THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PEER FEEDBACK TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS.

(1)

Cici Riksa Wiliyanti, 2014

The Effectiveness Of Peer Feedback Technique In Improving Students’ Writing Skill In Writing Narrative Texts Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

The Effectiveness of Peer Feedback Technique in Improving Students’

Writing Skill in Writing Narrative Texts

A Research Paper

(Submitted to the English Department of FPBS UPI as a partial requirement to achieve Sarjana Pendidikan Degree)

By

Cici Riksa Wiliyanti 0902349

English Education Department

Faculty of Language and Arts Education

(2)

Tech i ue I I p ovi g Stude ts’ W iti g

Skill In Writing Narrative Texts

Oleh

Cici Riksa Wiliyanti

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni

Oktober 2013

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

(3)

PAGE OF APPROVAL

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PEER FEEDBACK TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING

STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS

By

Cici Riksa Wiliyanti 0902349

Approved by:

Main Supervisor Co-Supervisor

Pupung Purnawarman, M.S.Ed.,Ph.D. Muhammad Handi Gunawan, M. Pd. NIP. 196810131998031001 NIP. 197301132009121002

The Head of English Department

Faculty of Language and Arts Education

Indonesia University of Education

(4)

The Effectiveness Of Peer Feedback Technique In Improving Students’ Writing Skill In Writing Narrative Texts

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu ABSTRACT

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PEER FEEDBACK TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING

STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS

Cici Riksa Wiliyanti (0902349)

Main supervisor: Pupung Purnawarman, M.S.Ed.,Ph.D. Co-supervisor: Muhammad Handi G, S.Pd., M.Pd.

This study intends to investigate the effectiveness of peer feedback technique

in improving students’ writing skill in writing narrative texts and to examine the responses of students toward the implementation of peer feedback technique. It employed a quasi experimental design, involving two classes consisting of 60 second graders at one of senior high schools in Bandung. The data were gathered from pretest, posttest and questionnaire. The obtained data were analyzed based on The ESL Composition Profile proposed by Jacob et al (1981). The statistical computation

showed that peer feedback technique is likely effective in improving students’ writing

(5)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu ABSTRAK

KEEFEKTIFAN TEKNIK UMPAN BALIK YANG DIBERIKAN OLEH REKAN SEBAYA UNTUK MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN MENULIS SISWA

DALAM MENULIS TEKS NARATIF Cici Riksa Wiliyanti (0902349)

Pembimbing Utama: Pupung Purnawarman, M.S.Ed.,Ph.D. Pembimbing Kedua : Muhammad Handi G, S.Pd., M.Pd.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji keefektifan dari teknik umpan balik yang diberikan oleh rekan sebaya untuk meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa dalam menulis teks naratif dan untuk melihat tanggapan dari siswa terhadap penerapan teknik tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan model quasi-experimental dengan mengikutsertakan 2 (dua) kelas yang terdiri dari 60 siswa kelas dua sekolah menengah atas di Bandung. Data yang terkumpul untuk penelitian ini berasal dari tes awal, tes akhir dan angket. Data tersebut kemudian dianalisis berdasarkan The ESL

Composition Profile yang diusulkan oleh Jacob (1981). Perhitungan statistik

(6)

STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION ……….. ii

PREFACE ... iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... iv

ABSTRACT……… vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS... vii

LIST OF TABLES ... xi

LIST OF FIGURES ... xii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ……… 1

1.2 Statement of Problems ……… 2

1.3 The Purposes of the Research ………. 2

1.4 Hypothesis ………... 3

1.5 Significance of the Study ……… 3

1.6 Limitation of the Study ……… 4

1.7 Research Methodology ……… 4

1.7.1 Design ………. 4

1.7.2 Population and Sample ………... 5

1.7.3 Research Instrument ………... 5

1.7.4 Research Procedure ……… 5

1.7.5 Data Analysis ………. 6

1.8 Clarification of the Key Terms ……… 6

(7)

