substitution ... 23

3) Ellipsis ... 24

(12)

v

d. Lexical Cohesion ... 26

5. Coherence ... 27

a. The Nature of Coherence ... 28

b. Factors Underlying Coherence ... 28

B. Major of the Students and Their Argumentative Writing Quality ... 30

C. Relevant Studies ... 32

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 36

A. Research Design ... 36

B. Data and Technique of Data Collection ... 36

C. The Subjects of the Study ... 37

D. The Procedure of Research Design ... 37

E. The Technique of Data Analysis ... 38

CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION ... 39

A. Ways of Using Cohesion by IPA and IPS Students ... 40

1. Ways of Using Reference ... 40

a. Personal Reference ... 40

b. Demonstrative Reference ... 41

2. Ways of Using Conjunction ... 42

a. Additive Conjunction ... 42

b. Adversative Conjunction... 44

c. Causal Conjunction ... 45

3. Ways of Using Reitration ... 46

4. Ways of Using Collocation ... 49

B. Ways of Using Coherence by IPA and IPS Students ... 57

1. Ways of Using Coherence by IPA and IPS Students ... 57

a. The Use of Topic Sentence ... 58

b. The Use of One Idea in One Paragraph ... 60

c. The Avoidance of Digression among Paragraphs ... 61

C. The Influence of Majors on Cohesion ... 64

(13)

vi

2. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Adversative Conjunction ... 70

3. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Repetition ... 72

4. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Demonstrative Reference ... 77

5. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Causal Conjunction ... 79

6. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Chain of Collocation ... 81

7. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Adversative Conjunction ... 82

8. The Influence of Majors on the Use of Repetition ... 84

D. The Influence of Majors on Coherence ... 84

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS... A. Conclusions ... 102

B. Suggestions ... 103

REFERENCES ... 104

(14)

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researcher would like to express her deepest gratitude to Jesus Christ, the Almighty and Most Beneficial, for His Grace, Guidance, Praise, Honour, and Mercy that has been given to the researcher so that she finally accomplished her thesis entitled: “Cohesion and Coherence of Argumentative Writing of the Students with Natural and Social Science Majors”.

This thesis is aimed to fulfill one of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan of the English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan (UNIMED).

In completing this thesis, the researcher realized that she faced some problems and she had received the academic guidance, suggestions, and comments and got a lot of assistance and moral support from many people. Therefore, the researcher would like to express her gratitude and special thanks to:  Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd., the Rector of State University of Medan.  Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., the Dean of Faculty of Languages and Arts.  Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the Head of English and Literature

Department.

Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., the Head of English Educational Study Program.

Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., and Rita Suswati, S.Pd., M.Hum, Thesis Advisors for their valuable time, knowledge, and guidance with all of their patience and wisdom during the process of accomplishing this thesis.

Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed. and Rafika Dewi Nasution, S.Pd., M.Hum, Examiners for their valuable input to furnish this thesis.

Eis Sri Wahyuningsih, M. Pd. and Pantes, the Administration Staffs of English Department

(15)

iii

Tarmiyo, S.Pd. , the English Teacher of SMA Methodist Binjai for helping the researcher during the research and all of the students, especially the 12th grade of Natural and Social Science students.

 Her beloved parents Agus Sembiring Pandia and Betsaida br. Hutagalung, Amd. for their endless love, support, and prayer.

 Her beloved grandmother Nalsali br. Tarigan for her abundant love and prayer.

 Special thanks for Frikson Siburian for his great love, time, patience, and support in finishing the thesis.

 Her beloved friends “The Black RibbonBerman, Bertha, Citra, Malawita and Petrus for the great experience during 4 years of togetherness and friendship.

 Her beloved step sister Sri Lestari Setyawan, Theresia Manalu, Yeslika Debora br. Bangun, Shely Hutajulu, Putri Sembiring, and Ratna br. Ginting, and also her step brothers Boy Simangunsong and Simon Christofel Silalahi for their support, laugh, advices, and prayer.

The researcher realizes that this thesis still has the paucity; she conveniently welcomes any suggestions, comments and advices that will improve the quality of this thesis. She hopes that this thesis would be useful for those who read and interest in the field of this study.

