A STUDY ON THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS’ WRITING COMPETENCY
IN WRITING A TOPIC SENTENCE AND SUPPORTING SENTENCES IN AN ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH
IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Elizabeth Bunga Dwi Untari 021214103
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
A STUDY ON THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS’ WRITING COMPETENCY
IN WRITING A TOPIC SENTENCE AND SUPPORTING SENTENCES IN AN ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH
IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Elizabeth Bunga Dwi Untari 021214103
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
This thesis is dedicated to my beloved GOD, JESUS CHRIST
“Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.”
“MASTER, “MASTER, “MASTER, “MASTER, we’ve worked hard
we’ve worked hard we’ve worked hard
we’ve worked hard ALL night long,ALL night long,ALL night long, ALL night long, and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing.
But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.”
Luke 5:4 – 5
Row the boat
Row the boat
Row the boat
Row the boat
out into the deep water
out into the deep water
out into the deep water
out into the deep water
and let your nets down
and let your nets down
and let your nets down
and let your nets down
to catch some fish.”
to catch some fish.”
to catch some fish.”
to catch some fish.”
“MASTER,
“MASTER,
“MASTER,
“MASTER,
we’ve worked hard
we’ve worked hard
we’ve worked hard
we’ve worked hard
ALL night long,
ALL night long,
ALL night long,
ALL night long,
and haven’t caught a
and haven’t caught a
and haven’t caught a
and haven’t caught a
thing.
thing.
thing.
thing.
But if YOU tell me to,
But if YOU tell me to,
But if YOU tell me to,
But if YOU tell me to,
I will let
I will let
I will let
I will let the nets
the nets
the nets
the nets
down.”
down.”
down.”
down.”
Luke 5:4Luke 5:4 Luke 5:4 Luke 5:4 ––– 5– 5 5 5
'Lord Give Us the Strength'
Lord Give Us The Strength..., To suppress our fears...., Lord Give Us The Strength...., To fight our tears....,
It's a rough, tough, world..., Every day is a test...,
But powerful and proud..., We’ll always do our best...., Still more and more...., We need your support...., So Lord Give Us The Strength....,
Lord Give Us The Strength Lord Give Us The Strength..., To keep the faith….,
Lord Give Us The Strength....,
To conquer hate…, It’s a harsh, cruel road…, We travel through life…, But we feel comfort…., Guided by your light...., Still on and on….,
We pray for your love...., And to worship you...., Is our sole intent..., So Lord Give Us The Strength....,
Lord Give Us The Strength.
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that the thesis I wrote does not contain the works or part of the
works of other people, except those cited in the quotations and in the bibliography,
as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, 28 June 2007
The writer
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I would like to thank GOD, my savior, for letting me learn a lot in the whole process of finishing my thesis. I thank Him for His blessing. This is one of the
biggest lessons of my life.
Second, I would like to thank Ag. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A., my major sponsor, for giving me correction, advice and support in writing this thesis. I would
also like to thank Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., my co-sponsor for the support, advice and love.
Third, I thank Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd., for giving me the chance to conduct my research in his classes. For Mr. Markus, Ms. Mita, Erlita, Ayu, and Nita, I thank them for helping me pilot my rubric. I would also like to thank the students of Writing IVclass B and class C for their willingness helping me to do my research.
Fourth, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to My Family (my Pa – Robertus Sudaryanto, my Ma – Chatarina Muryani and my sister – Fransiska Dian Lina Heryanti) for giving me great love and support, especially for my mom who always stood beside me and helped me finish my thesis. I love them all. To
Galih Pramaiswara Noviartanto, I thank him for his love, care, and kindness, and for letting me share my sadness and happiness, my problems, my tears and my
laughters. For all members in my house, Mas Lardi, Mbak Tini, Bimo, Angger and Dito, I thank them for always cheering me up.
Fifth, I would like to thank all of my best friends for their help and support.
Rika, my roommate, I thank her for keeping me strong and letting me learn to be happy forever. For Eryth and Che-che, I thank them for always being my friends.
Sixth, I would like to express my gratitude to all my friends who were giving
me hands and supports so I could finish this thesis. For Iin, Cheche, Thyna, Rika, Tuti, Hesti, Tutut and Dita (Lampar 38 family), Wida, Sesil, Galih K., Dedi, Agus, and Gabby (EXSA family), Dani, Dedi, Agus & Ayu, Gabby, Miko, Dedi, Sesil, Cheche, Dian, Erlita, Udjo, Reni (all EEPROers), my friends in J’ taime My Enemy, Helen Keller, The Wizard of Oz, I thank them all for the marvelous and
unforgettable moments in my life.
