xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page of Title ……… i
Page of Approval ……… ii
Dedication ……….. iii
Declaration ………... iv
Preface ……… v
Acknowledgements ………. vi
Abstract ……….. viii
Table of Contents ………... xi
List of Tables ………. xii
List of Figures ………... xiii
List of Appendices ………... xiv
Chapter I Introduction 1.1 Research Background ….………... 1
1.2 Limitation of the Problems ………... 3
1.3 Research Problems ………... 3
1.4 Hypothesis ………... 4
1.5 Research Objectives ……… 4
1.6 Research Significance ………. 4
1.7 Definition of Key Terms ………. 5
1.8 Thesis Organization ……… 5
Chapter II Review of Related Literature 2.1 The Nature of Writing ……… 7
2.2 The Purpose of Writing ………. 9
2.3 Teaching Writing Skill at Secondary School (SMP/MTs) …… 11
xii
2.5 Genre-based Approach (GBA) ………. 17
2.5.1 Stages in the Genre-based Approach (GBA) …………. 20
2.5.2 Text Types in Secondary School (SMP/MTs) ….…... 21
2.5.2.1 Descriptive ………... 22
2.5.2.2 Narrative ………... 22
2.5.2.3 Procedure ……… 22
2.5.2.4 Report ……….. 23
2.5.2.5 Recount ………... 23
2.6 Webbing Technique ……… 24
2.7 Related Studies ……… 28
2.8 Conclusion of Chapter II ………... 30
Chapter III Methodology 3.1 Research Design ………... 32
3.2 Research variables ………... 34
3.3 Research Site ………... 34
3.4 Population and sample ………... 37
3.5 Research Instruments ………... 38
3.6 Research Procedures ……… 39
3.6.1 Administering Try Out Test ………... 39
3.6.2 Administering Pretest ………... 40
3.6.3 Conducting Treatment ……….. 40
3.6.4 Administering Posttest ………... 46
3.6.5 Distributing Questionnaire ………... 46
3.7 Data Collection Technique ……….. 47
3.8 Data Analysis ……… 49
3.8.1 Analyzing Try Out Data ……… 49
xiii
3.9 Conclusion of Chapter III ………. 52
Chapter IV Research Findings and Discussion 4.1 Testing the Instrument ………... 55
4.2 Pretest Result ………... 57
4.3 Posttest Result ………. 59
4.4 The Experimental Group Scores ………. 62
4.5 The Control Group Scores ………... 64
4.6 Questionnaire Analysis ……… 73
4.7 Conclusion of Chapter IV ……… 75
Chapter V Conclusion and Suggestion 5.1 Conclusion ………... 77
5.2 Suggestions ……… 79
Bibliography………. 80
Appendices ………... 84
1 CAHPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Background
As one the two productive skills in learning English after speaking, writing is hard enough for Islamic junior high school students to master. Some research findings indicate that the students’ writing ability is not satisfactory yet. Hariyani (1990, in Suryawan, 2008) conducted a study which aimed to evaluate and identify the students’ ability in achieving coherence within paragraph. The findings of the study reveal that the students’ ability in writing a coherent paragraph was very poor. Katilie (2003) finds that the students had a poor ability in writing a composition in English. The reason of the students’ disappointing writing ability is the practices of inappropriate teaching strategy in class. Syakir (2003, in Suryawan, 2008) finds that the students’ ability in English writing is still far from the target stated in the curriculum. From the previous findings above, it can be concluded that there are some problems found in the teaching of writing.
2
Writing practice has not been provided satisfactorily so that students lack exercises and motivation for self-development. As a result, many students complain and find difficulties in writing.
According to Byrne (1988: 4), writing is difficult for students because they are required to write on their own writing without any interaction or feedback. He further states that, in writing, the students have to compose their writing using their own choice of sentence structure, and organize their own idea in such a way that they can be understood by the reader.
In the existing teaching and learning process, writing activities are mostly dominated by arranging jumbled words to be a sentence or jumbled sentences to be a paragraph and completing a dialogue or passage. The students are also asked to write a simple paragraph using their own words without their teacher’s assistance. As a result, it is difficult for the students to express their ideas on paper. The students are not able to construct words into a sentence and arrange the sentences to become a good paragraph. This condition influences the students’ ability in writing paragraph (Suryawan, 2008).
