THE COGNITIVE PROCESS OF THE SMA STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT MAJORS IN WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE TEXT.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

iii ABSTRACT

Safitri, Reni. Registration Number: 809112038. The Cognitive Process of the SMA Students of Different Majors in Writing Argumentative Text. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan 2012.

The purpose of this study is to describe the cognitive processes of students in writing argumentative text and to elaborate the reasons why the cognitive process happens in writing argumentative text the way it does. The subjects were the students of SMA Negeri 1 Padangsidimpuan from two different majors; they were five students of Natural Science Major and three students of Social Science Major. It was qualitative explanative research designs of which instrument are both writing test and interview. The researcher administered writing test to the subjects with five various topics in argumentative text form. A retrospective interview was conducted to the students after analyzing their argumentative writing in order to get the subjects’ cognitive process taking place during the writing of their argumentative text. The results of the data analysis showed that the cognitive processes of the students of the two majors were different in planning, translating and reviewing. In the stage of planning, all students of Natural Science major activate their cognitive process and did planning before writing. While students of Social Science major did not activate their cognitive process and did not do planning before writing a text. In the stage of translating, the students of Natural Science transform their experience and their thinking into their writing and directly in English language. While, the students of Social Science did not relate their experience into their thinking and write in Indonesian language first then translate into English language. In the stage of reviewing, the students of Natural Science in writing Argumentative text did reviewing after finishing writing a text while the students of Social Science did not do reviewing after finishing writing a text. It seemed that they were unaware of the possibilities for revision in their texts.

(6)

iii ABSTRAK

Safitri, Reni. Nomor Registrasi: 809112038. The Cognitive Process of the SMA Students of Different Majors in Writing Argumentative Text. Sebuah Thesis. Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris. Universitas Negeri Medan. 2012.

Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk menjelaskan proses kognitif siswa dalam menulis teks argumentative dan memaparkan alasan kognitif siswa seperti itu ketika menulis teks argumentative tersebut. Subyeknya adalah delapan orang siswa SMU Negeri 1 Padangsidimpuan; lima orang siswa IPA kelas tiga dan tiga orang siswa IPS kelas tiga. Kajian ini menggunakan desain penelitian kualitatif yang instrumennya adalah test menulis dan wawancara. Peneliti memberikan test menulis berupa teks argumentative dengan memberikan lima topik yang berbeda. Wawancara terhadap subyek dilakukan setelah tulisan teks argumentatif siswa dari dua jurusan yang berbeda yaitu IPA dan IPS dianalisa. Hal ini dilakukan untuk memperoleh alasan subyek menulis dan mengekspresikan argument teks argumentative seperti itu. Hasil kajian ini adalah: (1) Ditemukan bahwa dalam menulis teks argumentative teks semua siswa IPA melakukan planning sebelum menulis, (2) Ditemukan bahwa siswa dalam menulis teks argumentative menghubungkan pengalamannya dengan apa yang dia pikirkan dan langsung menulisnya dalam bahasa Inggris. (3) Ditemukan bahwa dalam menulis teks argumentative semua siswa IPA melakukan reviewing setelah selesai menulis teks. (4) Ditemukan bahwa dalam menulis teks argumentative semua siswa IPS tidak melakukan planning sebelum menulis. (5) Ditemukan bahwa dalam menulis teks argumentative semua siswa IPS tidak menghubungkan pengalamannya dengan apa yang dipikirkannya dan cenderung menterjemahkan kata untuk mendapatkan makna selama menulis teks dengan menulis bahasa Indonesia terlebih dahulu baru ke bahasa Inggris. (6) Ditemukan bahwa dalam menulis teks argumentative semua siswa IPS tidak melakukan reviewing setelah menulis teks.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all the writer would like to express her very special deepest gratitude to Allah SWT for blessing and love which is guiding her in completing this thesis. Clearly, this thesis could not have been written without the many visible and invisible contributions from her advisors. The writer would like to thank:

To Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., as her first advisor for sharing his concern from the beginning of this thesis, valuable time in giving the comments and constructive criticism in completing this thesis.

To Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd., as her second advisor for spending her time in giving her ideas in the process of finishing this thesis.

To Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd. as the Head of the English Applied Linguistic and also as her reviewer, Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., and Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M.Hum. as also reviewers and examiners for their valuable feedback and contribution.

To her parents, Abu Kosim Harahap, BA., and Mainun Siregar, S.Pd., for their love and prayers to her for the success of her study.

To her brothers, Taufik and Mukhtar and sister Rahma for their support and endless love in her life.

Finally, to her lovely friends, K’ Ita, Bu Mis, K’ Rahmi, K’Mas, K’ Cici, and Vivi, thanks for the time and the great working together. I’m happy to know you all.