Medan, January 2017 The researcher,

(16)

x

LIST OF APPENDICES

Pages

Appendix A. VC’s writing on National Examination topic ...108

Appendix B. KE’s writing on National Examination topic ...109

Appendix C. AK’s writing on National Examination topic ...110

Appendix D. KU’s writing on National Examination topic ...111

Appendix E. JL’s writing on National Examination topic ...112

Appendix F. VC’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...113

Appendix G. KE’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...114

Appendix H. AK’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...115

Appendix I. KU’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...116

Appendix J. JL’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...117

Appendix K. FS’s writing on National Examinatio topic ...118

Appendix L. JU’s writing on National Examinatio topic ...119

Appendix M. JE’s writing on National Examinatio topic ...120

Appendix N. JS’s writing on National Examinatio topic ...121

Appendix O. PF’s writing on National Examinatio topic ...122

Appendix P. FS’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...123

Appendix Q. JU’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...124

Appendix R. JE’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...125

Appendix S. JS’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...126

Appendix T. PF’s writing on Wearing Uniform topic ...127

(17)

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Page Figure 2.1 Hayes –Flowr’s Model of Cognitive Process in Writing ... 11 Figure 2.2 Knapp’s Model of Genre ... 14

Figure 4.1 Graphic of The Use of Grammatical Cohesion by IPA and IPS

Students Across All Topics ... 43

Figure 4.2 Graphic of Chain of Collocational Cohesion by IPA and IPS

Students ... 53

(18)

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 4.1 Repetition on National Examination and Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 49

Table 4.2 Chain of Collocation by IPA and IPS Students ... 55

Table 4.3 The Source of Incoherence on Argumentative Writing

by IPA and IPS Students ... 63

Table 4.4 Data 24 on Cohesive Devices on National Examination Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 65

Table 4.5 Data 25 on Causal Conjunction on National Examination Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 69 Table 4.6 Data 26 on Adversative Conjunction on National Examination

Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 71

Table 4.7 Data 27 on Repetition on National Exam Topic by IPA and IPS

Students ... 72

Table 4.8 Data 28 on Cohesive Devices on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 74

Table 4.9 Data 29 on Demonstrative Reference on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 78

Table 4.10 Data 30 on Causal Conjunction on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 80

Table 4.11 Data 31 on Chain of Collocation on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 81

Table 4.12 Data 32 on Adversative Conjunction on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 83

Table 4.13 Data 33 on Repetition on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and

(19)

viii

Table 4.14 Data 34 on Coherence Principles on National Examination Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 88

Table 4.15 Data 35 on Topic Sentence Principle on National Examination

Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 90

Table 4.16 Data 36 on One Idea in One Paragraph Principle on National

Examination Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 91

Table 4.17 Data 37 on Avoidance of Digression Principle on National

Examination Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 93

Table 4.18 Data 38 on Coherence Principles on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 94

Table 4.19 Data 39 on Topic Sentence Principle on Wearing Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 95

Table 4.20 Data 40 on One Idea in One Paragraph Principle on Wearing

Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 96

Table 4.21 Data 41 on Avoidance of Digression Principle on Wearing

Uniform Topic by IPA and IPS Students ... 98

Table 4.22 Summary of the Coherence on Argumentative Writing by IPA

(20)

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODECTION

A. The Background of the Study

In language learning, writing has always been one of the other three skills like

listening, speaking, and reading, that needs to be mastered by students. It is a must

have skill for them to share everything that goes to their mind or everything they

ewperienced.

Byrne (1979:1) states that writing is the encoding of a message that we

translate our thoughts into language. The message can be delivered by either spoken

or written. Spoken and written form of communication have different characteristics.

In speaking, the listener can directly ask for clarification related to the message so

that the speaker can repeat or ewplain it further. Moreover, through speaking, the

speaker can ewpress his or her feeling through loudness, rhythm, speed, pauses and

even gestures. It makes the listener feel the emotion or get the message easily.

Meanwhile, in writing, the message should be clearly written. It should be achieved

through the use of approriate word choices, correct sentences form and clear ideas

organization.