3
the central idea and also supporting ideas to make simple sentences and arrange them in a good chronological order to make a recount paragraph.
1.2 Limitation of the Problem
In order to make the research focuses more on a certain problems, the researcher limits the study on the use of webbing technique to improve the students’ ability in writing recount paragraphs compared with guided writing and the ways how webbing technique facilitate the students with valuable support in writing recount paragraphs.
1.3 Statement of the Problems
4 1.4 Hypothesis
In this study, the researcher states null hypothesis as follows: There is no significant different result between teaching writing recount paragraph through webbing technique and teaching writing recount paragraph through guided writing.
1.5Research Objectives
The study is conducted to find out 1) the effectiveness of the ‘webbing’ technique in improving students’ ability in writing recount paragraphs, 2) if teaching writing recount paragraphs through webbing technique achieve better result compared with teaching writing through guided writing, and 3) the ways how the ‘webbing’ provides students with valuable support in writing recount paragraphs.
1.6Research Significance
5 1.7Definition of Key Terms
To avoid misunderstanding of the key terms used in this study, thus, they are defined as follows. First, webbing is a kind of technique in teaching prewriting by generating ideas in which the topic or the core is written down in the centre of blank paper and supporting ideas are written down around it in balloons or bubbles where sub-core(s) can be made (Sumarsono, 2007).
Second, recount is a piece of text that retells past events, usually in the order in which they occurred (Derewianka, 1990: 15). Generally a recount text begins with an orientation and then unfolds with a series of events. The purpose of a recount text is to provide the audience with the description of what occurred and when it occurred (Anderson and Anderson, 1998: 24), to retell past events for informing or entertaining (Gerot and Wignell, 1994: 194), or to tell what happened (Derewianka, 1990: 15).
1.8 Thesis Organization
6
Chapter III: Methodology of the Research. This third chapter discusses the
methodology of the research which consists of research design, research subject, research questions, research method, data collection method, and data analysis. Chapter IV: Discussion and Findings. The fourth chapter contains the discussion
32
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter mainly contains the discussion on the research methodology. It includes research design, research variables, research site, research subject, research instruments, technique of data collection, and technique of data analysis.
3.1Research Design
Educational researches are usually conducted in two forms of methodologies; quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. Each of those methodologies has certain strengths and weaknesses. Based on the field of the research, the study was conducted quantitatively in the form of quasi experimental design.
The reason of choosing the experimental research was that it is one of the most powerful research methodologies; experimental research is the best way to set up cause-and-effect relationship among variables (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 267). Furthermore, Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 7) state that experimental research is the most conclusive scientific method since it actually establishes different treatments and studies their effects. The results of the experimental research are able to lead the most clear-cut interpretations.
33
factorial design. Weak experimental design consists of the one-shot case study, the one-group pretest-posttest design, the static-group comparison design and the static-group pretest-posttest design. True experimental design consists of the randomized posttest-only group design, the randomized pretest-posttest group design, the randomized Solomon four-group design, and random assignment with matching. While quasi-experimental design consists of the matching-only design, counterbalanced design, and time series design (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 266-280). A research which is carried out in the form of quasi-experimental design does not need to include of random assignment; it only needs other technique to control threats to internal validity (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 277).
Since the sample of the study were two classes (experimental and control groups) out of seven classes of eighth year students of MTs Negeri Kendal the research was conducted in Quasi-Experimental Designs with the formula as follows:
E T1 X T2
C T1 T2 (Hatch and Farhady, 1982) E: experimental group
C: control group T1: Pre test T2: Post test
X: treatment (teaching writing recount paragraph trough webbing technique)
34
disadvantages of the use of webbing technique. Other advantages of the questionnaire were to know whether the students like the technique and if webbing technique gave valuable support for the students in writing recount paragraphs. These research instruments were discussed further in 3.4.
3.2Research Variables
There were two kinds of variables in this research. They were independent variable and dependent one. Independent variable is variable which is chosen by the researcher in order to assess the possible effect(s) on one or more other variables (Hatch & Farhady, 1982: 15). The independent variable in this study was webbing technique as the teaching technique since it was the major variable that was investigated and was measured by the researcher.