Medan, 20 Januari 2013

Reni Safitri

(8)

INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Background of the Study

English has become an important language in the age of globalization. It is a medium of communication among people throughout the world. In Indonesia, students learn English as a foreign language (EFL). They are taught four skills of English: listening, reading, speaking, and writing. The national goal of teaching English in Indonesia is to develop the students’

ability in communication both in oral or written form. Of all the four skills, writing has become more important in the era of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL). Writing as one of the language skills must be taught in English classes especially Senior High School students. Through the teaching and learning of writing the students are expected to be able to produce a text well. This is in line with the objective of writing instruction in Senior High School, to develop the students’ writing skill in order they can

write into English effectively and accurately.

At the level of Senior High school, generally it has two majors, Natural Science major (IPA) and Social Science major (IPS). The students of the two majors have different cognitive process in doing something. Cognitive process is something happening in the students’ mind. However,

(13)

2 students of Social Science (IPS) do. They propose that the IPA students will have best quality in writing argumentative text than the IPS students do. We could see that the problem did not lie in the cognitive abilities of the Natural Science (IPA) students are better than Social Science (IPS) students have. However, it is caused of the different way of their cognitive process of processing something. The ways they express their ideas is not similar and depend on their characteristics.

According to Stenbergh in Zabu & Davia (2004) the students who study in Natural science tend to think logically and based on the fact. He also categorized students who study in Natural Science (IPA) major into conservative. In this category, they like adhering to existing rules and procedures, minimize changes, avoid ambiguous situations as far as possible,

and prefer familiarity in life and work.

Actually, the students of Natural Science (IPA) major have such a way of

thinking because their activities during learning in the classroom are engaging

(14)

3 _{Meanwhile, according to Scharfersmen in Synder and Mark (2008),} students who study in Social Science major are accustomed to explain something based on social phenomena. It is in line with Stenberg in Zabu (2004) that proposed the students who study in Social Science major tend to memorize and recall information. Related to the learning of thinking styles, Stenberg in Zabu (2004) also categorized students who study in social major into liberal. In this category, they like surpassing existing rules and procedures and attempt to maximize changes. In addition, they also seek or

are at least comfortable with ambiguous situations, and accept to certain

degree unfamiliarity in life and work.

Actually, the students of Social Science (IPS) major have such a way of

thinking because their activities or the subjects during learning in the classroom are engaging them in memorizing and arguing toward the social phenomena that existing in the social life. They also consider of others’ opinion or ideas as they progress through a discussion and they respect the differences as it is accepted by the society. The students of Social Science act like politician who generally good in arguing in spoken and therefore want to communicate their ideas to other people directly. Finally, students of social studies programs construct a knowledge base and attitudes from academic disciplines as specialized ways of viewing reality. They begin from a specific perspective and apply unique processes for knowing to the study of reality.

(15)

4 expect the educational system to impart to students during their schooling. There is a national expectation that students become able to comprehend and think critically within a domain. On the other hand, argumentative text is kind of text in which the process of making what writers or speakers think clear to themselves and to others are organized systematically. As proposed by Nippold, Ward-Lonergan, & Fanning in Chase (2011), argumentative text requires the writer to embrace a particular point of view and try to convince the readers in order to have the same perspective. The writers also have to arise the problems and attempt to map language onto his or her own thoughts and feelings as well as the expectations of the reader. It is in line with Saito’s opinion (2010) that the production of argumentative text is a reflection of cognitive process of problem solving. Intraprawat in Saito (2010) stated that in order to make an argument in argumentative text, the writers need to express their point of view on a controversial issue or claim, support it with evidence including facts or their own opinions in order to convince the readers.

(16)

5 reflected in their argumentative text and at last, we should realize that every student has same opportunity and no major is better than another major.

1.2 Research Problems

In relation to the background, the problems are formulated as the following:

1. How do students’ cognitive processes happen in writing argumentative text?

2. Why does the process happen the way it is?

1.3 The Objectives of the Study

Related to the problems, the objectives of the study are:

1. To explain the cognitive processes of students in writing argumentative text.

2. To elaborate the reasons why a cognitive process happens in writing argumentative text.

1.4 The Scope of the Study

The scope of this study is the cognitive processes’ theory; cognitive processes based on the students major which consist of Natural Science major (IPA) and Social Science major (IPS). Cognitive processes’ theory is related

(17)

6 intellectual process by which knowledge is gained from perception or ideas. The theory of writing is elaborated with the theory of argumentative text. Thus, this study focused on the proving whether majors effectively affected cognitive processes of the students in writing an argumentative text.

1.5 The Significances of the Study

The findings of the study are expected to be useful for theoretical and practical aspects. Theoretically, the research finding is expected to enrich the theories of writing strategies, specifically in writing genre text.

Practically, since this study focused on students of different majors, Natural Science Major (IPA) and Social Science Major (IPS) and their cognitive process in writing genre text, this study hopefully will help the SMA students both IPA and IPS majors to construct an effective argumentative text by using their individual writing processes in appropriate context of genre. Besides, the teacher should concern of these differences; they can help learners of the both majors in different ways in writing a text by concentrating on learners’ characteristics and provide successful learning

(18)

107 Chapter V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

After analyzing the data, the conclusions can be stated as the following:

5.1.1 The Cognitive process taking place in students of Natural Science and Social Science is different. The difference occurs in the three stages; in planning, translating, and reviewing.

