THE EFFECT OF USING COGNITIVE STRATEGY INSTRUCTION IN WRITING (CSIW) TO TEACH WRITING FOR EIGHT GRADE AT ISLAMIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL AL-KHAIRIYAH KOTA JAMBI
THESIS
By: RISKA YUSUF TE130561
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHER TRAINING THE STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN JAMBI
2018
THE EFFECT OF USING COGNITIVE STRATEGY INSTRUCTION IN WRITING (CSIW) TO TEACH WRITING FOR EIGHT GRADE AT ISLAMIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL AL-KHAIRIYAH KOTA JAMBI
THESIS
Submitted as partial fulfillment of the Requirements to Gain an Undergraduate Degree (S.1) in English Education
By: RISKA YUSUF TE130561
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHER TRAINING THE STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN JAMBI
2018
Jambi, May2018 Advisor I : Monalisa, M.Pd
Advisor II : Firdiansyah, SS, MA
Address :Tarbiyah and Teacher Training Faculty The State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Syaifuddin Jambi
Jl. Jambi-Ma.Bulian Km.16 Simpang Sei.Duren Kec. Jaluko Kab. Muaro Jambi The Dean of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training Faculty
The State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Syaifuddin Jambi
OFFICIAL NOTE Assalamu’alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh
After reading and making necessary changes, thus we state that the thesis by:
Name : Riska Yusuf
NIM : TE130561
Department : English Education Program
Title : The Effect of Using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) to teach Writing for eight Grade at Islamic Junior High School Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi.
Could be submitted to Munaqasah Exam as a partial fulfillment of the requirements to get an undergraduate degree (S1) in English Education Program in the Tarbiyah and Teacher Training Faculty the State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Syaifuddin Jambi.
Wassalamu’alaikum warahatullahi wabarakatuh
First Advisor Second Advisor
Monalisa, M.Pd Firdiansyah, SS.MA
NIP.1975051522000032004
DEDICATION
By the name of Allah SWT, for the blessing and merciful. I Dedicate This Thesis Especially For:
1. My beloved father Muhammad Yusuf and mother Rosmalaili, who have educated me, prayed and supported to finish the thesis and to be successful in the future.
2. My beloved sister Risma Wati who always give me motivation, support, helping powerful and always praying for me.
3. For my best friends Tatag Setiadi,S.E, Riska Agus,S.E, Rosmayanti,Amked, Muslimaini,S.Pd, Sri Wahyuni,S.Pd, Perdila Desi,S.Pd, for their love, their support, their presence complete my day and my life.
4. My greatest advisor (Monalisa, M.Pd) and (Firdiansyah, SS, MA) thanks for everything suggestions, motivations, and also patience to face me till finished this thesis.
5. All of Teachers and Lectures who have been teaching me during study in the state Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.
6. And the last, for all my friends in class BI C 2013 and especially English Education Program Students of academic year 2013 and also all my friends whom I can‟t mention. I thank them for everything.
MOTTO
.4 yang mengajar (manusia) dengan pena,
who teacher (humans) with a pen,
.5 Dia mengajarkan manusia apa yang tidak diketahuinya
He teaches people what he doesn't know
( Qur‟an Surah Al-Alaq, ayat 4-5 )
AKCNOWLEDGEMENTS
All praises be to Allah who gives the writer guidance and strength in completing this script. Peace and blessing be upon the prophet Muhammad shalallahu „alaihi wassalam, her families, her relatives, and her followers:
The writer would like to express many thanks the following people who deserved special recognitions for their invaluable help in accomplishing this thesis:
1. Dr. H. Hadri Hasan MA, the Rector of the State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.
2. Prof. Dr. H. Suaidi, MA, Ph.D. Dr. Hidayat, M.Pd. and Dr. Hj. Fadhillah Husen, M.Pd as vice rector‟s I,II, and III of State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.
3. Drs. Hj Armida, M.Pd.I as the dean of faculty of Education and Teacher Training of the State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.
4. Dr. H. Lukman Hakim, M.Pd as the first vice Dean of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training Zawaki Afdal Jamil, M.Pd as the second vice Deans of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, and Dr. Kemas Imran, M.Pd.I as the Third vice Dean of Faculty Education and Teacher Training.
5. Amalia Nurhasanah, S.Pd M.Hum as the chairwomen of English Education Program.
6. Monalisa, M.Pd as the first my advisor who has given a lot of input such as correction, opinion, and other things which is useful to the script writer in the process of writing this thesis. firdiansyah, SS, MA as the second advisor for motivation, help contribution of though and beneficial ideas toward the development of this thesis.
7. All lectures of Tarbiyah Faculty of The State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.
8. All librarians for their helps, lending me some needed books to complete this thesis.
9. The principal, all teachers and students in junior High School Al-Khairiyah kota jambi.
It is hoped that this thesis will give contribution to the teaching of Englishespecially in reading. Then, the writer realizes that this thesis is still far from being perfect, for that reason, the writer hopes the constructive critics and suggestions for readers for perfection of this thesis. May Allah SWT always gives guidance and blessing us. Amiinn ya rabbalalamiin
Jambi, May 2018 The writer
Riska Yusuf TE. 130 561
ABSTRACT
Name : RISKA YUSUF
Department : English Education Study Program
Title : The Effect of Using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) To Teach Writing For Eight Grade At Islamic Junior High School Al-khairiyah Kota Jambi
This thesis discusses the effect of using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) to teach Writing for eight grade at Islamic Junior HighSchool Al-khairiyah Kota Jambi. the research is a quantitative researchusing quasi experiment, while data collection uses writing test. With sampleclass experiment 14 student and control class 14 people. Researcher found thatthe effect of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategyincreased after experimental treatment.
The result that researcher found were; 1). The influence between before
beingtaught with Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy afterusing Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy proved withresult of paired sample t-test -10.034>-2.160, this mean H0 rejected. 2). thereis a significant effect between the classes taught by the Cognitive StrategyInstruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy and the classes not taught using the strategy. Can be proved by the independent t-test result found that is -11.700<-2.056. This means H0 is rejected.