The dependent variable is the variable that the independent variable is presumed to affect (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 43). The dependent variable in this study was the students’ writing score as it was the variable which was observed and was measured to determine the effect of the independent variable.
3.3 Research Site
35
conducting his study such as easiness of the bureaucratic procedures and supports from the colleagues. Besides he understands well the environment and the students as well.
The researcher conducted his research in nine meetings for each group. The schedule of the research treatment could be figured out as in tables 3.1 and 3.2 as follows:
Table 3.1
Treatment Schedule of the Experimental Group
36
All of the treatments given to the experimental group as scheduled at table 3.1 above were conducted through the Genre-based Approach, especially the use of webbing technique which was always employed in the third stage, Joint Construction of Text (JCoT) in which the students worked to make recount paragraphs in groups and the last stage, Independent Construction of Text (ICoT) when they had to make recount paragraphs individually.
Table 3.2
Research Schedule of the Control Group
DATE TEACHING
May, 20th, 2009 Unforgettable Experience 2 Guided Writing 2 x 40’
May 22nd, 2009 Interesting Experience 1 Guided Writing 2 x 40’
May 27th, 2009
Interesting
Experience 2 Guided Writing 2 x 40’
37
As what has been done in the experimental group, the researcher also applied Genre-based Approach in giving treatments to the control group. The use of guided writing was in the third stage, JCoT in which the students worked to wrote recount paragraphs in groups and in the last stage, ICoT when they had to compose their own recount paragraphs.
3.4 Population and Sample
Population can be defined as a group to whom the researcher would like to generalize the results of the study (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 93). The population of the research were the eight year students of MTs Negeri Kendal which consisting of seven classes. Each class consists of forty four students.
38
3.5 Research Instruments
Fraenkel and Wallen, (2007: 113) define instrumentation as the whole process of preparing to collect data in a research. There were two kinds of instruments which were employed in this research. They were writing tests and questionnaire. The score of the students’ tests was used to know the effectiveness of webbing technique in attaining language support to the students to improve their ability in writing recount paragraphs. They were collected through writing tests, pretest and posttest which were conducted to both experimental and control group.
The instrument of the study was a short writing test instruction. To help the students in composing recount paragraphs more easily, the researcher gave additional questions to lead them finding out ideas before writing. The instrument was as stated in figure 3.1 as follows.
Figure 3.1 Research Instrument
Write a short recount paragraph based on your experience on your last “Lebaran” Day! You may write your paragraph by answering these questions: 1. What did you do on the last “Lebaran” Day?
2. Where did you go on the last “Lebaran” Day?
39
To assess the students’ writing the researcher used the concept of story assessment criteria proposed by Rose (2008: 10) which was discussed further in 3.7, Data Collection Technique.
3.6Research Procedures
The researcher arranged some procedures to make the study ran in a well-organized way. The steps of conducting the research were as follows. First, the researcher tried out the instruments to test its validity and its reliability. Second, the researcher gave pretest to both experimental group and control group. The result of the test was collected and was analyzed to get preliminary data about the students’ ability in writing recount paragraph. Third, the researcher gave the sample treatment, teaching them writing recount paragraphs through webbing technique for the experimental group and guided writing for the control one. Fourth, the researcher gave them posttest to find out whether both groups got
different result or not. The last, the researcher distributed questionnaire to the experimental group. Each of those steps could be explained as follows.
3.6.1 Administering Try out Test
40
appropriateness of the instruments with the students’ background of knowledge. Try out test was conducted to the VIII D students consisting of 44 students. It was administered on May 5th 2009.
3.6.2 Administering Pretest
After calculating the result of the try out test and finding the validity and the reliability of the instrument, the researcher conducted pretest to the experimental and the control groups. The test was carried out on May 7th, 2009. As many as 44 students for each group were present. The pretest was intended to know whether the ability of the two groups were equal or not in writing recount paragraphs.
3.6.3 Conducting Treatments
Shortly after the researcher got the result of the pretest and found out that there was no significant different score mean between the two groups, he gave treatment to the samples of the study. The treatment was conducted seven meetings for each group in which each meeting lasted for 2 X 40 minutes.
