CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHOD
F. Data Analysis
and/ or fragments, run-ons, deletions meaning confused or obscured
10 – 5 Very poor
virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules dominated by errors does not communicate OR not enough to evaluate
(Heaton, 1989-146)
= Number of student
(Gay, 1981)
3. To calculate the percentage of the students‟ achievement, the formula which by using as follows :
F
P = --- x 100 4 X N
Notation: P : Rate Percentage
F : Frequency of the students‟ achievement N : The Total Number of Students
(Sudjana, 1999) 4. To calculate the students‟ improvement score, the formula which was used
as follows:
X2 – X1
P = x 100%
X1
Notation : P : Students‟ improvement score X1 : Mean cycle I
X2 :Mean cycle II
(Gay, 1981)
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of findings of the research and its discussion. The findings of the research present the result of the improvement of the students‟
writing skill that covers the students‟ writing content, organization, and grammar, and the discussion of the research covers further explanation of the findings.
A. The Findings
The finding of this classroom action research deals with the answer of the problem statement which is aim to improve the students‟ writing skill covers content, grammar and organization. The findings consist of the improvement of the students‟ content, grammar and organization in writing skill and the students‟
activeness in teaching and learning process. The findings of the research detect that the use of Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) can improve the students‟ writing skill in eleventh grade students of MA Muhammadiyah Datarang Kab. Gowa.
There are activities that have been conducted before finding the results of the research. The activities are such as the teacher asks students stating the point, illustrating it and putting forward an explanation end with a statement about the main point, not on some detail from the example. It‟s a very effective guideline to use, as it specifies all the steps that would be necessary to offer up a thorough discussion.
To explain further about how SRSD can develop paragraphs more the teacher makes change in cycle II, like ask the students begin their writing the strategy steps are introduced (POW+WWW, What = 2, and H = 2) : P = Pick your idea; O = Organize your notes; W = Write and say more. The WWW = Who is the main character? When does the story take place, Where does the story take place? What = What does the main character do? and What happens then? H = How does the story end? and How does the main character feel? . Students work on identifying parts of a good essay after discussing individual components of the strategy.
After guide the steps in practice writing descriptive text, the researcher give score to the students based on their writing skill. In assessing the students‟
progression during learning writing material using SRSD, the researcher use writing assessment of good writing from Heaton (1989:146) and the data from cycle I and cycle II is analyze through calculate the gain score is multiply with standard score (10) divided with maximal score in each component in writing.
The result is the students‟ score. For mean score, the researcher calculates the sum of all score divide with the number of students. The researcher also calculate the percentage of the students‟ achievement with use formula as frequency of the students‟ achievement multiply with 100 and divided the total number of students, the total number of students must multiply with 4 because there are four meetings in each cycle.
1. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Skill
The use of SRSD in improving the students‟ writing skill deals with content, organization, and grammar. It can be seen clearly in the following table and chart:
Table 4.1: The improvement of the students’ writing skill
No Indicators
The Student’ Score Cycle I Cycle II
1. Content 6.68 8.28
2. Organization 6.47 7.86
3. Grammar 5.65 7.21
4.
X
6.26 7.78The table above indicates that there is the improvement of the students‟
writing skill from cycle I to cycle II, the students‟ writing skill in cycle I is (6.26) then the students‟ writing skill increases in cycle II (7.78). Therefore, the improvement of students‟ writing skill achievement from cycle I until cycle II is increasing significantly.
The table above proves that the use of SRSD in teaching and learning process can improve the students‟ writing skill after taking action in cycle I and cycle II has been achieved the standard score.
To see clearly the improvement of the students‟ writing skill, the following chart is presented:
Chart 4.1: The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Skill in Term of Content, Organization, and Grammar
Chart 4.2: The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Skill
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CONTENT ORGANIZATION GRAMMAR
Cycle I Cycle 2
62.60%
77.80%
40.90%
36.90%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Improvement Writing Skill
Cycle I Cycle 2 D Test Improvement
The chart above shows that the improvement percentage of the students‟
writing skill after taking an action through SRSD is higher than before. It is proved by the improvement of the students‟ writing skill in cycle I to cycle II (6.26– 7.78).
2. The Result of the Students’ Activeness in Teaching and Learning Process
The result observation of the students‟ activeness in teaching and learning process toward the use of SRSD in improving the students‟ writing skill at the Eleventh Grade Students of MA Muhammadiyah Datarang Kab. Gowa which is conducted in 2 cycles during 8 meetings is taken by the observer through observation sheet. It can be seen clearly through the following table:
Table 4.2: The observation result of the students’ activeness in learning process.
Cycle
Meetings Average
Score
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
I 55.14% 61.76% 72.79% 74.26% 65.98%
II 80.88% 83.08% 86.76% 89.70% 85.10%
The result of the students‟ observation about their activeness can also be shown in the graphic below:
Chart 4.2. The Improvement of the Students’ Activeness
The chart above shows that the students‟ activeness in cycle I is lower than the students‟ activeness in cycle II. It because in cycle I, Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) is unfamiliar with them. They are still did not know that technique‟s steps and purposes. The researcher also limited the students chance to write intensively. Therefore, the students are not interested in learning because they didn‟t enjoy the material. As result they are less active to participate in learning and teaching process. But in cycle II the researcher tried to give clearer instruction to students about Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD). As
65.98%
85.10%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Students' Activeness
Cycle I Cycle 2
result, the students became accustom with it. They get many ideas to write intensively, so during this cycle they became more active than previous cycle.
Through the chart above, the researcher concludes that the use of Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) can improve the students‟ activeness in learning writing.
B. Discussion
1. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Content
Content is a component of writing skill. According to Jacob (1991 : 22) the content of writing should be clear for the readers so that the readers can understand the message convey and gain information from it. In order to have a good content of writing, its content should be well unified and completed. This term is usually known as unity and completeness, which become characteristic of good writing.
The use of Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) can improve the students‟ writing content. The table 1 indicates that the improvement of the students‟ writing content in cycle II is greater than cycle I. The students‟ mean score improve from 6.68 become 8.28. The process that can be explained from cycle 1 to cycle 2 as follows:
a. At the beginning of the implementation of the first cycle has not been suitable with planning yet this matter is cause by:
1. The Students are poorly described incomplete information to gain the aim in their writing.
2. The Students are difficult to think creatively and develop thoughts, excluding all irrelevant information.
3. The Students‟ writing is ambiguous and misunderstanding cause he Students did not use capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.
Therefore, most of them are difficult to write clearly and still felt difficult to think creatively. As result, the mean score of the students‟ content in cycle 1 is still low. As we can see in table 1 that the mean score is only 6.68. Its result is still under the completeness grade standard in SMA.
b. At the end of the second cycle can be concluded:
1. Students already wrote well describe, give the readers very clear information.
2. Students can think creatively, so they can understand what the messages convey.
The explanation above explains that, when the researcher conducted action in cycle II, the students‟ mean score improve from 6.68 to 8.28. It has achieved the standard score in SMA. In this cycle, the researcher intensively interested the students to write. The researcher help the student‟s in improving their writing content.
2. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Organization
Organization is a component of writing. According to Jacob (1991 : 22) the purpose of organizing material in writing involves coherence, order of importance, and general to specific, chronological order and spatial order of pattern. When writing the learner should arrange their writing chronologically.
They should present their ideas based on the order of which happened from the beginning to the end.
The use of Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) can improve the students‟ writing organization. The table 1 indicates that the improvement of the students‟ writing organization in cycle II is greater than cycle I. The students‟
mean score improve from 6.47 become 7.86. The process that can be explained from cycle 1 to cycle 2 as follows:
a. At the beginning of the implementation of the first cycle has not been suitable with planning yet this matter is cause by:
1. The Students are low ideas and topic which relevant in a topic.
2. The Students are can‟t understand what they write because their writing did not organize.
Therefore, most of them are low ideas and they can‟t understand what they write. As result, the mean score of the students‟ organization in cycle 1 is still low. As we can see in table 1 that the mean score is only 6.47. Its result is still under the completeness grade standard in SMA.
b. At the end of the second cycle can be concluded:
1. Students already developed ideas and topic which relevant in a united form.
2. Students can arrange and organize the ideas or messages in writing.
The explanation above explains that, when the researcher conducted action in cycle II, the students‟ mean score improve from 6.47 to 7.86. It has achieved the standard score in SMA. In this cycle, the researcher intensively interested the students to write. The researcher helps the students‟ in improving their writing organization.
3. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Grammar
Grammar is a one component of writing skill. According to Jacob (1991:22) language used or grammar in writing description and other form of writing involves connected languages and point of grammar should be one that is capable of producing grammar. We should not be able to do anything more than latter separate function. And also grammar can help the students improve the use of formal language.
The table above indicates that the indicators of the students‟ writing grammar improve significantly. The students‟ writing grammar improvement is quite significant from cycle I (5.65) to cycle II (7.21). In fact, the use of SRSD made the students‟ writing grammar increase. The processes that can be explain from cycle 1 to cycle 2 as follows:
a. At the beginning of the implementation of the first cycle has not been suitable with planning yet this matter is cause by:
1) The Students are afraid to make mistake in grammar.
2) Some students‟ writing is containing with errors in verb, noun, agreement and imperative sentence.
3) Some students still did not give attention for preposition, conjunction, articles and tenses.
Therefore, most of them are difficult to write correct and appropriate sentences. As result, the mean score of the students‟ grammar in cycle 1 is still low. As we can see in table 1 that the mean score is only 5.65. Its result is still under the completeness grade standard in SMA.
b. At the end of the second cycle can be concluded:
1) Students already write correct and appropriate sentences.
2) Students are giving attention for rule of grammar and relationship of words in sentences.
The explanation above explains that, when the researcher conducts action in cycle II, the students‟ mean score became improve from 5.65 to 7.21. It has achieved the standard score in SMA. In this cycle, the researcher intensively gives understanding or explanation and chance about Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD). The researcher helps the students‟ in improving their writing grammar.
The research indicated that the students‟ writing skill using Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) show the improvement in content, organization, and grammar.