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FOUNDATION

2.1 Writing ………. 9

2.1.1 The Nature of Writing ………. 9

2.1.2 Approaches to the Teaching of Writing ……….. 11

2.1.2.1 Product Approach ………... 11

2.1.2.2 Process Approach ……… 12

2.1.2.3 Genre Oriented ……… 14

2.1.3 Text Types ………... 15

2.1.4 Teaching Writing in EFL context ………... 16

2.2 Feedback ………. 18

2.2.1 Importance of Feedback in Writing ……… 20

2.3 Peer Feedback ………. 21

2.3.1 Definition of Peer Feedback ……….. 21

2.3.2 The Procedures of Peer Feedback ………. 22

2.4 Narrative text ……….. 24

2.5 Writing Improvement and Peer Feedback ………. 26

2.6 Previous Research on Peer Feedback………. 26

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design ………. 29

3.1.1 The Experimental Design ……….. 29

3.1.2 The Variable ………. 30

3.2 Research Subject ……… 30

3.2.1 Population ………. 30

3.2.2 Sample ……….. 31

3.3 Research Instrument ……….. 31

(8)

3.4.3 Conducting the pretest ………. 32

3.4.4 Conducting the treatment ………. 32

3.4.5 Conducting posttest ………. 33

3.4.6 Administering questionnaire ……… 33

3.5 Data Analysis ……… 34

3.5.1 Scoring Sheet for Writing Test ……… 34

3.5.2 Pilot Test Data Analysis ………... 36

3.5.3 Pretest and Posttest Data Analysis ……….. 36

3.5.3.1 Normality of Distribution Test ………. 36

3.5.3.2 Variance Homogeneity Test……….. 37

3.5.3.3 T-test Calculation ………. 37

3.5.3.4 Paired sample T-test ………. 38

3.5.4 Data Analysis on Questionnaire ……… 39

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Research Findings ……… 40

4.1.1 Pilot Test ………. 40

4.1.2 Pretest Data Analysis ……….. 41

4.1.2.1 Normality distribution test ……….. 41

4.1.2.2 Homogeneity of Variance Test ……… 42

4.1.2.3 The Independent T-Test Computation ………. 42

4.1.3 Posttest Data Analysis ………. 43

4.1.3.1 Normality distribution test ……….. 44

4.1.3.2 Homogeneity of Variance Test ……… 44

(9)

4.1.3.4 Paired t-test analysis ………. 46 4.1.4 The Result of Questionnaire ……… 49

4.2 Discussions ……… 56

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions ………. 60

5.2 Suggestions ………. 61

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

(10)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background

Writing is one of productive skills, besides speaking, which contains of written words and involves a complex process. Brown (2001) stated that the process of writing requires an entirely different set of competencies and is fundamentally different from speaking (p. 335). The learners have to be equipped with the other language skills prior to learning how to writing because the skills are reflected through the writing (Puegrhrom & Chiramanee, 2011). Thus, possibility might be that writing is the most complicated skill and it deserves serious attention. In general, education writing in Indonesia is need more attentions because there are dominance

of the teacher who unwilling to praising their student’s writing (Alwasilah and Alwasilah, 2005, p. 99).

Besides, as Hyland and Hyland (2001) noted that praising what a student does well is important, especially for less able writers, it could help them to strengthen their appropriate language behavior and foster their self-esteem. Holmes (1988) affirmed that praise as an act which connects each commend for some characteristic, attribute, skill, etc., which is positively valued by the person giving feedback (cited in Hattie and Timperley, 2010). In line with Hattie and Timperley (2010) which define feedback as information provided by an agent, it can be teacher, peer, book, parent, or experience, regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding.

Accordance to the agent in giving the feedback, there has been questioned by some experts in which teacher feedback or peer feedback the more effective agent in giving feedback. As cited in Srichanyachon (2012) previous research on student views of feedback has consistently shown that L2 students used more teacher than peer feedback in their redrafts (Zhang, 1995; Tsui and Ng, 2000; Yang et al., 2006). Further Srichanyachon explained L2 students believe that teacher feedback is more

(11)

2

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

accurate and more trustworthy than peer feedback because teachers possess a better knowledge of English language than peer learners.

Research on the other hand has indicated that peer feedback can also

contribute to students’ writing (Tsui & Ng, 2000; Yang, Badger & Yu, 2006).