41
discussing what recount was. The teacher explained recount as a text type and its characteristics. The other activities were giving examples of recount texts and discussing them with the students. Some students raised several questions dealing with the recount and its differences between recount and narrative text.
The second meeting was carried out on May 20th 2009 for the control group and on May 22nd 2009 for the experimental group. The second theme given was unforgettable experience 2. All students were present on the second meeting. Many students proposed questions dealing on the way of constructing good sentences into good and correct paragraphs. Some of them admitted that they often got difficulties in making English sentences. Other important activity on this meeting was discussing certain chronological order words such as first, second, third, next, and finally which often use in recount text.
The third meeting presented interesting experience 1 as the theme which was conducted on May 22nd 2009 for the control group and on May 25th 2009 for the experimental group. There were five students (two students in the control group and three students in the experimental group) were absent on the third meeting. The activity of the third meeting was focused on discussing past tense formation “with be” and “without be”. Many students made mistakes in using adjective words in the sentences. For instances, “I very happy that day” instead of “I was very happy ….”, “It fun” instead of “It was fun” etcetera.
42
focused on the way how to organize sentences into good recount paragraphs. The researcher also explained the plural nouns as the main discussion of the meeting. There were many students who did not know the plural forms of certain nouns, especially irregular plural nouns which do not use common rule of adding “s” or “es” in certain nouns such as mice, children, sheep, and oxen.
The fifth meeting was conducted on May 28th 2009 for control group and on May 29th 2009 for the experimental group. The theme on this meeting was holiday experience 1. The main activity on this meeting was discussing possessive adjectives and possessive pronoun. The teacher explained the possessive adjectives from the beginning since there were many students who did not clear yet with the use of possessive adjectives and possessive pronouns. Many sentences were made to make the students clearer about the use of possessive adjectives for examples. These are some of their incorrect sentences; “They played in the beach with they friends” instead of “They played on the beach with their
friends”, “We had to keep some goods of our” instead of “We had to keep some
goods of ours” etcetera.
43
producing sentences since many students still used certain subjects (e.g person names) more than once in short paragraphs or even in the same sentences for instance “My friends and I visited some tourist resort in Yogyakarta. First, My friends and I visited Borobudur in Magelang regent” instead of “My friends and I
visited some tourist resorts in Yogyakarta. First, we visited Borobudur temple in
Magelang regency”.
The seventh meeting was carried out on June 3rd 2009 for both groups. This was the last meeting (before the posttest was given) in which the teacher reviewed the whole six meetings before. The activity on this meeting was dominated by the teacher to ask the students everything they had not clear yet about recount text, past verbs, and the difficulties the students faced after they were treated six meetings. The teacher also gave more recount texts as examples to be discussed again to lead them to reach the conclusion of the recount text.
The only difference between the two groups was the technique given to the students. Particular treatment was given to the experimental group, the students were taught by webbing technique. On other hand, the control group was taught by guided writing; that is a teaching strategy that can be used to extend and develop text written during writing.
44
some “wh questions” such as what, who, where, when, which and also how. These questions were very important for the students especially when they got writing block and they could not find out the ideas. Sometimes the students got the ideas but they could not express them in English.
To give similar treatments to the control group, the researcher employed guided writing that is a strategy used to scaffold the students by giving some stimuli questions to lead the students to develop their writing. Brown (2004: 234) calls these questions guided writing stimuli. The purpose of using guided writing was to provide instruction and assistance to children while they are writing (Tompkins, 2008: 28). Though the teacher is allowed to help the students by giving some stimuli questions or structured lessons, it is the students themselves who have to write the writing. The difference between webbing technique and guided writing is on the time they are employed. In webbing technique teacher gives questions in prewriting to find out ideas as many as possible before writing while in guided writing stimuli questions are given along the writing process when the students need help.
The researcher employed four stages in teaching as proposed in GBA the researcher discussed before. The steps were building knowledge of the field (BKoF), modelling of text (MoT), joint construction of text (JCoT) and independent construction of text (ICoT).
45
giving some examples. The purpose of employing this stage was to develop students’ background knowledge of the recount text.
