CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION
B. INTERPRETATION
The researcher realizes that teaching writing by using C-SPACE strategy can improve students’ writing ability. C-SPACE is a complex activity that requires comprehension and selection of information and written production process. When C-SPACE is done correctly, students are encouraged to develop their creativity, motivation, and resourcefulness. Therefore, it has proved that C-SPACE strategy could be one the interesting strategy to teaching writing.
1. Result of Students Learning a. Result of students Pre-Test Grade
In this phase, the researcher presented the pre-test to measure the students ability before implementing the treatment. The researcher obtained the data through test in the from of essay test which completed for 90 minutes. It was done on Monday, September 02st, 2019. From the result of pre-test showed that most of the students got difficult for doing the test. Based on table 13 the students average were 56 it showed that most of the students have not passed yet in achieving the Minimum Mastery Criteria at least 75. In this phase, only 6 students out of 34 students passed of the MMC.
b. Result of Students Post-Test 1 Grade
In this research, to know the students writing ability after implementing the treatment the researcher conducted the post- test I.
It was done on Friday, September 13th, 2019. Based on the table 15 the students average was 66 it shown that most of the students have not passed yet in achieved the MMC at least 75. In this stage there are 18 students out of 34 students passed of the minimum mastery criteria. It can be conclude that most of the students failed in achieving the material.
c. Result of Students Post-Test II Grade
In this phase, the researcher continued to cycle II because the grade of post test I in cycle I did not fulfilled the MMC yet that was only 53% passed the MMC. The researcher presented the post- tes II to measure the students ability after implementing the treatment. The researcher obtained the data through test in the from of essay test which completed for 90 minutes. It was done on Monday, September 23th, 2019. Based on the table 21 students average were 78, it showed that most of the students have achieving the MMC at least 75. In this phase, 26 students out of 34 students of 76% students passed of the MMC and the research was successful.
2. Comparison of Grade in Pre-Test, Post-Test I in cycle I, and Post- Test II in Cycle II.
English learning process was successfully in cycle I but the students’ average grade was low. While the grade of the students in post-test I was higher than pre-test. Moreover, in cycle II, the students’ average grade was higher than cycle I. the following was the table of illustration grade in cycle I and cycle II.
Table 27
The Comparison of Writing Ability of
Pre-Test, Post-Test I in Cycle I and Post-Test II in Cycle II
No Grade
Pre-Test Post-Test I Post-Test II
1. 50 75 80
2. 75 80 90
3. 40 60 70
4. 40 50 71
5. 75 78 90
6. 50 75 83
7. 75 78 85
8. 75 65 83
9. 60 75 85
10. 40 75 81
11. 60 54 75
12. 40 75 83
13. 56 75 80
14. 50 75 80
15. 60 50 75
16. 40 75 84
17. 45 51 75
18. 50 50 70
19. 50 53 75
20. 58 75 80
21 45 50 70
22 55 75 84
23 60 75 82
24 50 54 70
25 75 75 81
26 60 75 85
27 55 58 73
28 50 54 73
29 65 68 78
30 55 75 80
31 60 50 73
32 60 64 78
33 75 75 80
34 50 56 75
Total 1904 2248 2677
Average 56 66 78
Complete 6 18 26
(Source: The result grade of Comparison of Writing Ability pre test, pos-test 1, pos-test 2 at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Punggur Central Lampung)
Table 28
The Comparison of Students’ Writing Grade Percentage in Pre-Test, Post-Test I Grade in Cycle I and Post-Test II Grade in Cycle II
Interval F Pre- Test
F Post- Test I
F Post- Test II
Explanation
≥75 6 18% 18 53% 26 76% Complete
< 75 28 82% 16 47% 8 24% Incomplete Total 34 100% 34 100% 34 100%
Based on the result of the pre-test, post-test I and post-test II, it was know that there was a positive significant increasing of the students’ writing grade. The percentage of students’ writing grade in pre test 18%, and in post-test I 53%, meanwhile, the percentage of students’ writing grade in pos-test II is 76%.