Alwasilah and Alwasilah (2005) elaborated about the teachers who teach classes with a big number of students experienced difficulties in giving feedback because they

have no enough time to correct and discuss each of students’ writing (p. 44). Accordance to this problem, teacher can encourage and train students trough collaborative teaching, a teaching writing technique that involve peer feedback (Alwasilah and Alwasilah, 2005, p. 21). It is supported by Hyland and Hyland (2006) which state that effective peer response is a key element of helping novice writers to understand how readers see their work.

A number of studies reported that the process of providing feedback on peers’

work increases the opportunity of meaningful interaction among them and maximizes the opportunity of sharing new ideas as well as understanding different perspectives on the writing process (Liu and Hansen, 2002; Tsui and Ng, 2000). Such peer review has an extremely positive effect on group cohesion because it encourages students to monitor each other and helps them to become better at self monitoring (Harmer, 2007, p. 150).

Concerning the explanation above, therefore, this study examined the

effectiveness of peer feedback technique to improve students’ writing skill in writing

(12)

1.2 Statement of Problems

This study will be conducted to answer the following questions:

1. How effective is peer feedback technique in helping students to improve their writing skill in writing narrative texts?

2. What are students’ responses toward peer feedback technique in teaching narrative text?

1.3 The Purposes of the Research

Based on the statements of the problem, the purposes of this study are as follows:

1. To examine the effectiveness of peer feedback technique to improve the students’ writing skill in writing narrative texts.

2. To discover students’ responses toward the use of peer feedback technique in teaching narrative text.

1.4 Hypothesis

(13)

4

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu The hypotheses formulated in the study are:

Ho : there is no significant difference between the students’ writing score in pre test and post test score; means the technique is not effective to improve writing skill.

H1 : there is significant difference between the students’ writing score in pre test and post test score; means the technique is effective to improve writing skill.

1.5 Significance of the Study

Hopefully, the result of this study will give benefit and informative inputs in teaching and learning English as a foreign language especially in practical, theoretical and professional benefits.

1. Practical benefits

Practically, this study presents a real picture on how Peer Feedback technique is used in the classroom. The findings are expected to contribute as the information for the student in helping and motivating students to improve their writing skill especially in writing narrative texts. In addition, the writer also could gain experiences on both conducting an experimental study and writing an academic report.

2. Theoretical benefits

The findings are hopefully able to enrich literature on peer feedback in teaching writing especially in teaching narrative text.

3. Professional benefits

(14)

1.6 Limitation of the Study

In compliance with the problems that have been formulated above, the study is limited to find out the effectiveness of peer feedback which given by the other

students in student’s writing work. This study also tries to reveals the students’ responses toward the use of peer feedback technique in teaching narrative text. Nevertheless, the context of the study was limited on teaching writing using the peer feedback in senior high school, especially in one SMA in Bandung.

1.7 Research Methodology

1.7.1 Design

In conducting the research the writer applied the quantitative research design as research methodology. Quantitative method is a method that relies on statistical analysis of the data, which is typically in numeric form (Creswell, 2012, p. 19).

Afterwards, because this study examined the effectiveness of peer feedback in

improving students’ narrative text, the quasi-experimental design was applied with the matching-only pretest-posttest control group designs. Essentially, the writer assigned intact groups the experimental and control groups, administers a pretest to both groups, conducts the experimental treatment activities with the experimental group only in which using peer feedback technique as the treatment activity, and then administers a post test to assess the differences between two groups (Creswell, 2012, p. 310).

According to Fraenkel J. R. et al (2012), the design of quasi experimental that applied in this study can be describes as follows:

(15)

6

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 1.7.2 Population and Sample

Considering the population, Fraenkel, J. R. et al (2012) explained that “in educational research, the population is usually a group of persons (students, teachers, or other individuals) who posses certain characteristics and in some cases it can be defined as a group of classroom, schools, or even facilities (p. 92).” The first grade students of senior high school in Bandung are taken as population. It is done to the fact that in curriculum 2006 narrative text is taught in the first grade of senior high school. It is assumed that they have applying genre-base approach to English language teaching.

Furthermore, Fraenkel J. R. et al (2012) added that the smaller group of population called sample or the group on which information is obtained in the research study (p. 91). Therefore, this study took two classes as the sample.

