CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
F. Procedure Of Collecting Data
1. Pre-test
The writer gave the topic to students’ about pleasurable experience (to measure the prior ability of the students in writing) and the students write a text based on the topic for 30 minutes.
2. Treatment
After giving pre-test, the writer gave treatment to students’ for two meetings :
a. The first meeting;
Material : The writer gave explaination about simple past tense.
After that the students’ were asked for writing a narrative text about childhood experiences.
b. The second meeting;
Material : The writer gave explain about procedure Plan and Write strategy and then, the students’ were asked to write a narrative text about pleasurable experiences
3. Post-test
The writer gave post-test to the students (the procedure is the same as the pre-test) for 30 minutes to see the students ability after giving. The students’ were asked for writing under the topic “Narrative Text”.
G. Technique of Data Analysis
The data of the study grammatical errors analysis in writing narrative text at second grade in SMP Negeri 35 Makassar obtained through the task that given to students. To analysis the data, the writer followed the steps as follows in order to know the students improvement in diagnostic test. In this research the writer only took two aspect, grammar and vocabulary in order to know the students competence in writing using Plan and Write strategy during the research.
1. Scoring the result of the students test based on the five aspects that given by Heaton in Sather (2015:36) such as the aspect of grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, language use and form organization. But in this research the writer used two aspects namely : grammar, vocabulary in order to know the students achievement in writing test.
a. Grammar
Table 3.1 The Scoring of Grammar
No Classification Score Criteria
1 Excellent 5 Few (if any) noticeable and error of grammar a word order.
2 Good 4 Same errors of grammar and order which do not, however interfere with comprehension.
3 Enough 3 Errors of grammar and word order, fairly frequent, accessional re-reading Necessary for full comprehension.
4 Poor 2 Errors of grammar and word order frequent.
5 Very poor 1 Error of intergeneration sometimes required on readers’ part.
According to Heaton in Sather (2015;37 b. Vocabulary
Table 3.2 Vocabulary’s Scoring
No Classification Score Criteria
1 Excellent 5 Use of vocabulay and idiom rarely (of at all) distinguish table from that of educated native speaker
2 Good 4 Occasional use inappropriate terms of relies on circumlocution, expression of ideas hardly impaired
3 Enough 3 Uses wrong inappropriate words fairly frequently expression of ideas may be limited because of inadequate vocabulary.
4 Poor 2 Limited vocabulary and frequent errors clearly hinder expression of ideas.
5 Very poor 1 Vocabulary so limited and so frequently misused that reader must often rely on own interpretation so extreme as to make comprehension virtually
c. Mechanics
Table 3.3 The Scoring of Mechanics
No Classification Score Criteria
1 Excellent 5 few (if any) noticeable lapses in punctuation or spelling.
2 Good 4 Occasional lapses in punctuation or spelling which do not, however interlink with comprehension error in punctuation spelling fairly.
3 Enough 3 Frequent occasional re-reading necessary for full comprehension
4 Poor 2 Frequent error in spelling or punctuation lead some times to obscurity.
5 Very poor 1 Error in spelling or punctuation so frequentations that reader must often rally on own interpretation
d. Language Use
Table 3.4 The Scoring of Language Use
No Classification Score Criteria
1 Excelent to verry good
4 Effective construction, few errors of agreement, tense, number, word order, article, pronouns, preposition
2 Good to
average
3 Effective but simple construction, minor problem in complex contruction, several errors of agreement, tense, number, word order, article, pronouns,
preposition.
3 Fair to poor 2 Majer problem in simple construction, frequent errors of negation, tense, number, word order, article, pronouns, preposition.
4 Very poor 1 No mastery of sentence construction rules, dominated by errors, does not communicate or not enought to evaluate.
Bahar, 2017:38 e. Form (Organization)
Table 3.5 The Scoring of Organization
No Classification Score Criteria
1 Excellent 5 Highly organized clear progression of ideas well linked, like educated native speaker.
2 Good 4 Material well organization links could occasionally be clearer but communication not impaired.
3 Enough 3 Some lack of organization re-reading required for clarification between them.
4 Poor 2 Individual ideas may be clear but very difficult to deduce some organization.
5 Very poor 1 Lack of organization several that communication is seriously impaired.
After conducted the research in SMP Negeri 35 Makassar, the writer gave scores to the result based on every meeting which is done by the writer. The data was gotten from pre-test and post-test and analyzed it order to know whether there was significant result between every meeting or not. The witer analyzed all data and score through following steps:
1. To find out the mean score for every meeting in this research the writer caltulated the mean score of the students writing test by using the following formula :
=
Where :
: There mean score.
Ʃx : The total raw score.
N : The number of students.
(Gay, 2006 : 363)
2. The students standard deviation in pre-test and post-test
SD=
Where:
∑x² = The sum of the score
(∑x)² = The sum square of all scores N = Total number of subjects.
3. To know development of the students’ will writing skill, the writer used percentage strategy. The writer calculated the rate percentage for every meeting to know the students significant improvement for each test.
X2 – X1
P = X 100 %
X1
Where:
P : percentage of the students
X1 : the first main score
X2 : the second main score
(Gay in Shater 2015:42) 4. To classify the students’ score, there are seven classifications which
were used as follow in order to know the student ability in writing test and based on the every meeting and different test which given to the students for every meeting.
Table 3.6 Qualification and range score
Qualification Score range
(1) (2)
Excellent 90-100
Good 70-89
Fair 50-69
Poor 30-49
Saleha in Sather (2015:41) 5. Calculating the values of t-test to indicate the significant of the
difference between the result of pre-test and post-test by using this formula:
t =
(Gay : 2006 363)
where: t = Test of significant
= The mean of the difference between the pair score ∑D² = The sum of the D (the difference between two pair of Score)
(∑D)² = Squares the sum of the D N = Number of students’