ABSTRACT
Nama : RISKA YUSUF
Jurusan : Program studi pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul : Pengaruh menggunakan strategy (CSIW) Cognitive Interaksi dalam menulis untuk mengajar kepada siswa kelas VIII Madrasah Tsanawiyah Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi.
Skripsi ini membahas tentang pengaruh strategy (CSIW) Cognitive Interaksi dalam menulis untuk mengajar kepada siswa kelas VIII Madrasah Tsanawiyah Al- Khairiyah penelitian ini merupakan penilitian kuantitatif dengan menggunakan quasi eksperiment, sedangkan mengumpulkan data menguunakana test menulis dengan sampel dikelas eksperiment 14 siswa dan kelas control 14 orang. peneliti menemukan bahwa adanya pengaruh dari pengajaran (CSIW) Cognitive Interaksi dalam menulis meningkat setelah dilakukannya perlakuan dikelas eksperiment.
Hasil yang peneliti temukan adalah; 1). Adanya pengaruh antara sebelum diajarkan dengana Strategy CSIW dan setelah menggunakan strategy CSIW dibuktikan dengan hasil paired sample t-test-10.034>-2.160 thitung> ttable, ini berarti H0
ditolak. 2). Adanya pengaruh significant antara kelas yang diajarkan dengan Strategy CSIW dan kelas yang tidak di ajarkan menggunakan strategy itu. Dapat dibuktikan dengan hasil indenpent t-test ditemukan bahwa thitung<ttable-11.700<-2.056. ini berarti H0 di tolak.
Kata kunci: Strategy CSIW, keterampilan menulis, Interaksi menulis, Descriptive.
TABLE OF CONTENT
TITLE COVER ... i
OFFICIAL NOTE ... iii
RATIFICATION ... iv
ORIGINAL STATEMENT ... v
DEDICATION... vi
MOTTO ... vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... viii
ABSTRAK (INDONESIAN) ... ix
... x
ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) ... xi
TABLE OF CONTENT ... xii
LIST OF TABLE ... xiii
LIST OF APPENDIX ... xiv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Formulation of Problem ... 3
C. Limitation of Problem ... 3
D. Objective of Problem ... 3
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Writing ... 4
1. Definition of Writing ... 4
2. Characteristic of Writing... 5
3. Micro and Macro skills of Writing ... 6
4. Types of Classroom Performance ... 7
5. Scoring of Writing ... 8
B. Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing... 10
1. The Nature of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing 10 2. The steps of Teaching Cognitive Strategy Instruction . 11 in Writing ... 3. The Principles of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in…. 14 Writing (CSIW) ... C. Related Studies... 15
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Research Design... 17
B. The setting of the Research ... 18
C. Population and Sample ... 18
D. Instrument of Research ... 19
E. Technique of Collecting Data ... 19
F. Technique of analyzing the Data ... 20
G. Hypothesis of the Research ... 20
H. Validity and Reliability Test ... 21 CHAPTERIV RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION
A. Finding and Discussion ... 23
1. Descriptive Analysis ... 23
a. The Result of Pre- Test and Post test in Experimental 24 b. The Result of pre-test and post-test Control ... 26
2. Statistical Analysis of the Test ... 28
a. Normality test ... 28
b. T-test ... 29
B. Testing Hypothesis... 29
1. The Analysis of Paired Sample T-test in Experimental 29 ... 2. The Analysis of Independent Sample T-test ... 30
C. Discussion ... 32
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 The result Pre-test Experiment class ... ……..…23
Table 4.2 The result Post-test Experiment class ... ………..24
Table 4.3 The result Pre-test Control class ... ………..25
Table 4.4 The result Post-test Control class ... ………..26
Table 4.5 Normality Test Experiment class ... ………..27
Table 4.6 Normality Test Control class ... ………..27
Table 4.7 Paired Sample T-test Experiment Pre-test and Post-test ... ………..29
Table 4.8 Independent Sample T-test Post-test Experiment and Control class...30
LIST OF APENDIX
Appendix A The data Instrument ... 34
Appendix B Assessment Rubric ... 35
Appendix C Normality Test ... 37
Appendix D The Descriptive Statistic ... 40
Appendix E The Result of Test ... 46
Appendix F Lesson Plan ... 47
Appendix G Documentation ... 61
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language is the most important aspect in human interaction. People communicate and interact with other using the language. In widely community, English became international language. Most of the communities in the whole world use English in order they can communicate with others who have different language. From this, English languages important to be thought and learned by the student. And as the form of our government‟s response toward this case, English language has been put in educational system in our country, and it is taught from junior high school until university and becomes a compulsory subject (Susiyanti, 2014:p.1).
That important language because making easy people communicate, and English language important also besides English language so central in required lesson for all student of elementary school level until university.
According to Brown (2003), writing is a skill that is the exclusive domain of scribes and scholars in educational or religious institutions. Almost every aspect of everyday life for “common” people was carried out orally. Writing is psychological activity of the language user to put information in the written text.
However, writing requires process and it can be developed and changed while the process is running on. The writer must be thinks some factors to making good writing, such as topic knowledge, knowledge of genres, knowledge of audience, and knowledge of language. Its means that writing is communicative since it is an interactive activity.
According to Andrew (2002: 2) as cited in Prestiasari. Cognitive Strategy Instruction In Writing (CSIW) is a discursive strategy that engages students in writing apprenticeships and collaborations. It is explained that this strategy simulates the students to be independent in writing. Also, this strategy helps the students how to make their writing concepts.
Furthermore, Nera (2004: 76) as cited in Prestiasari, Cognitive Strategy Instruction In Writing (CSIW) as an approach blends elements of direct instruction and cognitive strategy instruction with a core emphasis on collaborative teacher with student and student in dialogue. It is explained that this strategy gives students some points to be followed in writing activity. The teacher will lead the students in directed activity that happens among students or teacher with students.
Based on observation at the State of Islamic Junior High School Al-khairiyah Kota Jambi. Writing is very low and not all students know to write English language better and correct, and almost 50% student less enthusiasm learn about writing.
In Islamic Junior High School Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi, the student didn't have knowledge of using strategies in writing although it is important. So, we as the teacher must give more information to, the students know that using strategies in writing is good for some situations.