Finally, I would like to thank all who had supported me and could not be
mentioned, for their help during my study in Sanata Dharma University. Last but not
least, I hope this thesis will be useful for all of us.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE ... i
PAGE OF APROVAL ... ii
PAGE OF BOARD EXAMINERS ... iii
PAGE OF DEDICATION ... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... viii
LIST OF TABLES ... x
LIST OF FIGURES ... xi
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xii
ABSTRACT ... xiii
ABSTRAK ... xiv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1. BACKGROUND ... 1
1.2. PROBLEM LIMITATION ... 4
1.3. PROBLEM FORMULATION ... 4
1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ... 4
1.5. BENEFITS OF THE STUDY ... 5
1.6. DEFINITION OF THE TERMS ... 6
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ... 8
2.1. THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION ... 8
2.1.1. Writing ... 8
2.1.2. Paragraph ... 9
2.1.2.1.Definition ... 9
2.1.2.2.Topic sentence ... 10
2.1.2.3.Supporting sentences ... 11
2.1.3. Argumentative Paragraph ... 12
2.1.3.2...T
opic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative
Writing ... 13
2.1.4. Testing Writing ... 14
2.1.4.1. Diagnostic Test ... 15
2.1.4.2. Rubric ... 15
2.1.4.3. Validity ... 18
2.1.4.4. Reliability ... 18
2.2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 19
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ... 21
3.1. METHOD ... 21
3.2. RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS ... 22
3.3. RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ... 24
3.4. DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUE ... 27
3.5. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE ... 28
3.6. RESEARCH PROCEDURE ... 31
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 35
4.1. RESEARCH FINDINGS ... 35
4.1.1. Piloting of the Rubric ... 35
4.1.2. The fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences ... 40
4.1.3. The fourth semester students’ strength and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences ... 45
4.2. OTHER FINDINGS ... 52
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 54
5.1. CONCLUSIONS ... 54
5.2. SUGGESTIONS ... 55
BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 57
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1 Tabulation of students’ writing competency ... 27
Table 3.2 Tabulation of students’ strengths and weaknesses ... 27
Table 4.1 Piloting result for the first section ... 37
Table 4.2 Piloting result for the second section ... 39
Table 4.3 Data analysis of the fourth semester students’ argumentative paragraph ... 41
Table 4.4 Tabulation of the participants’ score ... 43
Table 4.5 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 1: Subject and Attitude ... 45
Table 4.6 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 2: Debatable Statement ... 46
Table 4.7 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 3: Support the Topic Sentence ... 47
Table 4.8 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 4: Relevant Statement ... 48
Table 4.9 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 5: Reasoning/Thinking ... 49
Table 4.10 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 6: Mechanics and Grammar ... 50
Table 4.11 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 7: Coherence ... 51
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 Scoring Rubric ... 16
Figure 3.1 Test Instrument ... 25
Figure 3.2 Rubric for assessing writing ... 25
Figure 3.3 Research diagram ... 34
Figure 4.1 Rubric for argumentative paragraph before piloting process ... 36
LIST OF APPENDIXES
Page
Appendix 1: Letter of research permission ... 59
Appendix 2 : Piloting step 1 ... 60
Appendix 3 : Piloting step 2 ... 68
Appendix 4 : Valid data ... 74
a. Good Grade ... 74
b. Fair Grade ... 77
c. Poor Grade ... 96
ABSTRACT
UNTARI, ELIZABETH BUNGA DWI. 2007. A Study on the Fourth Semester Students’ Writing Competency in Writing a Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative Paragraph in English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta : Sanata Dharma University
This thesis was aimed to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences. The topic sentence and supporting sentences were analyzed from the students’ argumentative paragraphs in which the topic sentence has to be stated.
The research questions were formulated as: 1) In what level is the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph? And 2) What are the fourth semester students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph?
The method used in this study was text analysis. The diagnostic-test was given to the fourth semester students, English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The fourth semester students were asked to write an argumentative paragraph and the researcher analyzed the students’ composition by using the rubric prepared. The students’ score was graded into good, fair, or poor. That was the level of the fourth semester students as the answer of the first research question. The students’ scores of each item in the rubric were analyzed to know the strengths and weaknesses of the fourth semester students as the answer of the second research question.
Based on the analysis of the data, it could be concluded that: first, the majority of the fourth semester students, twenty-four of thirty six participants or 66.67%, knew how to write and formulate a topic sentence but could not develop it into good supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. And the rest, nine of thirty-six participants or 25 % of all obtained a poor grade that means they neither know how to write a topic sentence nor develop it in good supporting sentences and only three of thirty-six participants 8.33% of them who really have the competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Second, there were two strengths of the fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph; they were 1) the ability in writing a topic sentence in a complete subject and attitude and 2) the ability of the fourth semester students in choosing a debatable statement in a topic sentence. There were two weaknesses of the fourth semester students; they were 1) the inability in controlling supporting sentences by only using the relevant statements and 2) the inability of the fourth semester students in arranging sentences into a coherence paragraph.
ABSTRAK
UNTARI, ELIZABETH BUNGA DWI. 2007. A Study on the Fourth Semester Students’ Writing Competency in Writing a Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative Paragraph in English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta : Universitas Sanata Dharma
Skripsi ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam membentuk kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang. Kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang ini dianalisa dari paragraf argumentatif yang dibentuk oleh siswa dimana kalimat utama harus dicantumkan dengan jelas.
Pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang akan dijawab dalam skripsi ini dapat diformulasikan sebagai berikut: 1) Termasuk dalam tingkatan manakah kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam argumentative paragraph? Dan 2) Apa sajakah kelebihan dan kelemahan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam argumentative paragraph?
Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah analisa teks. Tes diagnostik ini ditujukan pada siswa semester empat, Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma. Siswa semester empat tersebut diminta untuk membuat paragraf argumentatif yang akhirnya nanti hasilnya akan dianalisa menggunakan
rubric yang sudah disiapkan sebelumnya. Nilai siswa dari hasil analisa tersebut akan dikelompokkan dalam tingkatan-tingkatan baik, cukup dan buruk. Dan tingkatan itulah yang merupakan tingkat kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang sebagai jawaban dari pertanyaan penelitian yang pertama. Nilai siswa pada tiap-tiap aspek yang dinilai dalam rubric dianalisa untuk mengetahui kelebihan dan kekurangan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang sebagai jawaban dari pertanyaan penelitian kedua.