1.7.3 Research Instrument

In this study, some instruments were used to collect the data. The device (such as a pencil and paper test, a questionnaire, or a rating scale) the researcher uses to collect data is called an instrument (Fraenkel, J. R. et al, 2012, p. 111). Therefore, the instruments used in this research were writing task and questionnaire. There are,

writing task, in which to measure students’ ability in writing narrative text. There

were five narrative texts which include the test for both pre and post test. At the beginning, all the students were given the pre test to measure their initial ability in narrative writing before the peer feedback technique is applied. Then, questionnaire, it was distributed after conducting the post test to collect the information about

(16)

1.7.4 Research Procedure

The procedures of this study were gained by several steps that can be described as follow:

1. Preparing the lesson plan;

2. Trying out the research instrument by conducting the pilot test; 3. Conducting the pre-test;

4. Conducting the treatment, which is using peer feedback technique; 5. Conducting post-test;

6. Administering questionnaire.

1.7.5 Data Analysis

The data of this study is analyzed trough qualitative analysis. The data analysis was conducted to gain data in the form of writing performance test. Besides analyzing the data from the results of pre-test and post-test, the writer also analyzed the data gathered from the questionnaire. The procedures of analyzing the data

comprised several steps. First, the data collected from students’ writing performance

(17)

8

After calculating the data from pre-test and post-test, the data from questionnaire were analyzed. The data were analyzed based on the frequency

students’ answers. The result was calculated and interpreted into percentage.

1.8 Clarification of the Key Terms

To simplify the process of designing and application the research and also to avoid misunderstanding and misinterpretation, it is necessary to provide the definition of the main terms as follows.

Effectiveness refers to the goal attainment and it should be seen as a causal concept; not only interested in measuring educational effects but particularly in attributing effects to (various types of) antecedent conditions (Creemers and Scheereners, 1994). Therefore, the effectiveness in this study is the students’ attainment in writing narrative text as the goal after using peer feedback technique.

Peer feedback is having other writer to read and to give feedback on what other writer has written (Hyland, 2005). In this study is refers to the process by which students exchange constructive criticism on their work to help each other edit, improve and revise their writing.

Technique as stated by Anthony were the specific activities manifested in the classroom that were consistent with a method and therefore were in harmony with an approach as well, as cited in Brown (2001). While brown (2001) himself derives technique as any of a wide variety of exercises, activities, or task used in the language classroom for realizing lesson objectives (p. 16).

(18)

which is to finds a resolution. Therefore, kind of narrative text used in this study is a story of personal experiences that is appropriate for the first grade of senior high school students.

Writing skill refers to the ability of putting the ideas down on paper transform thoughts into words, to sharpen the main ideas, to give them structure and coherent organization (Brown, 2001, p. 336).

1.9 Organization of the Paper

The paper of this study is organized as follows: Chapter I. Introduction

This chapter provides the information on background of the study, purposes of the study, hypotheses, significance of the study, limitation, research methodology, clarification of terms, and organization of the paper.

Chapter II. Theoretical Foundation

This chapter consists of theoretical foundations; this part elaborates in detail theories which are relevant to the study.

Chapter III. Research Methodology

This chapter will discuss the methodology in conducting this research. It includes the preparation stages, procedures, instruments, techniques and the result of the research. Chapter IV. Result and Discussion

This chapter will explain findings and discussions; this chapter describes the results of the instruments analyses, such as pretest data analysis, posttest data analysis, and the data from the questionnaire, and the interpretation of the findings from the study. Chapter V. Conclusion and Suggestion

(19)

34

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents a discussion on the methodology employed in conducting this study. The description and account below involve: (1) Research Design, (2) Research Subject, (3) Research Instruments, (4) Research Procedures, and (5) Data Analysis.

3.1 Research Design

3.1.1 The Experimental Design

In conducting the research the writer applied the quantitative research design as research methodology. Quantitative method is a method that correlates with statistical analysis of the data, which is typically in numeric form (Creswell, 2012, p. 19).