Based on the explained above, the researcher is interested to do a research above
“The Effect of Using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) to Teach Writing For Eleventh Grade at Islamic Junior High School Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi”
B. Formulation of Problem
The writer formulates the problem of this research, as follows:
1. Is there any significant effect in writing achievement between before and after using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW)?
2. Is there any significant different in writing achievement between experimental class and control class?
C. Limitation of Problem
In this research, the writer focused on the effect of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) to teach writing for eight grade Islamic junior high school Al- Khairiyah Kota Jambi academic year 2017.
D. Objective of Problem
Based on the research questions above, the objectives of this study is to find out:
1. There is the significant effect in writing achievement between before and after using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing.
2. There is the significant different in writing achievement between experiment class and control class.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES
The discussion of some literatures in this chapter is related the variables of the research.
They are the definition writing, Cognitive Strategies Instruction in Writing. All of them be discussed deeper below:
A. Writing
1. Definition of Writing
Expository writing is challenging for many student because it requires an explicit awareness of how ideas can be produce in an conventional form that communicates meanings to a distance (Kozulin, 2003).
Writing is an active process to put the writer feelings and ideas into written words. It means that the people can write about their feelings, ideas, and thought some sentences in simple or large form. Also, when a writer wants to write she or he aims to give or share information addressed to the reader. The reader will read and will know what the writer wants in the writing (Barnet 1990:4).
Richards & Renandya (2002) in his book entitled Methodology in Language Teaching said that there are four steps of basic in writing, they are; planning, drafting, revising, and editing. Planning (pre-writing) is any activity in the classroom that encourages students to write. It stimulates thoughts for getting started. The learning experiences include group brainstorming, clustering, rapid free writing, Who-questions. Next, is drafting, the writers are focused on the fluency of writing and are not preoccupied with grammatical accuracy or the neatness of the draft. In revising, students review their texts on the basis of the feedback, it is not only merely checking for language errors but it is done to improve global content and the organization of ideas so that the writer‟s intent is made clearer to the reader. And the last stage is editing, in this stage students are engaged in tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft for evaluation by the teacher. They edit their own
or their peer‟s work for grammar, spelling, punctuation, diction, sentence structure and accuracy of supportive textual material such as quotations, examples and the like.
Based on the explanation above, writing is important and writing is a process which giving to reader, and the purpose to push someone to write also have to know base of writing.
2. Characteristic of Writing
According to Brown (2007,p.397-398). The characteristic of written language.
a. Permanence
Once something is written down and delivered in its final form to its intended audience, the written abdicate a certain power: the power to emend, to clarify, to with draw.
b. Production time
The good news is that, given appropriate stretches of a time, a writer can indeed become a “good” writer by developing efficient processes for achieving the final product. The bad news is that many educational context demand students writing within time limits, or “writing for display” as noted in the previous section (examination writing, for example). So, one of your goals, especially if you are teaching in an EAP context, would be to train your students to make the best possible use of such time limitations.
c. Distance
One the thorniest problem writers face is anticipating their audience. That anticipation ranges from general audience characteristic to how specific words, phrases, sentences, and paragraph will be interpreted.
d. Orthography
Everything from simple greetings to extremely complex ideas is captured through the manipulation of a few dozen letters and other written symbols. Sometimes we take for granted the mastering of the mechanic of English writing by our students.
e. Complexity
How to combine sentences, how to make references to other element in a text, how to create syntactic and lexical variety, and much more.
f. Vocabulary
Written language places a heavier on vocabulary use than does speaking. Good writers will learn to take advantages of the richness of English vocabulary.
g. Formality
Whether a Students is filling out a questionnaire or writing a full blown essay, the convention of each form must be followed. For ESL students, the most difficult and complex conventions occur in academic writing where student have to learn how to describe, Explain, compare, contracts, illustrate, defend, criticize, and argue.
3. Micro and Macro Skills of Writing
According to Brown (2007:p.399) identifies and enumerates micro and macro skills for writing as follow:
a. Micro skills
1. Produce graphemes and orthographic pattern of English.
2. Produce writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit the purpose.
3. Produce and acceptable core of words and use appropriate word other pattern.
4. Use acceptable grammatical system (e.g., tense, agreement, pluralization), patterns and rules.
5. Express a particular meaning in different grammatical forms.
b. Macro skills
6. Use cohesive devises in written discourse.
7. Use the rhetorical forms and conventions of written discourse.
8. Appropriately accomplish the communicative functional of written texts according to form and purpose.
9. Convey link and connections between events and communicative such relations as main idea, supporting idea, new information, given information, generalization, and exemplification.
10. Distinguish between literal and implied meaning when writing.
11. Correctly convey culturally specific references in the context of the written text.
12. Develop and use a battery of writing strategies, such as accurately assessing the audiences interpretation, using prewriting devices, writing with fluency in the first draft, using paraphrases and synonym, soliciting peer and instructor feedback, and using feedback for revising and editing.
4. Types of Classroom Performance
Brown (2004: 220) states that there are four types of writing, they will be described deeper as follows:
a. Imitative
To produce written language, the learner must attain skills in the fundamental, basic tasks of writing letters, words, punctuation, and very brief sentences. This category includes the ability to spell correctly and to perceive phoneme-grapheme correspondences in the English spelling system. It is a level at which learners are trying to master the mechanics of writing. At this stage, form is the primary if not exclusive focus, while context and meaning are of secondary concern.
b. Intensive (controlled)
Beyond the fundamentals of imitative writing are skills in producing appropriate vocabulary within a context, collocations and idioms, and correct grammatical features up to the length of a sentence. Meaning and context are some importance in determining correctness and appropriateness, but most assessment tasks are more concerned with a focus on form, and are rather strictly controlled by the test design.
c. Responsive
Here, assessment task require learners to perform at a limited discourse level, connecting sentences into a paragraph and creating a logically connected sequence of two or three paragraphs. Tasks respond to pedagogical directive, lists of criteria, outlines, and other guidelines. Genres of writing include brief narratives and descriptions, short reports, lab reports, summaries, brief responses to reading, and interpretations of charts or graphs. Under specified conditions, the writer begins to commit to user exercise some freedom of choice among alternative forms of expression of ideas. The writer has mastered the fund a metals of sentence-level grammar and is more focused on the discourse conventions that will achieve the
objectives of the written text. Form focused attention is mostly at the discourse level, with a strong emphasis on context and meaning.
d. Extensive
Extensive writing implies successful management of all the processes and strategies of writing for all purposes, up to the length of an essay, a term paper, a major research project report, or even a thesis. Writers focus on achieving a purpose, organizing and developing ideas logically, using details to support or illustrate ideas, demonstrating syntactic and lexical variety, and in many cases, engaging in the process of multiple drafts to achieve a final product. Focus on grammatical form is limited to occasional editing or proof reading of a draft.
