CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
The previous chapter has discussed the literature related to this study, including Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), Theme system, Theme progression, and Exposition text. This chapter will provide a detailed delineation of the methodological aspects of this study, which are the research design, research site and participant, data collection, and data analysis. Research design elaborates the method used in this study including its principles and characteristics. The research site and participant emphasizes on the place where the study took place and the participant involved. The data collection presents the data types and data collection technique. The data analysis elaborates the procedure of analyzing the data.
3.1 Research Design
The research design applied in this research is a descriptive method, embracing the characteristics of a case study approach. The choice of descriptive method was related to the research questions and the purpose of this study; to get in-depth understanding of the schematic structures, the textual organization, and the cohesion of the students’ exposition text. This research can be characterized as a qualitative study because this research created and investigated one of the outcomes of teaching learning activities
which is students’ exposition text (Nunan, 1992).
In addition, this research also has similar characteristics to a case study. As stated by Johansson (2003, p.2) that a case study is expected to capture the complexity of a single case and the methodology which has developed within the social science. Aside from that, case study method embraces the full set of procedures needed to do case study research. These tasks include designing a case study,
collecting the study’s data, analyzing the data, and presenting and reporting the
p.74-75, see also Noviyanti, 2014), which provides a powerful analytical tool, and present
the development of the ideas of students’ exposition text.
The findings will focus only on the case and the findings cannot be generalized to other groups or individual. That means the result of every group will be different and if other researcher finds a way to teach a certain group, it does not mean that this method is more effective than the other (Cohen, 2007, p.73).
3.2Research Site and Participant
3.2.1Settings
This study was conducted in one Senior High School in Cimahi. The researcher chose the place because the researcher served as a preservice teacher in that school, the researcher hoped to get an easy access in conducting the research.
3.2.2 Data Resource
The data resource of the study were 36 exposition texts written by eleventh grade students on second semester in one Senior High School in Cimahi. All the texts were classified into low-, middle-, and high achievement. However, only six texts were
analyzed that represented each level of achievements. It is based on De Paulo’s
statement (2000, in Noviyanti, 2014), the sample quality was more important rather than the sample number.
3.3 Data Collection
This research was conducted by using one data collection techniques; collecting
students’ Exposition texts.
schematic structures and the textual organization. The texts that scored 40-59 in the class were categorized into low achievers, the texts that scored 60-79 in the class were categorized into middle achievers, and the texts that scored 80-90 in the class
were categorized into high achievers. The score of the students’ writing products
were determined by the English teacher. In terms of thematic progressions, students’ texts were analyzed by categorizing the text into three levels of achievement, it was expected to give several advantages. It was easier to attain more informative data and it was expected to give greater comprehension of the context based on prior knowledge (Duff, 2008, p.16).
3.4 Data Analysis
The process of data analysis is eclectic, as there is no “right way” (Tesch, 1990 in
Creswell 1994 in Sarah 2012). The data analysis of the study was divided into three steps: analysis of the schematic structure, analysis of the linguistic features, and determining the thematic progressions pattern.
3.4.1 Analysis of the Schematic Structure
This part elaborated how the students composed an exposition text. The data of this study was the final draft of six exposition texts written by eleventh grade students in one high school in Cimahi. The texts were discussed based on the theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics from some experts to reveal the structures, and the theme progression pattern which occurs most dominantly in students’ exposition text.
Table 3.1 The Analysis of Generic Structure of Students’ Exposition texts
3.4.2 Analysis of the Linguistic Features
Based on the students’ exposition texts, the researcher also found out some linguistic features that appear in the text. The linguistic features analysis and the discussion are shown below.
Table 3.2The Analysis of Linguistic Features of Students’ Exposition texts
Participant Linguistic Features exposition texts based on the linguistic features. On the other hand, students 3, 4, 5 and 6 did not use verbal process, modality, mental verb, discourse move, and the evaluating language.
Relating to the theme analysis, the researcher found some types of theme from
students’ exposition texts. Beside topical theme which occurs most dominantly in
students’ texts, the researcher also found textual theme and interpersonal theme
Table 3.3 Types of theme found in students’ exposition texts.
Participant
Theme
Topical Theme Interpersonal Theme Textual Theme
Student 1 √ √ √
Student 2 √ √ √
Student 3 √ √ √
Student 4 √ - √
Student 5 √ - √
Student 6 √ √ √
3.4.3 Determining the Theme Progression Pattern
Relating to the theme progression analysis, the researcher found some types of theme progression occurrences in students’ exposition texts. Beside the theme re-iteration
which occurs most dominantly in students’ texts, the researcher also found zig-zag pattern, and multiple theme pattern that occurs in students’ exposition text. It can be seen in the table below.
Table 3.4 Types of theme found in students’ exposition texts.
Participant
Theme Progression
Zigzag pattern Theme re-iteration Multiple Theme pattern
Student 1 √ √ √
Student 2 √ √
-Student 3 √ √ √
Student 4 √ √
-Student 5 √ √ √
Student 6 √ √ -