Afterwards, because this study examined the effectiveness of peer feedback in improving students’ narrative text, the quasi-experimental design was applied with the matching-only pretest-posttest control group designs. Essentially, the writer assigned intact groups the experimental and control treatments, administers a pretest to both groups, conducts the experimental treatment activities with the experimental group only in which using peer feedback technique as the treatment activity, and then administers a post test to assess the differences between two groups (Creswell, 2012, p. 310).

(20)

According to Fraenkel J. R. et al (2012), the design of quasi experimental that applied in this study can be describes as follows:

3.1.2 The Variable

A variable is a characteristic of an individual or organization that can be measured by the researchers and also varies which has different value among different individuals or organizations (Creswell, 2012, p. 112). A common and useful way to think about the variables is to classify them as independent or dependent. Independent variables are those that the researcher chooses to study in order to assess their possible effect(s) on one or more other variables (Fraenkel, J. R. et al., 2012, p. 92).Those are presumed to affect other variables called dependent variables. In other words, dependent variables are those that dependent on or influenced by the independent variables. Accordance to the explanation above, this study also classified the variables into independent and dependent variables.

1. Independent variable chosen was peer feedback technique. Peer feedback technique became the treatment or manipulated variable.

2. Dependent variable in this study was students’ narrative score. It became the outcome from independent variable.

Treatment Group M O1 X O2

Control Group M O1 C O2

Notes : M = Matched subject

O1 = Students’ writing score in pre_-test

O2 = Students’ writing score in post-test

X = Treatment using peer feedback technique

(21)

36

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 3.2 Research Subject

3.2.1 Population

Fraenkel, J. R. et al (2012) stated that population is the group of interest as the destination that the researcher would like to generalize the result of the study (p. 92). They further explained that in educational research, the population is usually a group of persons (students, teachers, or other individuals) who posses certain characteristics and in some cases it can be defined as a group of classroom, schools, or even facilities (2012, p. 92). In line with Creswell (2012) who defined population as a group of individuals with same characteristics that can be identified by the researcher (p. 142). Considering that reason, the population of this study was the entire second grade in one senior high school in Bandung. They are enrolled in academic year 2013/2014.

The second grade students of senior high school in Bandung are taken as population since it is done to the fact that in curriculum 2006 narrative text is taught in the first grade of senior high school. It is also assumed that they have applied genre-base approach to English language teaching.

3.2.2 Sample

(22)

because there was difficulty in selecting the random sample of individuals due to the administrative of the school. In addition, they affirmed that the cluster random sampling can be used when it is difficult to select a random sample of individuals, besides, it is often easier to implement in school and also frequently less time-consuming (2012, p. 96).

Regarding to those explanations, this study took two classes randomly as sample. Each class consists of 32 students and researcher took 30 students as the sample for avoiding the absence of the students. The first class is the experimental group and the second class is the control group.

3.3 Research Instrument

(23)

38

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 3.4 Research Procedure

The procedures of this study were gained by several steps that can be described as follow:

3.4.1 Preparing the lesson plan

The lesson plan was designed to be implemented during treatment session. The material included in designing the lesson plan was narrative text in which it was organized for six meetings. The first and the last meeting were allocated to conduct the pre-test and post-test, while the other four meetings were allocated to implement the treatment by using peer feedback technique.

3.4.2 Trying out the research instrument by conducting the pilot test

The pilot test was conducted before the pre test in order to examine the writing test as the instrument whether it is valid or not. The pilot test was given to six students in similar level which were not included in both experimental and control group. Students who involved in this pilot test were assumed that they have already learned narrative text.

3.4.3 Conducting the pretest

(24)

3.4.4. Conducting the treatment

After conducting the pre test, the treatment was given to the experimental group only. “In an experiment, the researcher physically manipulates with interventions in one or more condition so that individuals experience something different in the experimental conditions than in the control conditions” (Creswell, 2012, p. 301). The treatment is the implementation of peer feedback technique. Time allocation for each meeting consists of two hours instruction in which one hour instruction is forty minutes. Time schedule of the research can be seen in the table.