Therefore, the researcher concluded that the research was successful because the indicator of success in this research had been achieved. The researcher provides the graph of the result of pre-test, post-test I and post-test II, as follow:
Figure 13
The Comparison Grade of Students Writing Ability
Percentage in Pre-Test, Post-Test I in Cycle I, and Post-Test II in Cycle I
18%
82%
53%
47%
76%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
≥75 <75
pre test post test 1 post test 2
Based on the graph above, it could be inferred that C-SPACE strategy could improving the students’ ability in writing. It is supported by improving grade of the students from pre-test to post-test I and from post- test I to post-test II.
3. The Result of Students’ Learning Activities in Cycle I and Cycle II The students’ learning activities data was gotten from the whole students’ learning activities on observation sheet. The table improvement of it as follow:
Table 29
The Percentage of Students Activities in Cycle I and Cycle II No Students’
Activities
Cycle I Cycle II
Improving F Percentage F Percentage
1
Paying atention to the teacher’s explanation
21 62% 27 79% Improved
2
Asking or answering the teacher’s question
20 58% 26 76% Improved
3 Being active
in class 16 47% 26 76% Improved
4
Doing the task given by the teacher
17 50% 28 82% Improved
5
Being active in group
activity 18 53%
27 79% Improved
The Average
Percentage 54% 78% Improved
Figure 14
Figure of Learning Activity in Cycle I and Cycle II
Based on the data had gotten, it can be explained as follow:
a. Paying atention to the teacher’s explanation
The students’ attention to the teacher explanation from the first meeting to the next meeting was increased. In cycle I was only 62% and in cycle II 79%, it improved 17%.
b. Asking or answering the teacher’s question
The students who ask/answered question from the teacher was increased from the first meeting to the next meeting. It showed when the teacher gave the question to the students, they were brave to answer although not all the question could be answered well. For this activity was improved 18%, from cycle I 58% and cycle II 76%.
62% 58%
47% 50% 53%
79% 76% 76%
82% 79%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Activity 1 Activity 2 Activity 3 Activity 4 Activity 5
cycle 1 cycle 2
c. Being active in class
The active students in the class were improved. It could be seen on the cycle I 47% and cycle II also 76%, it improved 29%. Based on the data above, it could be concluded that the students felt comfort and active with the learning process because most of the students shown good improvement in learning activities when C-SPACE was applied in the learning process from cycle I up to cycle II.
d. Doing the task given by the teacher
The students who had done the task were increased. It could be seen on the cycle I 50% and cycle II 82%, it increased 32%.
e. Being active in group activity
The active students in group activity were improved. It could be seen on the cycle I 53% and cycle II also 79%, it improved 26%. Then, based on the explanation of cycle I and cycle II, it could be inferred that the use of C-SPACE strategy improve the students’ ability in writing.
There was progress average grade from 56 to 66 and to 78.
From the graph 27, it is concluded that there was an improvement on the average grade and total of the students who passed the test from pre-test, post-test I to post-test II. In the graphs above, the average grade in the pre-test was 56 and only 6 students or (18%) passed the test.
Moreover, in the post-test I there were 18 students or (53%) passed the test the indicator students get grade >75 with an average of 66. And
in the post-test II, there was 26 students or (76%) passed the test the indicator students get grade >75 with average 78. From the explanation, the writer concluded that the research was successful and it could be stopped in cycle II because the indicator of success 75% of students got to grade 75 was reached.
C. Discussion
The researcher choose C-SPACE strategy to improve the students’ ability in writing. This strategy was used to organize students' idea that made students more active in writing ability in learning English. There was improvement in students’ learning activities using C-SPACE. Therefore, C-SPACE hopefully is useful in the learning activities.
Based on the explanation of cycle I and cycle II, it can be shown that the use of C-SPACE strategy could improve the students’ ability in writing. There is progress from the students gets grade >75 from pre-test 18% or 6 students, post-test I 53% or 18 students and post-test II become 76% or 26 students. It is investigated that there is improvement in the students’ complete grade and total of grade of the students who passed the least from pre-test, post-test I to post- test II.