Berdasarkan analisa data, dapat disimpulkan bahwa: pertama, mayoritas dari siswa semester empat, duapuluh empat dari tiga puluh enam partisipan atau 66.67%, tahu bagaimana menuliskan kalimat utama dengan baik, namun belum dapat mengembangkannya dalam kalimat-kalimat pengembang sehingga membentuk sebuah paragraf argumentatif yang baik. Sebelas participan dari tiga puluh enam yang lainnya atau 25% dari mereka mendapatkan nilai yang buruk. Mereka sama sekali belum mengerti bagaimana menuliskan kalimat utama serta merangkai kalimat pengembang. Siswa yang benar-benar memiliki kemampuan dalam memformulasikan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam paragraf argumentatif hanya tiga orang dari tiga puluh enam partisipan atau 8.33%. Kedua, terdapat dua kelebihan dari siswa semester empat; mereka adalah 1) kemampuan mereka dalam membentuk kalimat utama dengan subject dan attitude
yang lengkap serta 2) kemampuan mereka dalam memilih kalimat utama yang
menyusun kalimat-kalimat dalam paragraf sehingga membentuk paragraf yang koheren.
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCION
1.1BACKGROUND
Writing is a physical work of gathering words into a sentence, sentences into a
paragraph, and paragraphs into a text. Writing is also a mental work of investing
ideas, thinking about how to express them, and organizing them into statements
and paragraphs (Nunan, 2003). Based on that understanding, a writer has to
carefully manage and organize his/her writing, so that the readers will clearly
understand and catch the writer’s idea.
In order to convey the idea correctly and perfectly from the writer to the
reader(s), the idea should be stated in a well-organized text, or in the smaller
scope, a well-organized paragraph (Muhyidin, 1988). Therefore, a good topic
sentence and good supporting sentences are important requirements to make a
well-organized paragraph. As stated by Muhyidin (1988), a well-organized
paragraph should consist of three main parts. The first part is the topic sentence
that states the main idea of the paragraph. The second part is a set of supporting
sentences that develop the topic sentence by giving reasons, examples, and facts.
The third part is a concluding sentence that ends the paragraph by restating and
summarizing the ideas in it. However, a good paragraph does not always consist
of all parts mentioned above. It may only consist of at least two parts; they are
most important parts needed to write a well-organized paragraph are a good topic
sentence and a set of supporting sentences.
In some kinds of writing such as narrative and descriptive, a topic sentence
usually does not need to be stated. However, in an argumentative writing, a topic
sentence should be explicitly stated (Moore, 1955). A clear topic sentence which
is followed by a set of supporting sentences can be helpful not only for the
writers in delivering their arguments clearly but also for the readers in
understanding the writers’ arguments and ideas easily.
As students of English Language Education, the students of English Language
Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University have to master the writing
ability. It is so because they are prepared to face a big writing process in their
study, that is a thesis, as the requirement to finish their study. They also have to
master writing because they are prepared to be English teachers who teach their
students to write as one of the competencies in English Language. In order to
make the students master the writing ability, English Language Education Study
Program gives the students opportunity to learn more about writing by providing
six levels of writing. In each level, each type of writing such as descriptive,
narrative, persuasive, and argumentative is addressed. Argumentative writing is
the subject of Writing V in English Language Education Study Program of
Sanata Dharma University which is given to the fifth semester students.
As stated in the previous paragraphs, in order to write a good argumentative
supporting sentences. Hence, the fourth semester students who will learn
argumentative writing in their class and will learn more in the next level (Writing
V), need to know first how to write a topic sentence and a set of supporting
sentences.
The fourth semester students, who will be the participants of this study, have
been studying in English Language Education Study Program for almost two
years. It implies that the fourth semester students have taken Writing I, Writing
II, and Writing III. They have also taken supporting subjects such as Structure I,
Structure II, and Structure III which help them write a good composition. This
study is based on the assumption that the students have the experiences in writing
a well-organized paragraph with a clear topic sentence and supporting sentences
as stated in the syllabus of Writing II subject.
This study is trying to evaluate the fourth semester students’ writing competency
in writing a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences. This study will give
some benefits for the students themselves and English Language Education
Study Program as the institution which facilitates this study. This study gives a
glance point of view about the students’ condition especially on the students’
ability in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences.
In addition, a well-organized paragraph is also influenced by the students’
grammar awareness. A good topic sentence should be clearly expressed in a
grammatically correct sentence. Supporting sentences also can only be clearly
fact, grammar awareness will also be included in this study as one of supporting
points of the measurement.
Based on the explanation above, the writer wants to conduct a study in order to
know whether or not the fourth semester students have the writing competency in
writing a clear topic sentence and supporting sentences as the important parts in
formulating an argumentative writing.
1.2PROBLEM LIMITATION
This study will be focused on the writing competency of the fourth semester
students in writing a good topic sentence and supporting sentences in an
argumentative writing. By doing this research, the researcher will also find the
fourth semester students’ strengths and the weaknesses in writing a topic
sentence and supporting sentences.
1.3PROBLEM FORMULATION
The problems that are formulated can be listed as follows:
1. In what level is the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a
topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph?
2. What are the fourth semester students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a
topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph?
In this study, the researcher wants to know in what level the fourth semester
students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in
an argumentative paragraph is.
Based on the study of the fourth semester students’ writing competency in
writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph, the
researcher will know the students’ strengths and weaknesses of the fourth semester
students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative
paragraph.
1.5BENEFITS OF THE STUDY
This thesis is expected to give contributions in some aspects. They are:
1. For the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study
Program
This study will be beneficial for the fourth semester students for they will
know their writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting
sentences as a means of making a clear argumentative writing. From this study,
the fourth semester students will know what their strengths and weaknesses
are, so that they will know what they should do to prepare themselves.
2. For the English Language Education Study Program Lecturers
The other benefit of this study is to help the writing V lecturers to make use of
this study to help the students to maximize their writing skill in writing a topic
paragraph and to help the students to improve their weaknesses in writing a
topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph.
3. For the English Language Education Study Program
This study will give contribution to English Language Education Study
Program to evaluate the curriculum, especially in writing. This study will show
whether or not learning how to write a topic sentence and supporting sentences
in the second semester is enough for giving the students awareness in applying
topic sentence and supporting sentences in every time they write a paragraph
especially argumentative paragraph.
1.6DEFINITION OF THE TERMS
1. Writing
In this study, writing refers to both a physical and a mental act. At the most
basic level, writing is the physical act of committing words or ideas to some
medium. On the other hand, writing is a mental work of inventing ideas, thinking
about how to express them, and organizing them into statements and paragraphs
that will be clear to a reader (Nunan, 2003).
2. Argumentative Writing
Argumentative writing, in this study, refers to kind of writing which shows
the idea, opinion, or argument of something that is arguable (Spurgin, 1989).
3. Paragraph
In this study, a paragraph is a group of sentences which contains relevant information about one main or central
4. Topic Sentence
In this study, a topic sentence refers to a general sentence which becomes
the center of the paragraph in which the other sentences in the paragraph are
developed to explain this sentence and to make it more vivid (Moore, 1955).
5. Supporting Sentences
In this study, supporting sentences are sentences that develop the topic
sentence by giving reasons, examples, and facts (Muhyidin, 1988).
6. Writing Competency
In this study, competency, or in the basic form competence, means that the
students have the necessary ability, authority, skill, knowledge, etc in writing a
topic sentence and supporting sentences correctly in a good paragraph
composition. Thus, the items which will be measured in this study are the
students’ competency in writing a topic sentence, supporting sentence and the
CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL REVIEW
This chapter will discuss the theories which underlie the study. This chapter
will be divided into two parts: theoretical description and theoretical framework. The
theoretical description consists of brief descriptions of the theories which are used in
this study. The theoretical description will discuss four major theories: first, writing,
which will discuss the theory of writing in general. Second, paragraph which will
elaborate paragraph and its substances. The third is argumentative writing which will
discuss about the theories of argumentative writing and argumentative paragraph.
And the last is testing writing which will elaborate the theories which support the
way the researcher gathers the data of this study. In the theoretical framework, the
writer will adapt the theories from the theoretical description to support this study.
2.1. THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION 2.1.1. WRITING
As mentioned in the first chapter, writing means both physical and mental
work. Writing is a physical work of gathering words into sentence, sentences into
paragraph, and paragraphs into text. However, the physical work of writing will
not be meaningful without the mental work. The mental work of writing here is
the work of brain in investing ideas, thinking about how to express them, and
writing will produce meaningful writing product and the message from the writer
will be clearly conveyed to the reader(s) (Nunan, 2003).
Based on that understanding, paragraph writing could be defined as the
physical work of gathering words into a sentence and sentences into a paragraph,
and the mental work of investing idea, thinking about how to express them and
organized them into sentences to make a good paragraph. The idea invested will
be stated on the main paragraph or the topic sentence and expressed in
well-organized supporting sentences.
Physically, writing is a process of gathering sentences into paragraph and
paragraphs into a text. Thus, paragraph is one of the important parts that
establishes a text. In order to know what paragraph is, the following description
will describe briefly about it.
2.1.2. PARAGRAPH 2.1.2.1. Definition
A paragraph, physically, is a group of sentences. However, a good paragraph
should contain relevant information about one main or central idea. The main or
central idea here is called a topic sentence, and the relevant information about
one main idea is called supporting sentences (Bram, 1995).
Muhyidin (1988) states that a paragraph consists of three main parts; they are:
1. Topic sentence
2. Supporting sentences
Supporting sentences are used to develop the topic sentence by giving
reasons, examples and facts.
3. Concluding sentences
A Concluding sentence is used to end the paragraph by restating or
summarizing the ideas in it.
However, a good paragraph does not always consist of the three main parts stated
above. The most important elements of a paragraph are the topic sentence and a set
of supporting sentences (Bram, 1995).
2.1.2.2. Topic sentence
As stated before, a topic sentence is the main idea of the paragraph (Muhyidin,
1988). A topic sentence introduces the topic of the paragraph. A good topic
sentence states the idea or attitude which is called controlling idea. Controlling
idea controls what the sentences in the paragraph will discuss. All sentences in
the paragraph should relate to and develop the controlling idea stated. “A topic
sentence should consist of a subject and an attitude. A subject is what the writer
writes, and an attitude is why the writer writes” (Bram, 1995: 16).
For example:
“The BBC World Service Radio station broadcasts various highly selected
programs.”
From the sentence, it is shown that ‘The BBC World Service Radio station’ is the
subject of the topic sentence. It tells the reader that the paragraph will talk about
the BBC as the world service radio station. Then ‘broadcasts various highly
paragraph. The attitude also gives the boundaries in which the topic sentence will
be elaborated in a set of supporting sentences. The paragraph will only talk about
the various highly selected programs in BBC, so the ideas about history of BBC
radio or the BBC radio staff will not be included.
The position of a topic sentence can be: 1) at the beginning (in the first sentence)
of the paragraph, 2) (somewhere) in the middle of the paragraph, or 3) at the end
(the last sentence) of the paragraph. Even though there are three possibilities of
placing the topic sentence, most of the experts in writing suggest beginner
writers to place the topic sentence at the beginning or in the first sentence of the
paragraph (Bram, 1995; Muhyidin, 1988). When the topic sentence is placed at
the beginning of the paragraph, the writer will have clear guidance to finish the
rest of the paragraph and the writer will have good control over the contents –
what information to be included. In addition the reader will be more prepared to
follow and to understand the paragraph.
A good topic sentence should follow some rules as follows (Muhyidin, 1988):
1. A topic sentence is a complete sentence with a subject, a verb, and generally
a complement. It should be grammatically correct.
2. A topic sentence should have the subject which states what will be discussed
in the paragraph and the attitude or controlling idea which will give the
reason of writing and give the boundaries to limit information included in the
paragraph.
3. A topic sentence is usually (but not always) placed in the first sentence of a
2.1.2.3. Supporting Sentences
“Supporting sentences are a set of sentences that develop the topic sentence
by giving reasons, examples, and facts,” (Muhyidin, 1988: 9). When the attitude
of the topic sentence stated the boundaries of the paragraph, the supporting
sentences would only develop the information in the field which was stated.
Supporting sentences should completely develop the topic sentence, but should
not consist of irrelevant information (Bram, 1995).
There are two kinds of supporting sentences (p.18):
1. Major supporting sentences
Major supporting sentences develop the topic sentence directly. They add
some relevant, new information about the main idea.
2. Minor supporting sentences
Minor supporting sentences support the major supporting sentences directly
and the main idea indirectly. It is possible not to have any minor supporting
sentences in the paragraph.
It can be concluded that good supporting sentences should follow some rules:
1. Supporting sentences should elaborate the topic sentences completely
2. There are no irrelevant sentences.
There are so many kinds of writings or paragraphs, such as descriptive,
narrative, argumentative, etc., however, in this study, the kind of writing that is
chosen is argumentative paragraph. Thus, we need to know first about argumentative
2.1.3. ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 2.1.3.1. Definition
An argument is supposed to be a reasoned consideration of an idea.
Argumentative writing is a kind of writing which shows the idea, opinion or
argument of something (Spurgin, 1989). “Through this writing, the writer tries to
make sense of what the writer does not understand, tries to refuse ideas the writer
believe are mistaken, tries to determine appropriate policy for future actions,”
(Spurgin, 1989:1). Argument does not mean quarrel. It does imply the existence
of misunderstanding or disagreement. The thing which is argued is the thing that
is debatable. The thing that is not debatable is the thing that can be verified
readily or that is true by definition.
Since an argumentative writing should have the possibility for doubt and
disagreement from others, the arguer must try to search for an answer or facts to
persuade the reader or listener. To argue is to make a case for a judgment or
opinion, while to persuade is to bring about a desired response in a reader or
listener. Thus, in an argumentative writing, the writer(s) needs to be able to
provide a debatable topic sentence to make sure that not every reader has the
same opinion, and persuasive supporting sentences from which the reader will
know the writer’s idea and opinion, and also will be persuaded to agree and
support the writer’s opinion and argumentation.
2.1.3.2. Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in Argumentative writing
A topic sentence in a paragraph consists of subject and attitude (Bram, 1995).
conclusion, and the attitude of the topic sentence is called premise (Spurgin,
1989).
Similar to the subject in a topic sentence, conclusion also gives the main idea
of the paragraph. It tells about what the paragraph talks about. However, in an
argumentative writing, the conclusion must be a debatable statement. It cannot be
something that all of the people will agree or disagree, but a statement that can make
the reader give another argument about it.
For example:
- Spider is not an insect
This statement is not a conclusion. It is not debatable. The statement can be
true by definition. All people can say that it is true.
- Prostitution should be legalized
It is a debatable statement. Some people may say, “I agree with you.” But the
other may say “No way!” This kind of statement is appropriate as the
conclusion of the topic sentence in an argumentative writing.
However, a topic sentence which only consists of conclusion may not be a good
topic sentence. A good topic sentence should consist of subject, which in this
case is a conclusion, and attitude, which in this case is premise. Premise, as well
as attitude, is used to support the conclusion and give boundaries to the
conclusion.
For example:
‘Aspirin should be banned’ is the conclusion of the topic sentence; while ‘because
excessive amounts of it are poisonous’ is the premise. This premise gives support to
the conclusion and gives boundaries to the supporting sentences that the supporting
sentences are still in the boundaries of the topic “the poisonous excessive amounts in
an aspirin”.
In order to gather the data, the researcher needs to conduct a test. Thus, the
researcher needs to know the basic understanding about testing writing.
2.1.4. TESTING WRITING
The best way to test the students’ writing competency is to get the students to
write (Hughes, 1989). In this study, the researcher will conduct a diagnostic test in
order to gather the data. This test is used to know the basic competence of the
students.
2.1.4.1.Diagnostic Test
Diagnostic test is used to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses. It is
intended primarily to ascertain what further teaching is necessary (Hughes, 1989). It
means that by using the diagnostic test, the researcher is tried to identify the
students’ basic competence to know the students’ strengths and weaknesses to
diagnose what items to be improved.
2.1.4.2. Rubric
Testing writing is a subjective matter. However, it could be minimize using a
rubric. “Rubric is a tool in performance assessor kit which tells potential performers
judged. The result will be distinguished in form of relative quality.” (Wiggins,
1988:153)
A scoring rubric is the established criteria, including rules, principles, and
illustrations, used in scoring responses to individual items and clusters of items of
performance assessment. It has three main functions: establishing objective criteria
of judgment, providing established expectations to teachers and students, and
maintaining focus on content and standards of a student work.
There are several elements of useful rubrics, and each is discussed in turn
below (Huba & Freed, 2000).
a. Level of Mastery
Columns which describe the level of students’ work
b. Dimensions of Quality
The rows of each figure list the dimensions of quality that are important in
reaching the goal of the project or program.
c. Organizational Grouping
The dimensions of quality are grouped into several groups. This helps students
understand that they will be evaluated on complex abilities that are
multidimensional.
d. Commentaries
For each aspect of qualities, the rubric provides a commentary describing the
defining features of work at each level of mastery.
In the commentaries, it is described for the students the likely consequences of
performing at the level of quality in a real-life setting.