5. Scoring of Writing
Scoring of Writing Generally there are three types of rating scales used in scoring writing. They are holistic scoring, primary trait, and analytical scoring.
a. Holistic scoring Holistic scoring is a method by which trained readers review a piece of writing for its overall quality. Brown (2004: 242) states that each point on a holistic scale is given a systematic set descriptors, the reader evaluator matches, and overall impression with the descriptors to get score. Descriptors usually follow a prescribed pattern. The elements of holistic scoring involve for dimension, as follows:
1) Idea development/organization;
Focuses on central idea with appropriate elaboration and conclusion;
2) Fluency/structure;
Appropriate verb tense used with a variety of grammatical and syntactic structures;
3) Words choice;
Uses varied and precise vocabulary appropriate for purpose;
4) Mechanic:
Absence of error in spelling, capitalization, and punctuation.
b. Primary trait
Primary trait focuses on how well students can write within a narrowly defined range of discourse (Brown, 2004: 242). This type of scoring emphasizes the task at hand and assigns a score based on the effectiveness of the text‟s achievement.
To rate the primary trait of text, there are four point scales ranging from zero (no response or fragment response) to four (the purpose in unequivocally accomplished in a convincing fashion). A primary trait would assess (Brown, 2004: 243):
1. The accuracy of the account of the original (summary),
2. The clarity of the steps of the procedure and the final result (lab report), 3. The description of the main features of the graph (graph description), 4. The expression of the writer‟s opinion (response to an article).
b. Analytical scoring
Analytical scoring focuses on the principle function of the text and offers some feedback potentials, but there is no written production that enhances the ultimate accomplishment of the purpose (Brown, 2004: 243). Classroom evaluation of learning is best served through analytic scoring, in which as many as five major elements of writing competence are scored, thus enabling learners to home in on weakness and capitalize on strengths. They are organization, content, grammar, mechanics, and vocabulary. The point value for each element of writing is not the same. The differences are based on the emphasis of the goal and student‟s need.
B. Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing
1. The Nature of Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing
The are some definition of writing from experts. According (Englert et al., 1991) and applied it within adolescents with mild mental retardation attending self-contained classes in Turkey. The effectiveness of writing strategy instruction has not been evaluated with this group of students (the only exception involved a single student in De La Paz &
Graham, 1997). As in other CSIW strategies, a set of think-sheets was used to help students plan, organize, edit, and revise their expository writing (Englert et al., 1992). The instruction consisted of four phases: (a) text analysis focusing on the text structure targeted for instruction (i.e., problem/solution text), (b) modeling of the writing process, (c) guided practice, and (d) independent writing This included modeling aloud how to use the think-sheets and accompanying strategies, such as brainstorming. Students were also provided with assistance until they could apply them independently. During modeling and
guided practice, dialogue about text structures and strategy use were encouraged and supported.
Furthermore, The Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing Program (CSIW) is based on four central principles drawn from a socio cultural theory of instruction (Englert &
Mariage, 2003). First, this framework emphasizes the importance of immersing writers in a holistic and cognitive process in which they apply strategies related to planning, organizing, writing, editing, and revising their expository texts (Englert, 1992). Second, the CSIW framework emphasizes the importance of teachers modeling aloud strategies for these cognitive processes as they compose specific types of text (Englert, 1990;
Englert & Raphael, 1988). Third, teachers apprentice students in the strategies through the use of interactive dialogues in which they prompt, scaffold, and guide students through the application of the strategies (Englert, 1990; Englert & Mariage, 1991).
Fourth, teacher make text structures, writing process, and strategies visible through a series of think-sheets that provide students with structural or procedural support at each stage of the writing process by using graphic organizers, prompts, and questions that cue strategy application and self-regulation (Englert, 1990; Englert & Raphael, 1989;
Graham, MacArthur, & Schwartz, 1995).
So, this Cognitive Strategy Instruction In Writing, student asked to organize, to editing, and evaluating. By following instruction analyze text, modeling write process, and practice.
2. The steps of Teaching Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing
The instructional program is broken into four phases, analyzing text, modeling the process guiding student, and providing student opportunities independent writing.
Guining (2010: 470) as cited in Prestiasari (2014).
a. Step 1: Analyzing the text
Since low-achieving readers show little awareness of the text structure, either in their reading or their writing, examining text structure is emphasized. Samples from basals, trade books, periodicals, or content area texts can be used to illustrate a particular structure. It is also a good idea to use examples written by students, perhaps from previous years.
As you analyze the text, which can be written on the board or chart or on an overhead, point out and discuss the following:
The topic of the text
Its purpose
The kind of questions the reader might expect the text to answer
The audience
The text structure itself
Signal words that might be used in the text structure
You might also note some areas in which the piece might be improved.
Perhaps there is a part that is not clear, or a step may have been omitted from a process. Or signal words might be added to improve the comprehensibility of the piece.
b. Step 2: Modeling the writing process
After analyzing and discussing the text, demonstrate the composing of an informational piece by writing one yourself. If a new game is to be introduced to the class, the teacher might write a how-to piece explaining how the game is to be played.
As the teacher goes to the process, think aloud, so the class can see how the teacher plan and compose a piece. Make explicit your sense of audience, your purpose for writing, and strategies you might use to help your planning, such as listing the steps in a process and indicating needed materials. Also talk about the text structure that you plan to use, why you are using that structure, and what might be some signal words that could be used to “glue” the structure together. Later, after a discussion with students, model the revising and editing processes.
c. Step 3: Guiding students: Introducing Think Sheets.