Table 3.1

Time schedule of the Research

Date Experimental Group Control Group

September 2nd, 2013 Pretest Pretest

September 3rd, 2013 Writing text 1 Writing text 1

September 16th, 2013 Peer feedback training Writing text 2

and peer feedback 1

September 17th, 2013 Revised draft 1 Writing text 2

and peer feedback 2

September 23rd, 2013 Final draft Posttest

(25)

40

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 3.4.5 Conducting post test

The next step is conducting the posttest which aimed to measure the students’ achievement in writing skill after receiving the peer feedback technique. This post test was given to both experimental and control groups. This post test aimed to measure the differences of students’ score between the experimental and control group. Creswell (2012) reaffirmed that after the treatment, the researcher could take another reading on the attribute or characteristic and a posttest is a measure on some attribute or characteristic that is assessed for participants in an experiment after a treatment (p. 297).

3.4.6 Administering questionnaire.

In questionnaire, the subjects respond to the questions by writing or, more commonly, by marking an answer sheet and it can be given to large numbers of people at the same time (Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 125). The questionnaire was distributed for the experimental group only after performing the post test. This purposed to collect the information of students’ responses toward the use of peer feedback technique in teaching narrative text.

3.5 Data Analysis

(26)

1981). The scoring guide chosen as the criteria of scoring represents the basic aspect of writing. They are content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics aspects. In this study the scoring only focuses on organization aspect. Second, the scores were calculated by applying the statistical analysis of t-test to determine how mean of pre-test is different from the post-test score. The significance of the test was analyzed by using computer programme of Statistical Product and Service Solution (SPSS).

After calculating the data from pretest and posttest, the data from questionnaire were analyzed. The data were analyzed based on the frequency students’ answers. The result was calculated and interpreted into percentage.

3.5.1 Scoring Sheet for Writing Test

(27)

42

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu Table 3.2

The Scoring Standard of ESL Composition Profile

Aspect of Writing Range Score Criterion

Organization 20-18 Excellent to very good Fluent expression *ideas clearly stated/supported * Succinct * Well-organized * logical

sequencing cohesive.

17-14 Good to Average Somewhat choppy * loosely

organized but main ideas standout

* Limited support * logical but incomplete sequencing 13-10 _{Fair to Poor} _Non-fluent

(28)

* lacks logical sequencing and development

9-7 Very Poor Does not

communicate * No organization * or not enough to evaluate

Adopted from Jacob et al. (1981)

In this study, students’ writing texts were analyzed specifically on the organization aspect. The organization aspect assesses the students’ ability to introduce the beginning, establishes the connections and/or relationships between events, actions, details, and/or characters, and brings closure to the writing.

3.5.2 Pilot Test Data Analysis

In collecting the data, the researcher used a test as the research instrument. The test which was given before conducting the pretest named pilot test and it was given to six students in similar level which were not included in both experimental and control group. This test aimed to examine the validity and reliability of the instrument used in this study. It was conducted before doing pretest. If the students were able complete the test and write based on the given instruction then it can be concluded that the instrument can be used as pretest and posttest.

3.5.3 Pretest and Post test Data Analysis

(29)

44

Statistics 22.0 for Windows. The result from the test in experimental group and control group were used to know the effectiveness of using peer feedback technique in improving students’ narrative writing. It meant that the writer aimed to find a causative relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. In this study, the writer involved a large group of participants and randomly assigned them into either experimental group or control group in order to minimize unequal variances.

There are several conditions that need to be fulfilled in analyzing the result of the research. Those are the normality of data distribution, the homogeneity of the data and the calculation of t-test.

3.5.3.1 Normality of Distribution Test

Normal distribution test was calculated in purposed to investigate whether or not the distribution of pretest and posttest scores in groups were normally distributed. Shapiro-Wilk test formula in SPSS for Windows was used to analyze the normality of distributions. The steps are as follows:

1. Stating the hypothesis and setting the alpha level at 0.05 (two tailed test), H0 = the scores of the experimental group and the control group are

normally distributed.

H1 = the scores of the experimental group and control group are not normally distributed.

2. Analyzing the normality distribution using Shapiro-Wilk test formula in SPSS for Windows.

(30)

3.5.3.2 Variance Homogeneity Test

To examine whether or not the score of the research was homogeneous variance, the homogeneity of variance test was conducted. The statistical calculation of variance homogeneity test used ANOVA Lavene test formula in SPSS for Windows by following these steps:

1. Stating the hypothesis and setting the alpha level at 0.05 (two tailed test) H0 = the variance of the experimental group and the control group are

homogenous.

H1 = the variance of the experimental group and control group are not homogenous.

2. Analyzing the normality distribution using Lavene formula in SPSS for Windows.

3. Comparing the Asymp Sig. (probability) with the level of significance to test the hypothesis. If the Asymp Sig. is more than the level significance (0.05), the null hypothesis is accepted; the variance of the experimental and control group are homogenous.

3.5.3.3 T-test Calculation

In this study, the independent t-test in SPSS for Windows was used to investigate the difference between the means of experimental and control group. The procedures of the test are as follows:

1. Stating the hypothesis and setting alpha level at 0.05 (two tailed test)

(31)

46

H1 = there is significant difference between pretest mean for experimental group and control group.

2. Calculating t-test score using SPSS Statistics.

3. Comparing t-obtained and t-critical. If t-obtained>t-critical, it means that the hypothesis is rejected, there is a significant difference between two groups. In contrast, if t-obtained < t-critical, the hypothesis is not rejected; there is no significant difference between two groups.

3.5.3.4 Paired sample T-test

Paired t-test was used to find the differences between pretest on posttest in each group. In this study, the paired sample t-test was analyzed using computation SPSS Statistics. The steps are as follows.

1. Stating the hypothesis and setting alpha level at 0.05 (two tailed test)

H0 = there is no significant difference between students’ writing score in pretest and posttest score.

H1 = there is significant difference between students’ writing score in pretest and posttest score.

2. Calculating t-test score using SPSS Statistics.

(32)

3.5.4 Data Analysis on Questionnaire

Questionnaire used in this study in order to clarify the information and elaborate the data concerning the research question about the students’ responses toward the use of peer feedback technique in teaching and learning narrative text. The data collected from the questionnaire were classified into two major aspects. They are students’ responses toward writing subject and students’ responses toward the use of peer feedback technique in writing narrative text. The data from questionnaire were analyzed based on the frequency of students’ answer. The result will be calculated and interpreted into percentage.

The formula of percentage used is as follow: P =

P = percentage F = frequency

n = the sum of the sample 100 = constant

(33)

71

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter describes the research conclusion and suggestions as the result of this study. This chapter consists of two sections, the first section is conclusion and the second is suggestion.

5.1 Conclusions

In line with the research question, there are two conclusions made in this research. First, peer feedback technique improves students' skill in writing narrative text. Second, peer feedback technique was positively responded by the students. The elaboration of each point is given below.

First, peer feedback technique has been proven to be able to improve students’ skill in writing narrative text. This result was supported statistically by the t-test computation in the post test scores since the score of experimental group improved

significantly. Furthermore, based on the students’ paper it can be shown that students’

understanding of element within writing especially in organization aspect improved. Second, from the questionnaire analysis, it was found that students gave positive response toward the use of peer feedback technique in teaching narrative text. The result of the questionnaire shows that most of the students agreed that peer feedback technique made them more aware with the error or mistakes that they made in their writing, the correction given by their peer help them in revising their writing, and peer feedback technique improves their writing ability. Moreover, most students also need some guidelines and training before giving the feedback to help them giving appropriate feedback on their peers’ writing.

(34)

5.2 Suggestions

There are several suggestions which can be recommendations for other studies in the presents. These suggestions will be focused on two parts, suggestion for English teacher and for further researchers who are interested in this peer feedback technique.

In view of the positive results of the study, the researcher advises teachers to use peer feedback technique in their writing classrooms because the benefits are considerable for senior high school students. Although conducting peer response is not without problems, the time and effort required for decreasing difficulties are worth expending. Experience reveals that students should be given intensive training to enable them to participate fully in the process, and that they need to be taught appropriate language.

To ensure success, the teacher could bring the advantages inherent in peer feedback sessions to the awareness of the students by explicitly presenting all the benefits of peer feedback sessions in class. When conducting the sessions, it is also advisable for the teacher to vary some of the components of the sessions from time to time, for example, by changing the group size from pair to foursomes and, perhaps at times allowing students to have written copies of the essays. Some students may understand the presentation more fully and give more detailed comments with a written text in front of them.