On the second stage, MoT, the teacher gave example text as a model of recount text. Other activities on this stage were asking the students to read and explore the text, discussing and identifying the topic sentence, discussing and identifying the purpose of the text, and discussing and identifying the language features of the text given. Teacher could give more example texts if the students asked him to. The purpose of this stage was to develop students’ understanding of recount text, its purposes and its characteristics as well.
The first activity on the third stage, JCoT was grouping students (of four). Other activities conducted in this stage were asking them to work in groups to make web to find out core idea and supporting ideas before writing, asking students to make sentences based on the webs they have mad and arranged them into good paragraphs. The purpose of the activities in this stage was developing students’ writing skill that was to construct recount paragraphs within groups.
In the last stage, ICoT, the students were asked to make web and construct their own recount paragraphs based the web they have made individually. The purpose of the activities of this stage was to develop students’ writing skill, to produce recount paragraphs individually.
46 3.6.4 Administering Posttest
Posttest was conducted after the whole treatments had been given to both groups. It was carried out on June 5th, 2009. Posttest was conducted to measure the influence of the treatment, whether it gave significance improvement or not. The test was the same with the pretest. As many as 88 students or all samples could take part in the posttest.
3.6.5 Distributing Questionnaire
As previously mentioned that questionnaire was administered to see the students’ responses toward the use of webbing technique in teaching writing recount paragraphs. The questionnaire was distributed to the experimental group only after they did the posttest. The researcher gave the students other additional time to distribute the questionnaire in order to give the same length time with the control group.
3.7 Data Collection Techniques
47
Figure 3.2
Story assessment criteria (taken from Rose 2008: 10)
Purpose Is the story genre appropriate for the writer’s purpose? Staging Does it go through appropriate stages?
Field Is the story plot imaginative, interesting and coherent?
Tenor Is the reader engaged with characters’ reactions and reflections?
Mode Is the creative use of literate descriptive language and metaphors appropriate for the level?
Phases Are story phases used creatively to build problems and reactions, and to describe, comment, reflect?
Lexis Are people, things and places followed through coherently to build up context?
Conjunctions Are logical relations between each step clear, e. g. shifts back and forward in time, comparisons, cause?
Reference Is it clear who or what is referred to, e. g. in dialogue?
Appraisal Conscious control of appraisal, such as feelings, judgments of people and appreciation of things and places
Grammar Are grammatical conventions used appropriately? Spelling Is spelling accurate?
Punctuation Is punctuation used appropriately? Presentation Is the layout clear and attractive?
Is it well organized/presented?
48 Figure 3.3
Scoring form of the students’ writing
No
The numerical score of each aspect ranges from 0 to 3. 0 means there is no evidence of the criterion, 3 means it is the top standard, and in between as 1 and 2 (Rose 2008:14). Since the assessment consisted of fourteen aspects, the highest total score was 42 (14x3). The final score was gained by dividing the obtained score by the maximum score (42) and the result was multiplied by 100.
The complete students’ writing scores could be found in appendices 7 and 8 (try out), appendices 12 and 13 for pretest and posttest of the experimental group, appendices 15 and 16 for pretest and posttest of the control group.
49
instruments. In a questionnaire, the subjects respond the questions by writing or marking answer sheet (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 126). The questionnaire was employed to know the advantages of using webbing technique for the experimental group.
The questionnaire consists of 10 items of open and closed questionnaire (the complete questions of the questionnaire could be looked at appendix 6 of this study). The reason of using this kind of questionnaire was to gain more complete data about the students’ responses toward the use of webbing technique in writing recount paragraphs.
3.8 Data Analysis
3.8.1 Analyzing Try Out Data
50
The criteria of the validity test as stated by Arikunto (2002: 147) are 0.800
– 1.00 (very high), 0.600 – 0.800 (high), 0.400 – 0.600 (moderate), 0.200 – 0.400
(low), and 0.00 – 0.200 (very low).
The second step the researcher conducted was to test the reliability of the
instrument. Reliability refers to the consistency of scores or answers from one
administration of an instrument to another, and from one set of items to another
(Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007: 150). While Hatch and Farhady (1982: 244) define
reliability as the extent to which a test produces consistent results when
administered under similar condition. To test the reliability of an instrument,
Cornbach Alpha formula or the Kuder-Richardson formula can be employed.