A scoring rubric developer can have three options: adopt, adapt, or start from
the beginning. If an existing rubric which matches of with the items can be found, it
may be adopted. Otherwise, it may be modified to fit the need. Since the researcher
could not formulate the rubric by herself, the researcher adapts the rubric from
several sources. The researcher adapts the rubric stated in From: Huba & Fred
(2000), Stiggins (2001) and other sources from Internet. The rubric was adapted and
formulated as follows:
Figure 2.1 Scoring Rubric
Score Descriptions No Items
3 2 1
Topic Sentence 1. Subject and
attitude
There are a subject and an attitude
There is a subject but not an attitude
There is no topic sentence
2. Debatable statement
The topic sentence is clear and debatable
The topic sentence is too general and predictable
The topic sentence is unclear or absent
Supporting Sentences 3. Support the
topic sentence
clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence
4. Relevant statement
There is no irrelevant sentence
There is one irrelevant sentence
There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 5. Reasoning/
Thinking
Persuasive, often insightful
adequate Inadequate, confusing overall
Grammar and Coherence 6. Mechanics
and Grammar
All sentences are complete and grammatical, and have no errors in punctuation,
For the most part, sentences are complete and grammatical, and have maximum 4
capitalization, and spelling errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
7. Coherence The sentences are logically
arranged, each sentence moves on naturally and use the
appropriate transition signals
The sentences are logically arranged but lack of transition signals which make the sentences cannot flow together easily
The writer cannot read easily because of the bumpy jumping ideas and sentences. There is no transition signal
Scoring rubrics development is an integrated process of writing, revising,
piloting and trying it out. After the researcher write and revise the rubric, the
researcher pilot the rubric. After every effort has been made to clarify the scoring
categories, other teachers may be asked to use the rubric and the anchor papers to
evaluate a sample set of responses. Any discrepancies between the scores that are
assigned by the teachers will suggest which components of the scoring rubric require
further explanation. Any differences in interpretation should be discussed and
appropriate adjustments to the scoring rubric should be negotiated. This process is
called as piloting process. This process is used to make sure the validity and
reliability of the rubric.
2.1.4.3. Validity
A test is said to be valid if it measures accurately what it is intended to measure
(Hughes, 1989).
There are four types of validity (Hughes, 1989):
A test is said to have content validity if its content constitutes representative
sample of the language skills, structures, etc, with which it is meant to be
concerned.
b. Criterion – Related Validity
A test is said to have criterion-related validity if the result on the test agree
with those provided by some independent and high dependable assessment of
the candidate’s ability.
c. Construct Validity
A test is said to have construct validity if it can be demonstrated that it
measures just the ability which it is supposed to measure.
d. Face Validity
A test is said to have face validity if it looks as if it measures what it is
supposed to measure.
2.1.4.4. Reliability
A rubric should also has reliability aspect, or in this case, scorer reliability.
Scorer reliability means anyone scorer would give the same score on the two
occasions and this would be the same score as would be given by another scorer on
either occasion (Hughes, 1989).
2.2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The theories in the theoretical description will be used as the basic guideline to
answer the research questions in this thesis. The first question of this research is in
what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic
guideline for the researcher, the theory of writing and paragraph gives general
understanding to the researcher in analyzing the students’ writing. The characteristic
of a topic sentence and supporting sentences give the researcher knowledge about
what characteristics the students should cover to be included as the one who has the
competency in writing a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences. The
theories of argumentative writing specify what kind of writing is used by the
researcher as the kind of writing that is tested. The theories of a topic sentence,
supporting sentences and argumentative writing will be combined to make a rubric
to measure the writing competency of the fourth semester students in writing a topic
sentence and supporting sentence. The theory of testing writing, especially theory of
rubric, will give a glance understanding on how to make a rubric. And to make the
rubric valid and reliable, it is needed the theory of validity and reliability. The
second research question of the study is what the strengths and the weaknesses of the
fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and
supporting sentences are. It can be answered based on the analysis of each item in
the rubric which is arranged based on the theories of topic sentence and supporting
sentences in an argumentative paragraph. From the result of the analysis the
researcher can see the strengths and the weaknesses of the students as the data to
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the researcher would discuss the methodology that was used
by the researcher to conduct the research on the fourth semester students’ writing
competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative
paragraph in their Writing V class of English Language Education Study Program,
Sanata Dharma University. This chapter consists of six parts. The first part is method
that discusses the type of research chosen to find the answer to the research
questions. The second part is research participants, which elaborates the subject of
the research as well as the sampling method. The third part is research instruments.
This part shows the research tools that were used by the researcher to gather the data
from the research participants. The fourth part is data gathering technique, which
discusses the techniques that were used by the researcher to gather the research data.
The fifth part is data analysis technique, which gives the guidelines for the
researcher on how the findings were analyzed to answer the research questions. And
the last part is research procedure, which summarizes the procedure taken in
conducting the study.
3.1. METHOD
The method that was used by the researcher to find out the students’ writing
competency in writing a topic sentence and the supporting sentences in an
argumentative paragraph was a text analysis. The researcher’s curiosity in knowing
sentences in an argumentative paragraph could be easily answered by measuring and
analyzing the students’ result in making a topic sentence and supporting sentences in
an argumentative paragraph. Thus, the researcher asked the fourth semester students
in Writing IV classes to write an argumentative paragraph which would be analyzed
using the instrument. The instruments would be explained in sub-chapter 3.3.
In this test, the researcher used diagnostic-test to identify students’ strengths
and weaknesses. Diagnostic test was intended primarily to ascertain what further
teaching is necessary (Hughes, 1989). The diagnostic test was used here by the
researcher to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a
topic sentence and supporting sentences as the basic requirement to formulate an
argumentative writing, which is taught in Writing V. It meant that the researcher
asked the students to write an argumentative paragraph using the topics provided by
the researcher. The researcher gave two topics which could be chosen by the
students to give the boundaries of the subject matter. The topics were in the form of
a word or a clause and not a sentence to make sure that the researcher did not give
any clue for the participants in writing a topic sentence. The topics which were given
to the participants were “The Educational Level of Indonesian President” and
“Polygamy”. These topics were chosen with consideration of the fact that the
researcher wanted to measure the students writing competency in writing a topic
sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Thus the topics
3.2. RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS
The participants of this study were the fourth semester students of English
Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University who were attending
Writing IV classes. The fourth semester students were chosen based on some
reasons: First, the researcher assumed that the fourth semester students had the
experiences in writing a well-organized paragraph with a clear topic sentence and
supporting sentences because they had taken Writing I, Writing II, and Writing III.
They had also taken other subjects such as Structure I, Structure II, and Structure III
which help them write a good composition. Second, because they were studying
Writing IV in this semester, and they would study about argumentative writing in
Writing V in which a topic sentence and supporting sentences should be clearly
stated and developed.
Considering the limitation on the manpower, ability, chance, and time
factors, the researcher could not analyze all the members of fourth semester students.
Therefore, the researcher used cluster random sampling. “When the population is
spread out in some clusters which each of cluster has the same or almost the same
characteristics, one or some clusters can be taken randomly as the sample”
(Translated from Gulo, 2002: 93). Thus, the samples taken for the random sampling
were not based on the total population of the fourth semester students, but based on
the clusters or in this case were the Writing IV classes. There were five classes of
Writing IV, and the researcher only chose two classes randomly to represent the
whole fourth semester students. The two classes were considered enough to
almost the same characteristics in writing competency because they had taken the
same classes of writing, and they had taken almost the same subjects in their studies.
Since the subject of the research was the fourth semester students who were
attending Writing IV classes, for those who were attending Writing IV classes but
not from the fourth semester students were not counted as the research participants.
The total research respondents were fifty-one respondents, who were from class B
and D of Writing IV in English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma
University.
3.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
The first instrument that was used to collect the data from the research
participants was the test sheet. The test sheet was a form in which the participants
wrote their argumentative paragraph which would be analyzed by the researcher to
answer the research questions. The instrument could be seen in figure 3.1.
To analyze the participants’ writing composition, the researcher used a
rubric. “Rubric is a tool in performance assessor’s kit which tells potential
performers and judges what elements of performance matter most and how the work
to be judged. The result will be distinguished in form of relative quality.” (Wiggins,
1988: 153).
The rubric used to measure the fourth semester students’ writing competency
was adapted from several sources. (From: Huba & Fred (2000), Stiggins (2001) and
other sources from Internet) The rubric can be seen in figure 3.2.
Since the rubric was adapted from several sources. Thus, the rubric had to be
piloted to make sure that it was reliable. The rubric was piloted using the same
datum and the same rubric, measured by seven different persons.
Figure 3.1 Test Instrument
Choose one of the following topics to make an argumentative paragraph. Formulate your argument only in one paragraph.
1. Educational level of Indonesian President
2. Polygamy
Write in the following space:
_________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________
Figure 3.2 Rubric for assessing writing
RUBRIC FOR ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH Score Descriptions
No Items
3 2 1
Topic Sentence 1. Subject and
attitude
There are a subject and an attitude
There is a subject but not an attitude
There is no topic sentence
2. Debatable statement
The topic sentence is clear and debatable
The topic sentence is too general and predictable
The topic sentence is unclear or absent
Supporting Sentences 3. Support the
topic sentence
clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence
4. Relevant statement
There is no irrelevant sentence
There is one irrelevant sentence
There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 5. Reasoning/
Thinking
Persuasive, often insightful
adequate Inadequate, confusing overall
Grammar and Coherence
6. Mechanics and Grammar
All sentences are complete and grammatical, and have no errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
For the most part, sentences are complete and grammatical, and have maximum 4 errors in
punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
For the most part, sentences are not complete and grammatical and have more than 5 errors in
punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
7. Coherence The sentences are logically
arranged, each sentence moves on naturally and use the
The sentences are logically arranged but lack of transition signals which make the sentences cannot
appropriate transition signals
flow together easily
is no transition signal
The result of the students’ writing composition analysis was tabulated to
answer the first question formulated in the problem formulation. The tabulation
could be seen in table 3.1. In order to answer the second research question, the
students’ result was tabulated for each item of the rubric. By tabulating each item, it
could be seen in which items the students had the strengths and the weaknesses. The
tabulation could be seen in table 3.2.
Table 3.1 Tabulation of students’ writing competency
Score for Item No. No.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Total Score Grade
Table 3.2 Tabulation of students’ strengths and weaknesses
Item 1: Subject and attitude Score Number of
Participants
Percentage of the number of Participants 1
2 3
3.4 DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUE
Data used by the researcher in conducting this study were derived from two
1. Students’ Composition
The main aspect from which the researcher obtained the data to answer the
research questions was from the students’ composition. As mentioned before, the
researcher obtained the data by asking the fourth semester students to write an
argumentative paragraph using the topics provided. The researcher entered
Writing IV class B and class D which had been chosen randomly and asked the
students in those classes to write an argumentative composition. The students’
compositions were used as the data for the researcher to be analyzed.
The schedule of the research could be seen as follows:
a. Class D
Day and Date : Friday, March 23, 2007
Time : 11 a.m.
b. Class B
Day and Date : Monday, March 26, 2007
Time : 7 a.m.
2. Literature Review
Literary review was done to get the theoretical discussion to support the
research. This literary review was mainly done to find out the theory and the
characteristics of a topic sentence and supporting sentences which were the focus
of this research. Thus, this research had the basic theory to support it. The
literary review was also done to find any information related to the research.
Literary review included searching on the related books and the previous
3.5DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
In answering the problem formulation, the data collected were analyzed. The
analysis followed some steps:
1. Analyzing the Students’ Paragraphs
The data obtained from testing the students’ writing competency in writing
a topic sentence and supporting sentences in the form of students’ argumentative
paragraphs were analyzed by using the rubric formulated in the research
instrument (figure 3.2). Each student’s paragraph was scored based on the rubric.
The rubric consisted of seven items, and each item consisted of three scores; they
were 3, 2, and 1. Thus, the maximal score of each student was 3 x 7 = 21, and the
minimum score of each student was 1 x 7 = 7.
2. Tabulating the Students’ Score
The score of each student was tabulated by using the instrument in table
3.1. From the tabulation, the total score of each participant could be known. The
total score ranged between 7 up to 21. The total scores of the participants were
graded into three levels: good, fair, and poor. The range of leveling was counted
by subtracting the maximal score with the minimal score minus 1 divided by the
sum of the level. The minimal score minus 1 was used to make sure that the
minimal score was counted as the point which was included in the measurement.
The measurement could be seen as follows:
Max. score – (min. score – 1)
level
3
= 15 : 3
= 5
Thus, it could be concluded that the score range of each level was:
Good : 17 – 21
Fair : 12 –16
Poor : 7 – 11
3. Analyzing the Data to Answer Research Question Number 1
From the tabulation, the students who obtained the good, fair, and poor grade
were counted. The measurement answered these following questions:
a. How many students are included in Good grade? b. What is the percentage?
c. How many students are included in Fair grade? d. What is the percentage?
e. How many students are included in Poor grade? f. What is the percentage?
The result of the data analysis was elaborated in the form of narrative
paragraphs to answer the first research question: in what level the fourth
semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting
sentences in an argumentative paragraph was.
4. Tabulating Each Item in the Rubric
This part specified the items that showed the strength and the weakness of the
fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in
tabulation was used to tabulate the score of each item in the rubric. Thus, there
were seven tabulations since there were seven items in the rubric. The tabulation
showed, for the specific item, how many students obtained score 3, how many
students obtained score 2 and how many students obtained score 1.
5. Analyzing the Tabulation to Answer Research Question Number 2
From the tabulation of each item, it could be clearly seen the items in which
the students were strong (most of the students obtained score 3) and the items in
which the students were weak (most of the students obtained score 1). From the
tabulation, the researcher analyzed the result by using these following questions:
a. In which item(s) is/are the students’ strength(s)?
b. What is the description of each item?
c. It can be concluded that the students’ strength(s) is/are …
d. In which item(s) is/are the students’ weakness(s)?
e. What is the description of each item?
f. It can be concluded that the students’ weakness(es) is/are …
The answer to those questions would be elaborated in the form of narrative
paragraphs to answer the second research question: what the students’ strengths
and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an
argumentative paragraph were.
3.6RESEARCH PROCEDURE
This research followed some procedures in conducting this study. There were
six stages to be followed to conduct this study. The stages would be elaborated as
1. Literature Review
The researcher reviewed some literatures in order to choose the topic and the
problem of this study. The literature review was also used to get the supporting
theories of this research so that the research had the background theory to
support it. The literature review was done from November - December 2006.
2. Writing the Proposal
The next step after doing the literature review was writing the proposal of the
study. The proposal consisted of three chapters; they were chapter one for
introduction, chapter two for theoretical review and chapter three for
methodology. This proposal was compiled to give boundaries of the study and
the guidelines in conducting the research. This step was done from January –
March 2007.
3. Conducting a Test
Having written the proposal, the researcher conducted a test. Before conducting
the test, the researcher stated the sampling of the participants. The researcher
chose randomly which Writing IV class that would be used as the participants to
do the test. After choosing two classes, the researcher conducted the test in those
classes. Through the test, the researcher asked the fourth semester students in
those classes to write an argumentative paragraph based on the topics provided.
The researcher did not tell them what characteristics would be judged to make
sure that the result will be originally based on the students’ basic writing
competency. This step was done in March 2007.
After conducting the test, the researcher chose one of the students’ paragraphs to
test the reliability of the rubric as formulated in figure 3.2. The paragraph was
copied and given to seven persons to be scored using the rubric. Those seven
persons were those who had the competence on language teaching. When those
persons gave the same score or at least the scores were still in the same level
(good, fair or poor), the rubric was reliable. However, if the result did not meet
the requirements stated before, the rubric was not reliable and it should be
improved until the result was reliable. This step was done in March and April
2007.
5. Analyzing the data
In this step, the data that was in the form of students’ composition were
analyzed. The analysis followed the steps which had been explained in the data
analysis technique (Chapter III). This step was done in April 2007.
6. Giving suggestion
This study was made to give benefits for some aspects. Thus, in this part the
researcher would give conclusion of the research, restated the result of the study
and gave some support or suggestion to those who get the beneficial aspects of
this study. This step was done in April 2007.
Literature Review
(December 2006)
Writing the proposal (January – March 2007)
Doing test (March 2007)
Testing the rubric (March 2007)
Positive Result Negative Result
Rewrite the rubric until the result is positive
(March – April 2007) Analyzing the data
(April 2007)
Analyzing the students’ paragraph
Tabulating the students’ score
Analyzing the result to answer Research Question Number 1
Tabulating each item of question in the rubric
Analysing the tabulation to answer research question number
2
Giving Suggestion (April 2007)
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the findings of the research and the discussion of the
findings to answer the research questions stated in Chapter I. The main concern of
this research is to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing
a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph in English
Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. This concern is
formulated in two research questions. First, in what level the fourth semester
students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in
an argumentative paragraph is, and second, what the fourth semester students’
strengths and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an
argumentative paragraph are.
4.1. RESEARCH FINDINGS
The data of the research were collected on March 23 and 26, 2007 in Writing IV
class B and class D. The data were taken from a test which was done by the
participants in a form of an argumentative paragraph. The total number of the
data was 51 which consisted of 36 valid data and 15 invalid data. The invalid
data were those which were not in a form of an argumentative paragraph.
The data were analyzed using the rubric stated in Chapter III figure 3.2. Since the
rubric was adapted from several sources, the rubric should be piloted to check its
valid