For Indonesia’s educational contewt which is realized in syllabus, writing skill

is ewpected to be able to be masterred by students. To do this, students are demanded

(21)

2

ewperience. Besides, to produce a written tewt well, students need to learn not only the

spelling and punctuation, but also ways of organizing tewt at sentence level and above

(Sharples 1999:13). However, it is often found that students’ writing skill is still low

in terms of its connection between sentences (cohesion) and meaning as a whole

piece of writing (coherence), as it is shown on this following short paragraph:

JR’s Argumentative Writing: Should Students be Allowed to Bring Cellphone to School?

In our school a lot of students brcng cellhhone. But the school make the rule that forbcd students to brcng hhone. The headmaster ever tell us about the trouble of allowcng students to brcng hhone to school.

He sacd “When school student brcng hhone they wcll lose thecr concentrate. They wcll hlay game, chattcng, even when the test they wcll cheatcng. They thcnk ct’s a ncce and cool thcng to do.

From the paragraph above, the student shows connections between sentences

but it lacks of coherence since the idea is not completely stated and the writer does

not stand from his viewpoint.

Meanwhile, it is required that sentences within a tewt need to be connected to

each other so that the reader will be easier to understand the sequence (Brostoff,

1981). In addition, Harmer (2004:22) asserts that for writing to be truly accessible, it

needs to be both cohesive and coherent. Cohesion ewists where the interpretation of

any item in the tewt requires making reference to some other item in it (Halliday

1976:11). Meanwhile, coherence is the overall tewture of a tewt on how it makes sense

to readers (Harmer, 2004:22). Garing (2014) also states that these two terms are some

(22)

3

to be able to produce such a meaningful tewt, but also the teachers need to teach and

help the students to recognize the use of cohesion and coherence as the criteria of

either good or accessible writing.

For the twelfth grade students, in this case, natural and social science class,

they are specifically demanded to be able to write an argumentative tewt. Regarding

to this point, teachers need to have an understanding that there are some factors that

contribute to their students’ argumentation (Deane et.al, 2008:47), they are: (1)

linguistic skill, (2) background knowledge, (3) critical thinking skill. If they are good

for the three factors, it can be said that they will produce a cohesive and coherent

writing.

In relation to cognitive process, in this case the cognitive process due to the

students’ major in writing argumentative writing, Safitri (2013) concluded that

Natural Science students tended to plan their writing well in which they generated

new ideas for each topic sentence and to support them in paragraphs. Thus, her

findings is in line with the theory of Stenberg in her study, who states that the Natural

Science students tend to adhere rules and procedures while Social Science students

tend to have liberal thinking like surpassing rules and procedures. Thus, Natural

Science students also wrote their argumentative writing according to steps. Unlike the

Natural Science students, she also added that the Social Science students’ writing

avoided planning and reviewing.

Safitri’s (2013) study focused on the difference between the Natural and

(23)

4

argumentative writing. She claimed that the difference was resulted from the different

majors of the students. If it was true, then the product of their argumentative writing

in terms of coherence and cohesion would be different too. To ensure this idea, this

study was conducted with the title of “Cohesion and Coherence of Argumentative

Writing of the Students with Natural and Social Science Majors”.

B. The Problems of the Study

The problem of the study is formulated as follow:

1. How do the Senior High School students of Natural and Social Science

majors use cohesion of their argumentative writing?

2. How do the Senior High School students of Natural and Social Science

majors use coherence of their argumentative writing?

3. How do the two students’ majors influence the cohesion and coherence of

their argumentative writing?

C. The Scope of the Study

This study is limited to the study of coherence and cohesion on students’

argumentative writing. The cohesion and coherence was ewamined and categorized

into its types. The application of the two terms was compared between the students’

(24)

5

D. The Objectives of the Study

In relation to the problems, the objectives of the study are:

1. To describe how the Natural and Social Science students use cohesion on

their argumentative writing.

2. To describe how the Natural and Social Science students use coherence on

their argumentative writing.

3. To describe whether their majors influence the cohesion and coherence on

their argumentative writing.