The criteria of the reliability test are above 7.00 (very high), 0.41 – 0.70
(high), 0.21 – 0.40 (moderate), and 0.00 – 0.20 (low) (Arikunto, 2002: 110).
3.8.2 Analyzing Dat ata of Pretest and Posttest
tative data of the research consisted of prete l score of the tests were gained by dividing the score (42) and then multiply it with 100. T webbing technique toward students’ writing a
uld be calculated by using SPSS or the follow
f experimental group f control group error of mean
f the analysis was used to test the stated hypo : 121) as follows:
the H0 (null-hypothesis) the α level
ing the robserved and rtable
robserved is less than rtable , it accepts the
null-e robserved is greater than rtable , it rejects the d continue.
which alternative hypothesis is more logical
52
6. Making interpretation and conclusion.
To find out the way the teacher taught writing and students’ response toward the implementation of webbing technique through questionnaire, the researcher employed the following formula:
F
P= x 100 N
P = Number of percentage F = Total number of scores N = Number of questions
3.9 Conclusion of Chapter III
The study was carried out at MTs Negeri Kendal in the quasi experimental design. It was meant to find out the different result of the use of webbing technique employed in the experimental group compared with guided writing in employed in control group. The researcher also distributed questionnaire to the experimental group to support the result of the main statistical data obtained from pretest and posttest. The second purpose of giving questionnaire was to find out the advantages of the webbing technique.
53
77
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
This chapter consists of two main parts; 1) the conclusions of the research and 2) the suggestions for English teachers and for other researchers who would carry out similar study. They are based on the research findings and discussion in the previous chapter
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
The aim of the study, in general, is to find out the effectiveness of the webbing technique in improving students’ ability in writing recount paragraphs. The pretest and posttest were administered to both experimental and control groups. However, particular treatment, that was the use of webbing technique given to the experimental group only, while the control group was taught by guided writing. The researcher used SPSS 12.0 for windows to analyze the result of pretest and posttest scores.
At the beginning of the study it could be seen that the students of MTs Negeri Kendal as novice writers got some difficulties in writing such as
78
Minimal) or Minimum score Criteria or minimum target score which had been
stated in the beginning of the academic year, that is 60. From those pretest results for both groups the researcher found that there is no significant difference mean between the two. In other words, the students’ ability in writing recount paragraphs between the two groups is relatively similar.
On the other hand, after several different treatments were given, the researcher employed webbing technique in experimental group and guided writing in control groups, there was a difference mean of the posttest. The experimental group reaches 61.27 in mean, while the control group reaches only 54.98. Based on the computation, this difference mean is statistically significant (tobt 5.686 > tcrit 1.980). In short, it could be concluded that the use of Webbing technique gave more significant improvement compared with guided writing to the result of the students’ ability in writing recount paragraphs.
79
5.2 SUGGESTIONS
Based on the research findings above, the researcher raises some suggestions for both English teachers and other researchers. Since the result of the research shows us that the use of webbing technique is effective enough for attaining support for the students in writing recount paragraphs, the writer suggests English teachers to apply this technique in teaching their students writing recount text or at other kinds of genres taught in Junior High School, especially narrative and report.
Based on the result of the questionnaire administered for the experimental group the researcher suggests English teachers to find effective ways in managing time in pre-writing since most of the students used much time in applying webbing technique to find out ideas.
80
Bibliography
Abisamra, N. S. 2008. Teaching Writing: Approaches & Activities. http://nadabs.tripod.com/writing/ [accessed on February 4th, 2009].
Agustien, H. I. R. 2006. Genre-based Approach and the 2004 English Curriculum. A Plenary Paper Seminar. Unpublished.
Alagozlu, N. 2009. Critical Thinking and Voice in EFL Writing. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 9. Issue 3. Article 6. Available at http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Sept_2007_na.php [Retrieved on August 26th, 2009].
Alwasilah, S. S. 2002. The Creative Process of Writing: A Case Study of Three Indonesian Fiction Writers. Unpublished Thesis. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.
Archangelklee. 2009. How to Mind Map. Available at: http://www.ehow.com/ how_2184873_ideas-technique-perfect-note-taking.html. Retrieved on August 26th, 2009.