(35)

73

(36)

Alwasilah, A. C and Alwasila, S.S. (2005). Pokoknya Menulis: Cara Baru Menulis Dengan

Metode Kolaborasi. Bandung: PT Kiblat Buku Utama.

Badger, Richard & White, Goodith. (1999). A process genre approach to teaching writing. Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Higher Colleges of Technology on May 31, 2013

Brown, H.D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Appproach to Language Pedagogy

(Second Edition). Prentice hall Inc: New Jersey.

Creemers, BPM & Scheerens, Jeep.(1994) Development in the educational effectiveness

research programme. Retrieved on May 20, 2013, from

doc.utwente.nl/.../1/Creemers94developments.pdf

Creswell, John W. (2012). Educational research : planning conducting and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (fourth ed). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Ertmer, Peggy A. (2007) Using Peer Feedback to Enhance the Quality of Student Online

Postings: An Exploratory StudyJournal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 12.

412–433

Emilia, Emi. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in A

Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. Dissertation to University of Melbourne:

Unpublished.

Farrah, Mohammed. (2012). The Impact of Peer Feedback on Improving the Writing skills

among Hebron University Students. Retrieved on January 7, 2013, from

http://scholar.najah.edu

Fraenkel, Jack R. Wallen, Norman E &Hyun, Helen H. (2012). How to design and evaluate

research in education (eight ed). New York : McGraw-Hill.

Gerot, L. and Wignell, P. (1994) Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney: Gerd Stabler Antipodean Educational Enterprises.

(37)

Hasan, M. K & Mohd, M.A. (2010). “Approaches to Writing in EFL/ESL Context: Balancing Product and process in Writing Class at Tertiary Level”. Retrieved on January 11, 2013, from www.nepjol.info/ndex.php./NELTA/article/download/3612/3823

Hattie, J & Timperley, Helen. (2010). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. 77.(1), 81–112.

Herrera, S. L. (2011). “Exploring the Role of Corrective Feedback in Second Language

Writing”. Retrieved on January 8, 2013, from www.bcatml.org/.../herrera.pdf

Hyland, Ken. (2001). Teaching and researching. Writing. Harlow : Longman.

Hyland, K & Hyland, K. (2001).” Sugaring the pill Praise and criticism in written feedback”.

Journal of Second Language Writing. 10, 185–212.

Hyland, K & Hyland, K. (2006). “Feedback on second language students’ writing”. Lang. Teach. 39, 77–95.

Jacobs, H., Zinkgraf, S., Wormuth, D., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. (1981). Testing ESL

Composition: A practical approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Kramp, M. K. (2004). “Exploring Life and Experience Through Narrative Inquiry”. Retrieved

on January 11, 2013, from www4.nau.edu/cee/ci.../6_kramp.pdf

Min, Hui-Tzu. (2006). “The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality”. Journal of Second Language Writing. 15, 118–141.

Mubarok, Husni. (2012). The Use of Peer Feedback Strategy to Motivate Students in Narrative

Text Writing. Retrieved on January 7, 2013, from

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej

Paltridge, Brian. (1996). Genre, text type, and the language learning classroom. ELT Journal 50 (3), 237-243.

Purnawarman, Pupung. (2011). IMPACTS OF TEACHER FEEDBACK ON ESL/EFL

STUDENTS’ WRITING: Impacts of Different Types of Teacher Corrective Feedback in Reducing Grammatical Errors on ESL/EFL Students’ Writing.

Puegphrom, P & Chiramanee, T. (2011). “The Effectiveness of Implementing Peer Assessment on Students’ Writing Proficiency”. Retrieved on March 7, 2013, from

http://sv.libarts.psu.ac.th/conference5/.../003.pdf.

(38)

Srichanyachon, Napaporn. (2012). “An investigation of university EFL students’ attitudes toward peer and teacher feedback”. Retrieved on January 7, 2013, from

http://academicjournals.org/ERR

Storch, Neomy. (2005). “Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’reflections”.

Journal of Second Language Writing. 14, 153–17.

Strijbos, et all. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing

revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency?. Learning and

Instruction Journal 20, 291-303.