E. The Significances of the Study

Theoretically, the findings of this research will contribute to either

strengthening or modifying the theory of writing especially the one related to the

relationship between critical thinking with the quality of writing, in this case, the

quality that refers to the cohesion and coherence.

Practically, the findings of this research will be useful for:

1. the teachers in their attempt to make their teaching writing better by taking

the critical thinking ability into account.

2. the students of high school or university level so that they are able to produce

a cohesion and coherence writing.

3. other researchers, as a reference for conducting further research in relation to

(25)

101

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusions

1. In cohesion, both IPA and IPS students achieved cohesion throush the use

of personal, demonstrative reference, additive conjunction, adversative

conjunction, causal conjunction, reiteration, and chain of collocation

across all topics. However, the extended demonstrative reference and

complex additive conjunction were only found in IPA students’ writins.

1. In coherence, IPA students achieved coherence by usins topic sentence

and one idea in one parasraph principles in National Examination topic.

Meanwhile, IPS students achieved coherence in Wearing Uniform topic by

usins the topic sentence and one idea in one parasraph principle also.

3. The students’ major was not the factor affectins the cohesion and

coherence. But, the factor was the students’ interest to the topic. The topic

of National Examination was more important to IPA students rather than

to IPS students, while the topic of Wearing Uniform was more important

to IPS students rather than to IPA students. This was the reason of why

IPA students wrote more cohesive and coherent parasraph on the National

Examination rather than on Wearing Uniform; while the other way around

(26)

103

B. Suggestions

Based on the above conclusions, there are some sussestions listed:

1. Teachers should consider the topic which is siven to the students because

their majors which are realized in their thinkins is not enoush to see their

ability in achievins cohesive and coherent writins.

1. Students should firstly understand types of cohesive devices and

principles of coherence to be able to present cohesive and coherent

writins.

3. For other researchers, it is important to use more various topics to the

(27)

101

REFERENCES

Angeles, M.S.D. (2005). Coherence in the Argumentative Essay of ADZU college freshmen: A textual analysis of writing quality.

Amir, A.Z. (2013). The Use of Cohesive Devices in descriptive Writing by Omani Student- Teachers.

Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics. London : Longman

Berzlanovich, I. (2008). Lexical cohesion and the organization of discourse.

First year report. Center for Language and Cognition Groningen: University of Groningen.

Byrne, D. (1979). Teaching Writing Skills. U.K: Longman Group

Boardman, C.A., & Frydenberg, J. (2002). Writing to communicate: paragraphs and

essays. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Brostoff, A. (1981). Coherence: “Next to” is not “connected to.” College

Composition and Communication, 32 (2), 278–291.

Deane, P et.al. (2008). Cognitive Models of Writing: Writing Proficiency as a

Complex Integrated Skill. Princeton : Educational Testing Service

Deuraman, B. (2007). Cohesion and Coherence in English Essay Written by Malaysian and Thai Medical Students. Southern Thailand English Language Teaching/ Cultural Change Conference.

Driscoll, L. D. & Brizee, A. (2013). On Paragraphs. Purdue University

Fitzgerald, D. and Spiegel, D. L. (1986). Textual coherence and cohesion in children’s writing. Research in Teaching of English, 20(3), 263-280.

Galbraith, D. (2009). Cognitive Models of Writing. GFL Journal. No. 2.

(28)

105

Halasek, K. (1999). A Pedagogy of Possibility: Bakhtinian Perspectives on

Composition Studies. Southern Illionis University

Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman Group Ltd.

Harmer, J. (2001). How to Teach Writing. England: Pearson Education.

Heaton, J.B. (1988). Writing English Language Test. London: Longman Group Ltd.

Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press

Kaewcha, N. (2013). Problems with Coherence in Writing in the Thai Context.