Anderson, M. and Anderson, K. 1998. Text Types in English 3. South Yarra: McMillan Education Australia PTY Ltd.
Arikunto, S. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian, Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: Bina Aksara.
Bell, J. 1999. Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-time Researchers in Education and Social Science (Third Ed.). Buckingham: Open Unversity Press.
Beare, K. 2008. Teaching Writing Skills. http://esl.about.com/cs/teaching technique/a/a_twrite.htm. [Accessed on February 4th, 2009]
Bhuana, R. J. 2008. Developing the Writing Skills through Mind Mapping Strategy (MMS) (An Experimental Research in the Second Grade Students of SMAN 1 Lembang). Unpublished Paper. UPI Bandung.
Brown, H. D. 1994. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching (Third Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Integrative Approach to Language Pedagogy (Second Ed.). San Francisco: Longman.
81
Brown, J. D. 1988. Understanding and Research in Second Language Learning: A Teacher’s Guide to Statistics and Research Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buzan, T. and Buzan, B. 1993. The Mind Map Book. London: BBC Books.
Byrne, D. 1988. Teaching Writing Skill. (New Ed.). Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited.
Charney, Davida H., and Richard A. Carlson. "Learning to Write in a Genre: What Student Writers Take from Model Texts." Research in the Teaching of English 29.1 (February 1995): 88-125. Available at: http://wrt-howard.syr.edu/Bibs/Genre.htm. [Accessed on August 26th, 2009].
Clark, Irene L. "A Genre Approach to Writing Assignments." Composition Forum 14.2. Available at: http://wrt-howard.syr.edu/Bibs/Genre.htm. [Accessed on August 26th, 2009].
Collerson, J. 1989. Writing for Life. Maryborough: Primary English Teaching Association.
Coolidge, F. L. 2000. Statistics: A Gentle Introduction. London: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. 1994. Research Design, Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. California: Sage Publications.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2004. Materi Pelatihan Terintegrasi Bahasa Inggris, Buku 1. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Derewianka, B. 2004. Exploring How Texts Work. Newton: Primary English Teaching Association.
Emilia, E. 2005. A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. Melbourne: Unpublished Thesis. Emilia, E. 2008. Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Foreman, G. & Cohen, I. 2005. Beware the Null Hypothesis: Critical Value Tables for Evaluating Classifiers.
82 Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. Available at: http://PAREonline.net/gotvn.asp?v=5&n=14. Retrieved on August 28th, 2009.
Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Ed.) Harlow: Pearson Education limited.
Harmer, J. 2004. How to Teach Writing. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Harmer, J. 2007. How to Teach English (New Ed.). Harlow: Longman.
Harris, D. P. 1969. Testing English as a Second Language. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Hartono, R. 2005. Genre-based Writing. Semarang: Unpublished. English Department of Semarang State University.
Hastuti, S. 2008. Teaching Report Genre through Genre-based Approach. Unpublished Thesis. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.
Hatch, E and Lazaraton, A. 1991. The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. Massachusetts: Heinly & Heinly Publishers.
Haycraft, J. 1978. An Introduction to English Language Teaching. England: Longman Group Ltd.
Heaton, J.B. 1991. Writing English Language Tests. New York: Longman.
Herrel, A. and Jordan, M. (Eds). 2004. Fifty Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners (Second Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Hughey, J. B. et al. 1983. Teaching ESL Composition. Rowley, Massachussetts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
83
Johns, A. M. 2009. Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Katilie, N. 2003. Improving Students’ Ability by Using Scaffolding Strategy in the Process of writing at STP Negeri 3 Tolitoli. Malang: Unpublished Thesis. State University of Malang.
Killen, R. 1998. Effective Teaching Strategies: Lessons from Research and Practice (Second Ed.). NSW: Social Science Press.
Kim, M. S. 2009. GBA to Teaching Writing. Available at http://web1.hpu.edu/images/GraduateStudies/TESL_WPS/07Lim_Genre_a 17238.pdf. Retrieved on April, 29, 2009.
Kroll, B. (Ed). 1990. Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kurtus. R. 2003. Enhance Writing Creativity Using Graphic Outlines. Available Retrieved on April 29th, 2009.
Kusumaningsih, L. W. 2008. The Effectiveness of Mind Mapping Techniques in Improving Students’ Narrative Text Writing Ability (An Experimental Study in the Second Grade of SMA Lab School UPI Bandung). Unpublished Paper. UPI Bandung.
Lin, B. 2009. Genre-based Teaching and Vygotskian Principles in EFL: The Case of a University Writing Course. Available at: http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Sept_06_bl.php. [Accessed on April 29th2009].
Macken-Horarik. “Something to Shoot for: A Systemic Functional Approach to Teaching Genre in Secondary School Science” in Johns, A. M. 2002. Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspective. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Magee, P. T. 2009. Three Step Creative Writing Process. Available at http://braindance.com/bdimmap4.html. [Accessed on April 29th, 2009]. Mukminatien, N. 1991. Making a writing Class Interesting. TEFLIN Journal: An
EFL Journal in Indonesia 4 (2).
Mukminatien, N. 1991. Developing Writing Skill by Providing Interactive Experience. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Malang: IKIP Malang.
Nunan, D. 2000. Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. London: Pearson Education Ltd 2000.
84
Omaggio-Hadley, A. (2001). Teaching Language in Context (Third Ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
O’Malley, J. M. and Pierce, L. V. 1995. Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners: Practical Approaches for Teacher. USA: Longman. Powell, S. 1996. Statistics for Science Projects. London: Hodder Headline Plc. Procter, M. 2009. Designing assignments and Presenting them to Students.
Available at: http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/faculty/designing-assignments. Accessed on August 26th, 2009.
Raimes, A. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richard-Amato, P. A. 2003. Making It Happened: From Interactive to Participatory Language Teaching, Theory and Practice (Third Ed.). New York: Longman.
Rose, D. and Acevedo, C. 2006. Designing Literacy Inservicing: Learning to Read: Reading to Learn. A Paper on National Conference of the Australian Systemic Functional Linguistics Assn 2006.
Rose, D. 2008. Reading to Learn. Book 4: Assessing Reading and Writing.
Safari. 2005. Teknik Analisis Butir Soal Instrumen Tes dan Non-tes dengan Manual, Kalkulator, dan Komputer. Jakarta: Asosiasi Pengawas Sekolah Indonesia. Departemen Pendidikan nasional.
Safii, M. 2001. Aspects of Writing: A Case Study of Intricacies in Writing Encountered by the Second Year Students at the English Education Department of State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Sulthan Syarif Qasim Pekanbaru. Unpublished Thesis. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.
Shuttleworth, M. 2008. Quasi-Experimental Design. Available at: http://www.experiment-resources.com/research. Accessed on August 26th, 2009.
Spear, K. 1988. Sharing Writing: Peer Responses Groups in English Classes. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Steele, V. 2009. Using Mind Map to Develop Writing. Available at:
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/articles/using-mind-maps-develop-writing. Retrieved on August 26th, 2009.
85
Sulistyawati, I. 2000. Developing the Writing Skill through Cooperative Learning. Unpublished Thesis. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.
Sumarsono, S. 2007. The Effectiveness of Brain-Webstorming in Writings; An Experimental Research at the TEFL Department FKIP UHAMKA Jakarta 2006/2007. A Paper in the 55th TEFLIN International Conference, Jakarta. Suryawan, I. 2008. Improving the Ability of the Second Year Students of MTs
Muhammadiyah Wangon in Writing Recount Paragraph Using Picture Series. Unpublished Thesis. State University of Malang.
Tompkins, G. E. 2008. Teaching Writing: Balancing Process and Product (Fifth Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Woods, A. et al. 1985. Statistics in Language Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wu, Y. & Dong, H. 2009. Applying SF-based Genre Approaches to English Writing Class. International Education Studies Vol. 2 No 3 August, 2009. Available at: http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ies/article/view/3326/ 2992. [Accessed on August 26th, 2009].
___________. 2009. Top Five Students Writing Problems. Available at (http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/fivesp.html. Accessed on August 26th, 2009.
___________. 2009. Writing Hypothesis: A Student Lesson. Available at: http://www.accesexcellence.org/LC/TL/filson/writhypo.php. Accessed on August 26th, 2009.