Moreover, the minimum mastery criteria was 75 in this research, in the post-test I there are 18 students or 53% passed the test with the average 66 and the post-test II is 26 students or 76% who passed the test with average 78.
From the explanation, the researcher concludes that the research is successful
and it can be stopped in the cycle II because the indicator of success 75% of students got grade >75 are reached.
The result of the student’s activities in cycle I and cycle II are improve.
Pay’ attention of the teacher’ explanation from 62% become 79%, the students’
ask/answer question from 58% become 76%, the students’ activeness in the class from 47% become 76%, the students’ able do the task from 50% become 82%, The students’ activeness in group activity from 53% become 79%.The result of students’ activities in cycle I and cycle II, there are improving about students’ learning activities.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the learning process on two cycles, the researcher would like to describe the conclusion that the students’ writing ability and learning activities could be improved through C-SPACE strategy at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Punggur Central Lampung. Some conclusion are outline as follow:
C-SPACE strategy can improve writing ability at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Punggur Central Lampung. It can be seen on the progress from pre- test to cycle I and cycle II. The percentage of students’ writing grade in pre test 18%, and in post-test I 53%, meanwhile, the percentage of students’
writing grade in pos-test II is 76%. It means that result of cycle II had already reached the indicator of succes that was >75% students fulfill the minimum mastery creteria (MMC).
Moreover, C-SPACE strategy can improve learning activity at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Punggur Central Lampung. It was investigated that the percentage of learning activity of cycle II is 78%. It means that C-SPACE strategy can improve the student’s learning activity.
B. Suggestion
Based on the conclusion above, some suggestions are provided as follow:
1. For English Teacher
a. It is suggested for the teacher to use C-SPACE strategy in English learning especially in writing because it can improve students’
writing ability.
b. The teacher is supposed to give motivation to the students to be active in the learning process.
2. For the Students
It is advised to the students to be more active in the learning process in the class and to improve their ability in writing ability so they can be successful in English learning.
3. For Headmaster
It is suggested for the headmaster to support the English teachers to implement C-SPACE strategy in the learning process because a C- SPACE strategy is so helpful.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albertson, Luann R. and Felix F. Billingsley. Improving Children's Story- Writing, .Washington: Educational Resources Information Center.
Bakken, Jeffrey P, Festus E. Obiakor, Anthony F. Rotatory. Learning Disabilities Pratice Concernes and Students with LD. Bingley: Emerland Group, 2013.
Anthony, Brooke Allen. Making Students’ Writing Bloom: The Effect Of Scaffolding Oral Inquiry Using Bloom’s Taxonomy On Writing In Response To Reading And Reading Comprehension Of Fifth Graders.
Albama, 2007.
Brown, Rachel, Chidsey Louise Bronaugh, and Kelly Mcgraw. RTI in The Classroom Guidelines and Recipes for Success. New York: Guilford Press, 2009.
Burns, Anne. Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Carolyn Chapman et.al, Differentiated Instruction in Literacy, Math, & Science.
California: Corwin, 2011.
Carter, Ronald and David Nunan. The Cambridge Guide To Teaching English To Speakers Of Other Languages. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Almadani,Fadhli.“The Effect Of Pick Organize Write (Pow)+C-Space Strategy Toward The Ability In Writing Narrative Text At The Second Year Students Of SMP N 1 Kampar Kiri Hilir Kampar Regency”, Thesis English Education Faculty Of Education And Teacher Training State Islamic University Of Sultan Syarif Kasiam Riau Pekanbaru. 2013.
Harmer, Jeremy. How to Teach Writing. New York: Longman, 2004.
Harris , Karen R. and Lynn Meltzer. The Power of Peers in the Classroom Enhancing Learning and Social Skills. New York: Guilford Press, 2015.