As you model the process, introduce the concept of Think Sheets. These are prompts that help students plan, organize, revise, and edit their pieces. Each type of writing or text structure should have its own think sheets. Athough sample Think Sheets are presented here, it should be emphasized that Think Sheets can take a variety of forms and should be tailored to meet the needs of your students. Think Sheets might provide prompts for the following (Dixon, Carnine, and Kame‟ enai (1993) in Gunning (2010: 470).
Who is my audience?
What is my goal?
What do I know about this topic?
What can I tell the readers at the beginning to get them interested?
What do I need to tell my audience so they will understand what I am trying to say?
How can I group my ideas? (steps in a process, similar in a comparison contrast piece, reasons in a persuasive piece, solution to a problem, causes of a problem, etc).
What signal words might I use? (first, then, because, and, but, however, moreover, etc).
8) What might be a good ending sentence?(sum up, leave with a thought or question).
d. Step 4: Providing opportunities for independents writing
As students become more proficient, Think Sheets are phased out and students engage in independent writing. A key in CSIW is the use of Think Sheet. Think Sheet is scaffolds that prompt the students to use writing strategies that they have been taught recently. The four steps above explain how Think Sheets are used. In conclusion, CSIW obviously gives the appropriate ways on how to improve them students‟ ability in writing. Basically, the steps can develop all writing indicators.
They lecture the students the fluency of thought and the content in composing their writing such as the topic and the purpose of the text which are discussed in the first and the third steps; the structure and mechanic that are learnt by the students in revising the text, editing the text, and making independent writing through the second, the third, and the fourth steps; and the vocabulary which can be seen from the signal words that is discussed in all steps. Therefore, CSIW is an effective method to develop the students‟ writing ability.
3. The Principles of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW)
Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing Program (CSIW) is a program which was developed by Englert and her colleagues. As a program, of course, it has basic or central principles as the guidence. It is stated by Englert & Mariage (2003: 21) asserted in Prestiasari (2014). the Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing Program (CSIW) is based on four central principles drawn from a socio cultural theory of instruction. First, this framework emphasizes the importance of immersing writers in a holistic and cognitive process in which they apply strategies related to planning, organizing, writing, editing, and revising their expository texts. Second, the CSIW framework emphasizes the
importance of teachers modeling aloud strategies for these cognitive processes as they compose specific types of text. Third, teachers apprentice students in the strategies through the use of interactive dialogues in which they prompt, scaffold, and guide students through the application of the strategies. Fourth, teachers make text structures, writing process, and strategies visible through a series of think-sheets that provide students with structural or procedural support at each stage of the writing process by using graphic organizers, prompts, and questions that cue strategy application and self- regulation. From those principles, it is clearly seen that CSIW gives a big contribution to the teacher in teaching writing. Besides, CSIW also gives some advantages for the students.
CSIW students demonstrate better writing performance on text structures they are directly taught, transfer their knowledge to untaught text structures, and display greater meta-cognitive knowledge about writing. Moreover, it can be concluded that the advantages of CSIW are: (a) students are able to show better writing performance on text structure and meta-cognitive knowledge about writing; and (b) students are able to improve their performance for the next high school classes.
C. Related Studies
The are same previous researcher which have the same topic with this research. This first research comes from Solihin (2014) with the title ”Improving Students‟ Skill in Writing Descriptive text Through Students Team Achievement Division (STAD) Method Eighth Grade Islamic Junior Mazniyah Jambi”. This thesis about improve students‟
writing ability by student team achievement division (STAD) method. This research is a classroom action research. It means that an action research which is conducted in a classroom to increase the quality of learning teaching practices. Then, collecting data using observation, checklist, field data, questionnaire and test. The researcher found Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) method is very useful method in teaching writing because it might be able to motivate students‟ to improve their involvement in writing ability. Besides, the use Students Team Achievement Division (STAD) method makes the teaching learning writing activity more enjoyable and interesting. The use of (STAD) method also makes the students‟ more motivate in learning.
The similarity of the previous research with this present study. Where the first similarity used skill writing descriptive text. The difference with the previous research is
Solihin Used with classroom action research design, and researcher will use Quasi- Experimental research degin.
The second research comes from Yuni Kurniasih (2015)with the title “Students‟
Coherence In Writing Descriptive Text At Fifth Semester Of English Education Program The State Institute For Islamic Studies Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi”. In order to write a good English text, one must pay attention to the knowledge and skill of using coherence, that is transition signal and logical order. This study is to investigate the type of coherence of students writing descriptive text a fifth semester of English Education Program The State Institute For Islamic Studies Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi. The purpose this research is to find out the types of coherence written by student in writing descriptive text both for transition signal and logical order. The research applied qualitative method by using discourse analysis. The data was taken using documentation, and field note. To analyze data, the researcher employed data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing/verification.
The similarity of the previous research with this present study. Where the first similarity used skill writing descriptive text. The difference of the previous research is the data was taken using documentation and field note and researcher will use Quasi- Experimental research design.
The last, research comes from Ida (2014) with the title “Improving Students Writing Skill in Descriptive text Through Think Talk Write (TTW) Strategy At Eighth Grade Islamic Junior High School Asas Islamiyah Kota Jambi”. Based on the research at eighth grade of Islamic junior high school Asas Islamiyah kota jambi. It is concluded that think talk write (TTW), strategy is effective to enhance the students writing skill of descriptive text. From the result of the research show that through think talk write (TTW) Strategy makes students easier in making descriptive text, and makes them easier in exploring their idea and makes students more active and in the classroom. The think talk write strategy also can improve students‟ achievement significantly in writing skill of descriptive text.
The similarity of the previous research with this present study. Where the first similarity used skill writing descriptive text. The difference of the previous research is used research design with classroom action, and researcher will use Quasi-Experimental research design.
According to the previous researcher above it can be concluded that the research which be conducted by the researcher is different with the previous researcher.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Design
Research design is the plan to do something and research design contains the formula about the systematic steps of research. For this rese4arch, the researcher used quantitative research design to observe.