Manustat Paritat. 31.(2), 29-10

Knapp, P. et.al. (2005). Genre, Text, Grammar. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press

Khusnita, D. (2013). The Use of Facebook to Improve Students’ Skill and Increase

Their Motivation in Writing Recount Texts.Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Mawardi. (2011). An Analysis of the Cohesion and Coherence of the Students’ Narrative Writings in the English Language Education Department of Nahdlatul Wathan Mataram University. 8.(1)

Mayberry, K. (2009). Everyday Arguments: A Guide to Writing and Reading

Effective Arguments. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge Language Teaching Library

Meyer, A. (2005). Gateways to Academic Writing: Effective Sentences, Paragraphs

and Essays. New York : Pearson Education, Inc.

Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1991). Qualitative Data Analysis.California: SAGE Publications Inc.

Morley, G.D. (2000). Syntax in Functional Grammar: An introduction to

lexicogrammar in systemic linguistics. London: Paston PrePress Ltd.

Muvindi, I. (2013). Cohesion and Coherence: Implications for ESL Teachers.

(29)

106

Nudee, N. (2010). Effects of Coopeartive Learning on Writing Ability of Thai

Secondary School Students. Unpublished master thesis, Prince of Songkla

University, Thailand.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Renkema, J. (1993). Discourse studies. An introductory textbook. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Safitri, R. (2013). The Cognitive Process of the SMA Students of Different Majors in

Writing Argumentative Text: UNIMED

Sandelowski, M (2000). Whatever Happened to Qualitative Description? Focus on

Research Methods. 23. 331-310

Shahriar, A. et.al. (2012). Coherence and the Role of Cohesion in Coherent Texts. 12. 373-389.

Sharples, M. (1999). How We Write : Writing as creative design. Great Britain: T.J. International Ltd.

Taboada, M.T. (2001). Building Coherence and Cohesion. Philadelphia: Johns Benjamins Publishing Company

Tanawong, P. (2011). The Relationship Between Cohesion and Coherence in Writing: The Case of Thai EFL Students. A Thesis. Srinakhairinwirot University

Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2010). Promoting Cohesion in EFL Expository Writing: A Study of Graduate Students in Thailand. International Journal of Arts and Sciences. 3.(16), 1-31.

Tanskanen, S.K. (2006). Collaborating Towards Coherence. Philadelphia:Johns Benjamins Publishing Company

Vyncke, M. (2012). The Concept and Practice of Critical Thinking in Academic Writing: An Investigation of International Students’ Perceptions and Writing

(30)

107

Wang, Y. et.al. (2011). A Short Analysis of Discourse Coherence. Journal of

Language Teaching and Research. 5.(2). 160-165.

Weigle, S.C. (2002). Assessing Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press

Wells, J.M. (2009). Topic Sentences. Purdue University

William, J.M. (2000). Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. London: The University of Chicago Press.

Witee, S. et.al. (1981). Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality. College

Composition and Communication. 32.(2). 189-201.

Gambar

Figure 2.1 Hayes – Flowr’s Model of Cognitive Process in Writing ......................
Table 4.16 Data 36 on One Idea in One Paragraph Principle on National

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

Iklan kreatif akan menarik perhatian orang yang melihatnya.iklan kreatif adalah iklan yang dianggap original atau asli tidak meniru orang lain, iklan yang mencengangkan,

The Annual Certificate of Compliance must be completed and submitted to the Procurement Service along with the Annual Procurement Report to certify that procurement activity of

Teknik pengumpulan data merupakan langkah yang paling strategis dalam penelitian, karena tujuan utama dari penelitian adalah mendapatkan data tanpa mengetahui

Hubungan Pengelolaan Program Pelatihan Meister Otomotif dengan Kompetensi Peserta.. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Generally, all local and international businesses in Timor Leste have an obligation to pay income tax in monthly or quarterly instalments and are also required to lodge an

Anak-anak yang menjadi korban, tidak hanya anak perempuan, tetapi juga anak laki-laki. Sebagian besar anak berasal dari dalam kota itu sendiri, dan masih. berstatus

Pengaruh Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Investigasi Berbantuan Media Animasi Terhadap Penguasaan Konsep Sistem Reproduksi Dan Motivasi Belajar Siswa Kelas XI.. Universitas

Pada hari ini Rabu tanggal Tiga bulan April Tahun Dua Ribu Tujuh Belas, kami yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini Pokja Pada Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Manggarai telah melakukan