5.1.2 The cognitive processes of the students of the two majors were different becaused they have different ability in the proficiency of writing ability, language proficiency related to L2 oral expression ability, L2 vocabulary comprehension ability, and L2 discourse comprehension ability.

5.2 Suggestions

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

5.2.1 The teacher should encourage students to make full use of their L1 writing ability and expertise and writing strategies to facilitate their L2 writing to both students of the two majors. Due to the differences in rhetorical features of the two languages, teacher should introduce the English rhetorical features in the class especially argumentative text.

(19)

108 writing quality, there is some different effort or approach that should be done related to the students’ major. As a cognitive process, writing quality can be improved by having more ideas or information in the writers’

(20)

109 References

Alamargot, Denis & Levrave, Jean- L. 2009. The Study of professional writing. A Joint contribution from cognitive psychology and genetic criticism. Journal of Psychology. Vol.6, No.2.2009.

Barab, Sasha & Hay,E. Kenneth. 2000. Doing Science at the Elbows of Experts: Issues Related to the Science Apprenticeship Camp. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Biasutti, Michele. 1999. Cognitive Process in Composition. Universita di Padova, Italia Journal. Vol.19, No.16,1999.

Chase, Beth Jillian. 2011. An Analysis of the Argumentative Writing Skills of Academically Underprepared College Students. Unpublished Disertation, Columbia University.

Chaisiri, Tawatcihai. 2010. Implementing a Genre Pedagogy to the Teaching of Writing in a University Context in Thailand. Language Education in Asia Journal, Vol 1.No.6,2010.

Chen, Wain-Chin. 2007. Some Literature Review on the Comparison of the Chinese Qi-Cheng-Zhuan-He Writing Model and the Western Problem- Solution Schema. Whampoa- An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol.52, No.2,2007.

ETS. 2008. Cognitive Models of Writing: Writing Proficiency as a Complex Integrated Skill. Educational Testing Service Journal. Vol.5, No.3, 2008. Fulkerson, D, Nichols, & Snow. 2011. Expanding the Model of Item Writing

Expertise: Cognitive Processes and Requisite Knowledge Structures. National Science Foundation Journal, Vol 7, No.3, 2011.

Galbraith, David. 2009. Cognitive Models of Writing. German foreign language -journal, Vol 2.No.3.2009.

Halpern, D.F. (2004). A Cognitive-Process Taxonomy for Sex Differences Cognitive Abilities. Journal American Psychological Science.Vol 13, No 4, 2004.

Hyland, Ken. 2006. A Genre Description of the Argumentative Essay. RELC Journal, Vol 21, No.1, 2006.

(21)

110 Kellogg, R.T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental

perspective. Journal of writing research, Vol 1, No.1,2008.

Kieft,M, Rijlaarsdam,& van den bergh. 2006. Writing as a learning tool: Testing the role of students’ writing strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education Vol.1, No.17,2006.

Kingfairgod. 2008. Psycological Attributes.Journal of Psychology. Vol 3, No.4, 2008.

Kyeong Hah Roh & Halani, Aviva. Analysis of Undergraduate Students’ Cognitive Processes When Writing Proof about Inequalities. Preliminary Research Report Arizona State University.

Leager, Clair. 2005. Fostering Scientific Habit of Mind. Iowa Science Teachers Journal, Vol 32, No.4,2005.

Liu Xinghua. 2010. An Investigation of Chinese University EFL Learners’ Knowledge about Writing. Language Studies Working Papers. Vol.2, No.51, 2010.

National Council for the Social Studies. “What Is Social Studies?” Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies. Retrieved from WhatIsSocialStudies.Pdf January 3, 2012, from WhatIsSocialStudies.Pdf Olive, Thierry. 2004. Working Memory in Writing: Empirical Evidence From the

Dual-Task Technique. European Psychologist, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2004, pp. 32-42 Hogrefe & Huber Publishers

Saito, Siwaporn. 2010. An Analysis of Argumentative Essay of Thai Third- Year English Majors Instructed By the Integrated Process- Genre Approach. Unpublished master thesis, Srinakharinwirot University, Thailand.

Shih- Chieh Chien. (2005). A Cognitive Analysis of the Relationships between Chinese EFL Writers’ Strategy Use and Writing Achievement Performance. Retrieved May 13, 2011, from http://3- chien.pdf

Synder, Lisa Gueldenzoph & Snyder, Mark J.2008. Teaching Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Skills. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, Vol L, No 2.2008

The Ontario Curriculum. 2004. Social Studies, History and Geography. Retroeved May 13, 2011, from http://www.edu.gov.on.

(22)

111 Yanbin Lu. 2010. Cognitive Factors Contributing to Chinese EFL Learners’ L2 Writing Performance in Timed Essay Writing. Unpublished Disertation, Georgia State University, Georgia.

Zabu, Vlasta & Davia Kobal. 2004. Psychology Science Journal.Vol 46, No,156. 2004.