In this research the written uses quantitative method. According (Latief 2015:77) quantitative research as each research is trying to discover the underlying system of the research objects, a researcher has to decided the appropriate strategy for that purpose. The strategy is decided based on either quantitative or qualitative approach. The different approaches dictate different ways in the process of research; in defining data, in selecting data, in gathering data, and in data analysis.
It mean research quantitative have to as appropriate strategy but in collecting that data differ from to defining data, in gathering data, and in data analysis.
Morever, researcher use Quasi-Experimental Research very often is not possible to select sample out of all the population students‟. When the researcher can only assign randomly different treatment to two different classes, the researcher use quasi- experimental research design (Charles, C.M. 1995: 247) asserted in Latief (2015:97).
This research uses two class the first is experimental class ( class treatment by Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing (CSIW) ) and the second class as control class ( the class is not given Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing ( CSIW) ). The design of research is quasi-experimental design because in this design researcher could control independent variable that given effect to experimental.
Quasi-experimental there is two way of is. The first design time-series and of nonequivalent group control design.
In this design to group used for research cannot be selected by random. Before giving treatment group in giving pretest for the purpose of to know stability and clarity of situation of group before in giving treatment. When result of the pretest in the reality its value differ, meaning the group its situation uncertain, and not consistence after stability can know clearly hence newly in giving treatment. this research design only using one just group, so that do not need control group. Class control much the same to with pretest- posttest control class design, only this design experiment group and also control group not in selecting by random.
B. The Setting of the Research
The research will be conducted at eleventh grade of Islamic Senior High School, which is located in Gatot Subroto, Kota Jambi. It will be carried out on November 2017.
C. Population and Sample 1. Population
According to Sugiyono (2013, p.117) population is subject or object having certain characteristic and quality which specified by researcher to be studied. The population had the academic year of 2017/2018. All the members of population had the same chance to be the sample members. From the population, it was taken two classes, which each class of 20 and 21 students.
2. Sample
According to Sugiyono (2010, p.118) sample is the part taken object from all observed population, this research used random sampling. Random sampling is a sampling of the population that is done randomly without regard to strata that exits in
the population. because in this research the population is 60 students. it was take 30 students as the sample.
D. Instrument of the Research
Instrument is a tool take information or data of subject who selected by researcher. In this study the instrument was test ( pre – test and post – test ). The test was write narrative text. Pre-test and post-test about narrative text. Pre-test and post-test have different title of text but have some quality of questions which have reliability and validity tested from tryout of the instrument in 12 student expect of sample research. The test was conducted by two sections, they are; pre-test and post-test was given after doing some treatment
.
E. Technique of Collecting Data 1. Testing
According to Brown (2003:3) a test is a method of measure a person‟s ability, knowledge, or performance in a given domain. In this research, the researcher used the test of instrument in research. The test is descriptive text. The data were collected in two stages; pre-test and post-test.
a. Pre-test
The purpose of giving pre-test is to know how far the students can understand about writing text before being taught by using the Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing (CSIW). So that, administering pre-test before students was given treatment by researcher.
b. Post-test
The purpose of giving post-test is to know the result of students writing after giving the treatment. The result decided the effectiveness of the Cognitive Strategies Instruction In Writing (CSIW) teaching on students writing. The post- test was given by researcher after student done the treatment.
F. Technique of analyzing the data 1. Statistical analysis
a. Normality test
The test is carried out in order to check whether or not the data is normal. If the data is normal, the parametric test is used. On the other hand, if the data is not normal, the non-parametric test is used.
b. T-test
The technique of analyze the data, the writer will employ SPSS (Social package for social science) program. In this case, the data will be analyzed by sample t-test. There will be two kinds of sample t-test, they are independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test. Paired sample t-test is used to see whether or not there is significant improvement of students‟ writing achievement before and after the treatment. The independent sample t-test is used to compare the means of one variables for two group of cases (Taniredja, 2014: p.81-83).
G. Hypothesis of Research
Hypothesis of this study are:
1. Null Hypothesis (Ho)
There is no significant effect on the students‟ writing who are taught by using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW), compared with those who are taught by using conventional strategy.
2. Alternative Hypothesis (Ha)
There are is any significant effect on the students‟ writing comprehension who are taught by using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW), compared with those who are by using conventional strategy.
H. Validity and Reliability Test 1. Validity
Validity test is used to determine whether or not the instrument is appropriate to be used in the research. An instrument can be said as logic validity. If the instrument is in accordance with the content and the aspect expresses (Arikunto, 2010: p.167). in validity, this research uses content validity and face validity, the content validity is used in order to see whether or not the genre of writing given in the research is matched with genre of writing in second semester. Face validity is the extent to which a test is subjectively viewed as covering the concept it purport to measure. It refers to the transparency or relevance of a test it appears to test participants.
2. Reliability
Reliability refers to the consistency of the scores obtained how consistent they are for each individual from one administration of an instrument to another and from one set of items to another (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009, p.154). the technique that used was inter rater reliability. Inter reliability was the measuring that involved two rater in reliable the instrument. The both of rater have same perception it means the instrument was reliable. The first rater Gusmarita, S.Pd and the second rater was Tartila, M.Pd. The result inter rater reliability showed that the reliability of the data was 0.563 in control group pre-test, 0.625 control group post-test and 0.568 was in experiment group pre-test, 0.958 experiment group post-test. It indicate that there was strong relationship of the data.
CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION A. Finding and Discussion
1. Descriptive Analysis
In this chapter, the researcher gained the data about students score in teaching writing by using Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy. First, the researcher present the result of pre-test and post-test of both classes. The experiment class was VIII A, in this class the researcher did the treatment for eight meeting and used the Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW). Control class was VIII B, in this class the researcher also gave the 8 meetings with the conventional treatment. The researcher took 14 student of each class.
After that the researcher used SPSS formula to calculate the t-test with level of significant to decide the differences of the result of teaching writing Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) to teach writing for eight grade student Islamic Junior High School Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi. Even in between pre-test and post-test of experiment class or the result of post-test in experiment class and post- test in control class.
A. The result of pre-test and post-test experiment class
a. The result pre-test experiment class
The experiment class consisted of 14 students. The result of pre-test before the intervention, shows that the lowest score was 52.25 and the highest score was 67.75. Based on the calculation, it can be concluded that the mean of score 61.4036, the calculation can be seen in appendix E. It checked the result by using statistical product and service solution (SPPS) version 22 program.
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
52.25 1 7.1 7.1 7.1
56.63 1 7.1 7.1 14.3
57.25 1 7.1 7.1 21.4
59.25 1 7.1 7.1 28.6
59.90 1 7.1 7.1 35.7
61.50 1 7.1 7.1 42.9
61.88 1 7.1 7.1 50.0
62.25 1 7.1 7.1 57.1
62.63 1 7.1 7.1 64.3
62.88 1 7.1 7.1 71.4
64.13 1 7.1 7.1 78.6
64.25 1 7.1 7.1 85.7
67.13 1 7.1 7.1 92.9
67.75 1 7.1 7.1 100.0
Total 14 100.0 100.0
b. The result post-test experiment class
After the treatment, the researcher gave post-test to the class to see improvement of the students‟ writing. The lowest score was 71.13 and the highest score was 75.25. Based on calculation, it can be concluded that the mean score of post-test in experiment class were 73.0086 from 14 student, the Appendix E.
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
71.13 1 7.1 7.1 7.1
71.25 1 7.1 7.1 14.3
71.63 1 7.1 7.1 21.4
72.13 3 21.4 21.4 42.9
72.38 1 7.1 7.1 50.0
73.50 1 7.1 7.1 57.1
73.63 1 7.1 7.1 64.3
73.88 2 14.3 14.3 78.6
74.63 2 14.3 14.3 92.9
75.25 1 7.1 7.1 100.0
Total 14 100.0 100.0
B. The result of pre-test and post-test control class a. The result pre-test control class
After calculating the pre-test and post-test in experiment class, the researcher calculated pre-test and post-test in control class. The result of the test before the intervention showed that the lowest score
was 54.70 and the highest score was 58.13. Based on calculation, the mean score of pre-test in control class was 56.5746 from 14 student the calculation can be seen in appendix E.
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
V a l i d
54.70 1 7.1 7.1 7.1
55.25 1 7.1 7.1 14.3
55.75 1 7.1 7.1 21.4
56.20 1 7.1 7.1 28.6
56.25 1 7.1 7.1 35.7
56.50 1 7.1 7.1 42.9
56.63 1 7.1 7.1 50.0
56.65 1 7.1 7.1 57.1
56.75 1 7.1 7.1 64.3
57.00 2 14.3 14.3 78.6
57.63 2 14.3 14.3 92.9
58.13 1 7.1 7.1 100.0
Total 14 100.0 100.0
b. The result post-test control class
After teaching and learning activities, the researcher calculated the student post-test. The result of post-test showed that the lowest score was 62.01 and the highest score was 68.75 from 14 students.
Moreover, the mean differences between the result of post-test in experiment class was 73.0086 and post in control class was 68.
Frequency Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
62.01 1 7.1 7.1 7.1
63.13 1 7.1 7.1 14.3
64.88 1 7.1 7.1 21.4
65.25 3 21.4 21.4 42.9
65.50 1 7.1 7.1 50.0
65.75 1 7.1 7.1 57.1
66.00 2 14.3 14.3 71.4
68.00 2 14.3 14.3 85.7
68.25 1 7.1 7.1 92.9
68.75 1 7.1 7.1 100.0
Total 14 100.0 100.0
2. Statistical Analysis of the Test
a. Normality Test
Normality test want to know to see weather the sample have the normal distribution or not. The test is used was lilliefors. After calculated it, so it can be concluded that the result of the effect of Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing to teach writing for eight grade student Junior High School Al-khairiyah have normal distribution, because.
1.
Normality test control class
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic Df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Pre-test .129 14 .200* .973 14 .916
Post-test .185 14 .200* .927 14 .279
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
Lilliefors Significance Correction
2. Normality test experiment class
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic Df Sig.
Pre-test .152 14 .200* .963 14 .769
Post-test .181 14 .200* .930 14 .306
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
Lilliefors Significance Correction
b. T-test
The technique of analysis the data, the writer would employ SPPSS (Statistical Product and Service Solution) version 22 program. this case, the data would be analyzed by t-test. There were toto kinds of sample t-test, they were paired sample t-test and independent sample t-test. for the more elaborated as follow
B. Testing Hypothesis
1. The analysis of Paired Sample T-test in Experimental Class
This was conducted to examine the difference of score between pre-test and post-test. Firstly, to see whether or not Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy gave significant effect to student writing, the researcher applied pair sample t-test. The researcher tried to find out the students achievement before the intervention. The result of calculation showed that the score was -10.043.
Paired Sample T-test Experiment pre-test and post-test
Paired Differences
T df
Sig.(2- tailed) Mean
Std.
Deviati on
Std.Error Mean
95%Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper pre-test
and post-test
-11.605 4.324 1.156 -14.102 -9.109 -10.043 13 .000
2. The Analysis of Independent Sample t-test
This study an independent sample t-test was conducted to find out whether or not there was a significant difference between the experimental and control class after the student were given the treatment, the calculation of independent sample t-test was used to analyzed the score of post-test in experiment and control class.
Independent Sample T-test Post-test experiment and control class Levene's
Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. T df
Sig.
(2- tailed )
Mean Differe nce
Std.
Error Diffe rence
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper Equal variances
assumed
.375 .545 -11.700 26 .000 -6.991 .598 -8.219 -5.763
Equal variances not assumed
-11.700 24.216 .000 -6.991 .598 -8.224 -5.758
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion
After conducted the study, there were some result that could be concluded.
First, there was a significant improvement before and after taught by the strategy, proven by the data that was found. It can be proven by the statistical data the researcher found was -10.034>-2.160 it means H0 is rejected. Second;
the result student score who taught by Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) higher than the mean students‟ score who did not taught by it tcount <
ttable was -11.700<-2.056 it means Ha is accepted. So, Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing (CSIW) strategy is effectiveness technique in teaching writing.