Hatch, Evelyn and Anne Lazaraton. The Research Design and Statistics For Applied Statistic. Los Angeles: Heinle Publisher, 1991.
Heaton, J.B. Writing English Language Tests New Edition. New York: Longman, 2013.
Hyland , Ken. Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
McNiff , Jean and Jack Whitehead, Action Research: Principles and Practice, New York: Routledge Falmer, 2002.
Klinger, Janette K. Sharon Vaughn, and Alison Boardman. Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with Learning Difficulties. New York: A Division of Guilford, 2007.
Asmara, Linda Tri et.al, “POW+CSPACE (Pick Idea, Organize, and Write + Character, Setting, Purpose, Action, Conclusion, Emotions): A Strategy To Teach Writing Viewed From Students’ Creativity”, English Education Department of Graduate Program of Sebelas Maret University
Little, Steven G. and Angeleque Akin Little. Academic Assessment and Intervention. New York: Routledge, 2014.
LLC. Eighth grade reading comprehension and writing skills. New York:
Learning Express, 2009.
Monaghan, Connie. Effective Strategies for Teaching Writing. A Project Submitted to the Faculty of The Evergreen State College in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master in Teaching, 2007.
Naughton, Glenda Mac and Patrick Hughes. Do Action Research in Early Childhood Studies: A Step by Step Guide. New York: Open University Press, 2009.
Oshima, Alice and Ann Hogue. Introduction to Academic Writing. Third Edition New York: Pearson Education, 2007.
Painter, Diane D., “The Computer-based Writing Program: A Clinical Teaching Experience for Education Interns to Develop Professional Knowledge and Skills in Effective Instructional Writing Practices”, A Journal of the Association of Teacher Educators Virginia, Volume 9,2016.
López, Paula et al., “Effects of Direct Instruction and Strategy Modeling on Upper-Primary Students’ Writing Development” Educational Psychology a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017 , Volume 8.
Reid, Robert , Torri Oritz Lieneman, Jessica L Hagaman. Strategy Inctruction for Students with Learning Disabilities 2nd Edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
Santangelo ,Tanya and Natalie G. Olinghouse, “Effective Writing Instruction for Students Who Have Writing Difficulties”, Journal,Volume 42, Number 4, December 2009.
Weigle, Sara Cushing. Assessing Writing.New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Weiss, Neil A, Introductory Statistics,Boston,MA: Addison-Weseley, 2012
Urdan ,Timothy C, Statistics in Plain English, Third Edition, New York: Taylor &
Francis, 2010.
Mata Pelajaran : BAHASA INGGRIS - WAJIB Kelas/ Semester : X/Ganjil
Kompetensi Inti :
KI 1 :Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya
KI 2 :Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab, peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan pro- aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam pergaulan dunia
KI 3 :Memahami, menerapkan, menganalisis pengetahuan faktual, konseptual, prosedural berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni, budaya, dan humaniora dengan wawasan kemanusiaan, kebangsaan, kenegaraan, dan peradaban terkait penyebab fenomena dan kejadian, serta menerapkan pengetahuan prosedural pada bidang kajian yang spesifik sesuai dengan bakat dan minatnya untuk memecahkan masalah.