The researcher has change the activity more interesting in cycle II so that students can show the improvement in the first cycle the researcher give less explanation about Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) to students‟ but in cycle II students‟ really enjoy the SRSD because the researcher give explanation intensively and giving more chance for students.
At the first, students are lazy to participate in Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) but the researcher usually encourages them and made SRSD more interesting by choosing fun material. As a result students became enjoy and fun in learning process.
The observation in the cycle I and II, the teacher making note to the all activities of the students in every meetings, so the teacher can measure the improvement of the students‟ writing skill dealing with content, organization, and grammar. Then, the teacher identity and making note all the problem that we need when teaching and learning process on observation paper and the students doing the evaluation which use the result of the study to know how far their improvement after using Self Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD).
After exceeded several processes in cycle I and cycle II which consisted of eight meetings, the result of the data analysis through the writing test show that the students‟ writing skill in terms of content, organization, and grammar improve significantly. It is indicate by the mean score of result of the students‟ D-Test is
4.09. It is also lower than the mean score of the students‟ writing test in cycle I that is 6.26 and cycle II is 7.78. Those scores are got from writing content, organization, and grammar. The students‟ enthusiasm also increases along with their improvement.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis, research findings, and discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher came to the following conclusions. SRSD is an effective way to improving the students skill in writing descriptive of the Eleventh Grade Students of MA Muhammadiyah Datarang Kab. Gowa. In addition, SRSD is the ways that can be expected to motivate the students to study especially in writing descriptive. The researcher formulated practically her conclusions according to the research problems.
Using SRSD improve the students‟ writing content at the Eleventh Grade Students of MA Muhammadiyah Datarang Kab. Gowa. It is proved by the students‟ achievement in cycle II is higher than D-Test where in D-Test the students‟ mean score achievement in writing content is 4.78, but after evaluation in cycle II becomes 8.28. Using SRSD improve the students‟ writing organization.
It is proved by the students‟ achievement in cycle II is higher than D-Test where in D-Test the students‟ mean score achievement in writing organization is 4.10, but after evaluation in cycle II becomes 7.86. Using SRSD improve the students‟
writing grammar, it is proved by the students‟ achievement in cycle II is higher than D-Test where in D-Test the students‟ mean score achievement in writing grammar is 3.41, but after evaluation in cycle II becomes 7.21.
B. Suggestions
In relation to the writing skill in terms of content, organization, and grammar in this thesis, the researcher would like to give some suggestions to the students (learners), the English teacher and the next researchers as follows:
1. For students
a. Being aware that writing is an important skill in English language. The students should try to write individually or in group because it can stimulate to write more and to get many ideas.
b. Generally, there are so many students considered that English as a
“monster” that‟s wrong perception. The students have to consider that English is fun.
c. The students should make English as daily language in their activities even though they just write little by little.
d. The students also should not to forget to memorize many English daily expressions in order to make them write easily in their paragraph.
2. For the English teacher
a. The use of SRSD can significantly improve the students‟ writing skill in terms of content, organization, and grammar at the Eleventh Grade Students of MA Muhammadiyah Datarang Kab. Gowa. So it is strongly suggested to be applied in teaching English writing in the classroom in order to improve the students‟ writing skill.
b. The teachers should be creative in teaching English especially writing because to master English, it needs more technique or technique in improving it.
3. For the next researchers
a. To improve the students‟ writing skill generally, there are many cases which must be improved such as: writing content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics, how to delivery writing etc. but in this research, the researcher focused attention on improving the students writing content, organization, and grammar. So for the next researcher, they can take the other case of writing to be improved neither they use this technique nor other techniques. But it is better to use this technique in order to know the students‟ writing skill improvement with different discussions.
b. The improvement of students can be seen significantly if the next researcher tries to use this technique time after time and of course with some „creative flavors‟.
c. The result of this research can also be used as an additional reference or further research with different discussion for the next researchers.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adelstein. 1980. The Writing Commitment. New york: hartcourt brace java novich. Inc. Adolescents in Middle and High Schools. New York:
Carnegie Corporation of New
Alexander. 1990. Writing Assessment Handbook. California: California Department of Education.
Brown, H. Douglas. 1994: 227. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Case, et al.1992. Helping Young Writers Master the Craft: Strategy Instruction and Self-Regulation in the Writing Process. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Cutler. 2008. Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 907–919.
Fatmawaty. 2009. Increasing the Students’ Writing Proficiency Through Think- Talk-Write Method. Unpublished Thesis, Makassar: Fakultas Keguruan Dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.
Gay. L. R. 1981. Educational Research. New York: Prentice Hill Inc.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. 2000. The Role of Self-Regulation and Transcription Skills in Writing and Writing Development.
Graham. 2003. Students with Learning Disabilities and the Process of Writing: A Meta-Analysis of SRSD Studies
Graham, et al. 1992. Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High Schools. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Graham. 2007. Writing Next. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Haris. 2003. The Influence SRSD Method on the Development of Students’
Writing Ability. Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
Harris, K. R., & Alexander, P. 1998. Integrated, constructivist education:
Challenge and reality. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 115–128.
Heaton. 1989. Online. Retrieved on Monday, May 05, 2015 at