B. Suggestion
After doing research, the write would give suggestion to the teachers and other researchers. For English teacher, his strategy is appropriate to be applied in the writing skill, not only for descriptive text but also other text like narrative text, analytical exposition etc. Not only for writing, teacher also suggested to be creative and choose the appropriate strategy in teaching learning in the classroom. For other researcher; this study should be developed with other design research.
Appendix A The data instrument
Exercise
Name :
Class :
Direction : Write the descriptive text and than choose one topic above..!!!
Topic : - Flora and Fauna
Appendix B Assessment rubric
No Aspect of
Writing
Total
Score Description
1. ACCURACY
Grammar 20%
Grammar is mostly correct
Grammar is less correct but it doesn‟t influence the meaning
Grammar is less correct and it influences the meaning
Vocabulary 10%
Vocabulary choice is appropiate
Vocabulary choice is less appropiate but it doesn‟t influence the meaning
Voacabulary choice is less appropiate and it influence the meaning
Mechanics 5%
The punctuation and spelling are mostly correct
The punctuation and spelling are less correct and they don‟t influence the meaning
The punctuation and spelling are less correct and they influence the meaning
2. FLUENCY
Fluency 30%
The ideas are clear, attractive and easy to read
The ideas are monotonous but still easy to read
The ideas are unclear and difficult to read
Organization 35%
The ideas are organized, logically, and clearly The ideas are organized, less logically, and clearly
The ideas are organized illogically
Appendix C Normality test
1. Normality test of pre-test and post-test control class
Descriptives
Statistic
Std.
Error VAR0000
1
Mean 56.5746 .24834
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 56.0381 Upper
Bound 57.1112
5% Trimmed Mean 56.5927
Median 56.6375
Variance .863
Std. Deviation .92921
Minimum 54.70
Maximum 58.13
Range 3.42
Interquartile Range 1.07
Skewness -.378 .597
Kurtosis .139 1.154
Mn VAR0000 2
Mean 65.8575 .51265
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 64.7500
Upper
Bound 66.9650
5% Trimmed Mean 65.9108
Median 65.6250
Variance 3.679
Std. Deviation 1.91817
Minimum 62.01
Maximum 68.75
Range 6.74
Interquartile Range 2.84
Skewness -.276 .597
Kurtosis -.024 1.154
2. Normality test of pre-test and post-test experiment class
Descriptives
Statistic
Std.
Error
Pre-test Mean 61.4036 1.10915
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 59.0074 Upper
Bound 63.7997
5% Trimmed Mean 61.5595
Median 62.0625
Variance 17.223
Std. Deviation 4.15006
Minimum 52.25
Maximum 67.75
Range 15.50
Interquartile Range 5.41
Skewness -.589 .597
Kurtosis .568 1.154
Post-test Mean 73.0089 .36064
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower
Bound 72.2298 Upper
Bound 73.7880
5% Trimmed Mean 72.9891
Median 72.9375
Variance 1.821
Std. Deviation 1.34938
Minimum 71.13
Maximum 75.25
Range 4.13
Interquartile Range 2.06
Skewness .155 .597
Kurtosis -1.330 1.154
Appendix D
The descriptive statistic
1. The result of pre-test and post-test Experiment class
STUDENT PRE- TEST
POST-TES
St1 57.25 71.625
St2 52.25 72.375
St3 56.625 75.25
St4 61.5 74.625
St5 62.625 73.5
St6 62.25 73.625
St7 59.9 74.625
St8 61.875 71.25
St9 67.125 73.875
St10 67.75 73.875
St11 59.25 72.125
St12 62.875 72.125
St13 64.125 72.125
St14 64.25 72.125
a. Pre-test of experiment class
Statistics
N Valid 14 Missing 0
Mean 61.4036
Minimum 52.25
Maximum 67.75
b. Post-test of experiment class
Statistics
N Valid 14
Missing 0
Mean 73.0089
Minimum 71.13
Maximum 75.25
2. The result of pre-test and post-test control class
STUDENT PRE-TEST POST-
TES
St1 55.75 68.75
St2 56.65 66
St3 57 66
St4 56.25 65.25
St5 56.2 65.25
St6 58.125 68
St7 56.625 68
St8 56.5 65.75
St9 57 65.25
St10 55.245 64.875
St11 57.625 68.25
St12 56.75 62.005
St13 57.625 65.5
St14 54.7 63.125
1. Pre-test of control class
Statistics
N Valid 14
Missing 0
Mean 56.5746
Minimum 54.70
Maximum 58.13
Mean: 56.5746 Minimum: 54.70 Maximum: 58.13
2. Post-test of control class
Statistics N
N Valid 14
Missing 0
Mean 65.8575
Minimum 62.01
Maximum 68.75
Mean: 65.8575 Minimum: 62.01 Maximum: 68.75
Appendix E The result of t-test a. Paired sample t-test
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 sebelum kursus 61.40 14 4.150 1.109
sesudah kursus 73.01 14 1.349 .361
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Correlatio
n Sig.
Pair 1 sebelum kursus &
sesudah kursus 14 .031 .916
b. Independent t-test
Group Statistics experiment post-
tes N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean control post-
test
1 14 66.02 1.783 .476
2 14 73.01 1.349 .361
Appendix F Lesson plan
Rencana Pelaksanaan pembelajaran
Nama sekolah : MTs Al-Khairiyah Kota Jambi
Kelas / semester : VIII ( Delapan ) / 1 ( Experimenta lClass ) Mata pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Alokasi waktu : 1 x 45 menit
Tema : Person
Skill : Writing
A. Standar kompetensi :
6. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sederhana berbentuk descriptive, dan recount untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar
B. Kompetensi Dasar :
6.1.Mengungkapkan makna dalam bentuk teks tulis fungsional pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar
C. Indikator :
1. Melengkapi rumpang teks fungsional pendek
2. Meyusun kata menjadi teks fungsional yang bermakna 3. Menulis teks fungsional pendek
D. Tujuan pembelajaran :