KI 4 :Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan
Kompetensi Dasar Materi Pokok Indikator Kegiatan Pembelajaran Alokasi Waktu Sumber Belajar
Penilaian
4.8 Menyusun teks naratif, lisan, tulis, pendek dan sederhana terkait legenda rakyat dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks
Fungsi Sosial Mendapat hiburan, menghibur, mengajarkan nilai- nilai luhur, mengambil teladan
Struktur Teks Dapat mencakup:
- Orientasi - Komplikasi
4.8.2 Membuat teks naratif terkait legenda rakyat, sederhana dengan
memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks
- Menyimak guru membacakan legenda, sambil dilibatkan dalam tanya jawab tentang isinya
- Didiktekan guru menuliskan legenda tersebut dalam buku catatan masing-masing, sambil bertanya jawab terkait fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan yang ada
- Dalam kelompok masing- masing berlatih membacakan
2 x 2 JP
- Resolusi - Orientasi ulang
Unsur Kebahasaan - Kalimat-kalimat
dalamsimple past tense, past continuous, dan lainnya yang relevan - Kosa kata:
terkait karakter, watak, dan setting dalam legenda - Adverbia
penghubung dan penujuk waktu - Ucapan, tekanan
kata, intonasi, ejaan, tanda baca, dan tulisan tangan
Topik
Cerita legenda yang dapatmenumbuhka n perilaku yang termuat di KI
legenda tsb dengan intonasi, ucapan dan tekanan kata yang benar, dengan saling
mengoreksi
- Membaca satu legenda lain, bertanya jawab tentang isinya, dan kemudian mengidentifikasi kalimat-kalimat yang memuat bagian-bagian legenda yang ditanyakan
- Melakukan refleksi tentang proses dan hasil belajar.
RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN (RPP)
Sekolah : SMA Negeri 1 Punggur
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris Kelas/Semester : X/Ganjil
Materi Pokok : Teks Naratif; Terkait Legenda Rakyat Alokasi Waktu : 4 x 45 Menit / 2 Pertemuan
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI-1 dan KI-2:Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya. Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, santun, peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), bertanggung jawab, responsif, dan pro-aktif dalam berinteraksi secara efektif sesuai dengan perkembangan anak di lingkungan, keluarga, sekolah, masyarakat dan lingkungan alam sekitar, bangsa, negara, kawasan regional, dan kawasan internasional”.
KI 3: Memahami, menerapkan, dan menganalisis pengetahuan faktual, konseptual, prosedural, dan metakognitif berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni, budaya, dan humaniora dengan wawasan kemanusiaan, kebangsaan, kenegaraan, dan peradaban terkait penyebab fenomena dan kejadian, serta menerapkan pengetahuan prosedural pada bidang kajian yang spesifik sesuai dengan bakat dan minatnya untuk memecahkan masalah
KI4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara mandiri, bertindak secara efektif dan kreatif, serta mampu menggunakan metode sesuai kaidah keilmuan
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi
Kompetensi Dasar Indikator
4.8 Menyusun teks naratif, lisan, tulis, pendek dan sederhana terkait legenda
rakyat dengan
memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks
4.8.2 Membuat teks naratif terkait legenda rakyat, sederhana dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Setelah mengikuti proses pembelajaran, peserta didik diharapkan dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi persamaan dan perbedaan fungsi sosial, struktur teks dan unsur kebahasaan teks narati
2. Memahami struktur teks naratif dalam memberi dan meminta informasi terkait legenda rakyat
3. Memahami unsur kebahasaan dari teks naratif dalam memberi dan meminta informasi terkait legenda rakyat
4. Menyusun teks naratif terkait legenda rakyat, sederhana dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks penggunaanya
D. Materi Pembelajaran Pengertian Naratif Teks
Narrative adalah jenis teks yang menceritakan kisah yang berisikan imajinasi atau khayalan.
Fungsi Sosial
Mendapat hiburan, menghibur, mengajarkan nilai-nilai luhur, mengambil teladan
Struktur Teks Dapat mencakup:
- Orientasi - Komplikasi - Resolusi - Orientasi ulang Unsur Kebahasaan
- Kalimat-kalimat dalamsimple past tense, past continuous, dan lainnya yang relevan
- Kosa kata: terkait karakter, watak, dan setting dalam legenda - Adverbia penghubung dan penujuk waktu
- Ucapan, tekanan kata, intonasi, ejaan, tanda baca, dan tulisan tangan Topik
Cerita legenda yang dapat menumbuhkan perilaku yang termuat di KI E. Pendekatan, Strategi dan Metode Pembelajaran
1. Pendekatan : Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) 2. Strategi : C-SPACE strategy
3. Metode : Ceramah, diskusi, penugasan F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran