CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Research Design
This research used POWER strategy in CAR to improve the students’
ability in writing descriptive that consist of some steps planning, action, observing and reflecting. The process lines follows:
In this research conduct in four stages these are:
Cycle 1 1. Planning
a. In this section, the teacher prepare material of writing descriptive paragraph.
b. Make the lesson plan for the implementation of action.
c. Make observation sheet to measure the activeness of students.
d. Make the sheet of students’ assessment, to measure the students’
achievement in writing both in grammar and organization.
2. Action a. Plan
1) The researcher give instruction the students to choose a topic (example: about someone, Place or Something)
2) The researcher ask to the student to looking for information about the one topic that the students are chosen. The students can ask from their friend or the other media to look information.
30
b. Organize
1) The students organize their main idea ( what the first the students want to write) for example from general to specific or from specific to general
2) The teacher ask the students to organize all information about their topic.
c. Write
1) The students write down all information about their topic to make descriptive paragraph.
2) The student write paragraph consist of 70-90 words d. Edit
1) the teacher teach students to critique their own writing or make correction of the students task (grammar, capitalization, proper noun, and punctuation)
2) the teacher gave clarification how to write well (self evaluation for the students)
e. Revise
1) The teacher modeling on how to insert or change the order of information is suggested.
2) The teacher gave scoring to each student.
3. Observation
a. Identified and made note all problems when teaching and learning process was running based on observation paper that arrange.
31
b. give evaluation based on result of study.
c. Give the students’ chance to give suggestion and question in action research.
4. Reflection
Reflection is the activity of evaluating critically about the progress or changed of the students and also the teacher. In this step, researcher observed activity is result any progress and also about the positive and negatives in learning.
The reflection was not succses, had make research planning for the next cycle.
The score of the observation steps gathered for data analysis and evaluation by the observer and then the observer can reflect herself about successful of action research. The observers had evaluated in every cycle.
Cycle II
This cycle will continuity from the cycle one. Here, researcher improved the weakness from the cycle one include planning, action, observation and reflection.
B. Research Variable and Indicator A. Independent variable
The independent variable is implementation of POWER (Plan, Organize, Write, Edit, and Revise) strategy. It is the method use by the teacher to teach students how to write descriptive paragraph.
32
B. Dependent variable
The dependent variable is the students’ writing ability in writing descriptive paragraph.
C. Indicators
The indicators of this research are use to measure the variables. That are grammar and organization. : Grammar (simple present tense) and Organization (specific to general and general to specific).
C. Research Instrument
In this research the instrument used:
1. Observation is the notes about the interaction between teacher and students, and also between students and students in teaching and learning process.
2. Test
The test is used to get about the students’ writing ability through a POWER Strategy. It is to know the improvement of writing descriptive paragarph of students. The test give at the end of cycle one.
D. Data Collection
1. Observation; the researcher collect data from interaction between student and teacher, student and student.
2. Test; the researcher collect data from diagnostic test through POWER Strategy to write descriptive paragraph, cycle I test, and cycle II test.
Researcher gave test to students by following the step below:
a) Researcher prepare test material or topic for students.
33
b) Researcher give correction to their writing descriptive paragraph based on their mistakes.
There are two components that concerns of the researcher in this research to measure. Those are grammar and organization which used criteria as follows:
1. Grammar
In language use component used scale 2 – 6 as scoring rate as follows:
Score classification Indicator of grammar
6 Excellent If the grammars of the composition are all correct in tenses, punctuation, capitalization, pronouns 5 Very Good If the composition contains few errors of grammar 4 Good If the composition contains some errors of grammar 3 Fair If the composition dominated by errors of grammar 2 Poor If the grammar of the composition are all incorrect
Glencoe (2000: 171) 2. Organization
In organization component, the writer used scale 2-6 as scoring rate as follows:
Score classification Indicators of coherence and spatial order
6 Excellent 1. The ideas are-well organized in spatial order.
2. Correct in spatial order concise.
34
3. The ideas are cohesion.
4. The ideas are coherent
5 Good Very 1. The ideas are adequate organized.
2. The organization is adequate concise.
3. The ideas are adequate cohesion.
4. The ideas are adequate coherence.
5. The ideas are relevant to outline.
4 Good The ideas are generally organized.
2. The organization is quite concise 3. Few ideas are a break out cohesion.
4. The ideas are generally coherent.
5. The ideas are mostly relevant to
3 Fair 1. The ideas are almost loosely organized.
2. The organization is not concise 3. The ideas are inadequate cohesion 4. The ides are inadequate coherent.
2 Poor 1.The organization are loosely organized
2. The organization is not concise in spatial order 3. The ideas are confuse and disconnected.
Glencoe (2000: 168) 3. The students participation
Classification Score Criteria
Very Active 4 Students sit down in their own seat
35
Good 3 Students are ready to get the material Lest Active 2 Students attention toward the material
Not active 1 Students activeness in applying the technique Layman (2007:36).
E. Procedure of Data Analysis
1) To classify the students score, there were four classifications which will be used as follows:
Jacobs
(1981 )
D. Technique of Data Analysis
In giving with the students’ ability in writing some categories the researcher use as follows:
1. Calculating the mean score of the students’ writing test by using the following formula:
𝑋 = ∑𝑋
𝑁
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑋 = Mean
∑𝑋 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑎𝑤 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒
N = the total number of the student
(Gay, 1981: 298) 2. To calculate percentage of students’ achievement in grammar and organization
researcher uses this formula:
Clasification Score
Excelence 90 - 100
Very good 80 - 85
Good 60 - 70
Fair 45 - 55
Poor 30 - 40
36
P = 𝑭
𝑵 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎
P = Rate percentage F = Number of correct N = Number of sample (Sudjana, 1990:83).
3. To know the students’ Percentage of the Students’ Activeness in teaching learning process through POWER strategy, researcher uses percentage formula as follows:
P = FQ × 100 4 x N Where:
P = Percentage
FQ = Sum of all the student’s score N = Total students
(Sudjana, 1990:36).
35 CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter particulary presents the finding of the research cover with the description of the students’ improvement in Grammar and organization. In the discussion part. the writer described the findings in detail.
A. Finding
1. Improvement of the students’ Grammar
The improvement of the students’ writing descriptive paragraph based on the grammar aspect by using POWER method in D- Test.cycle I and cycle II would be described in the following table.
Table 1:The students’ Improvement in Grammar
No Indicators
CI CII Improvement (%)
Score % Score % CI-CII
1 Present Tense 1439 57. 56 1958 78.32 36.08 2
Present
continuous 1374 54. 96 2160 86.4 57.20
𝑋 2813 112. 52 4118 164.72 93.28
𝑋 1406 56.26 2059 82.36 46. 64
The data in the table above shows the students’ writing ability in grammar as the result of calculating of the diagnostic test and students’ test at the students’
writing ability by using POWER Strategy. Where the students score in diagnostic test is different from the students’ test in cycle I. in cycle I is 1406 (56.26%). and in cycle II is 2622 (82.36%). The assessment of cycle II is greater than cycle I and
36
and classified as very good. And then, improvement from cycle I to cycle II is I (82.36% > 56.26%).
Based on the percentages above there are significant improvements of the students by using POWER strategy .To see clearly the improvement of the students’ writing content, the following graphic is presented.
Graphic 1: . The Students’ Improvement in Grammar
The chart above shows that the improvement of the students’ organization from D- Test to cycle I (34.07%), from cycle I to cycle II (10.88%), from D- Test to cycle II ( 48.71%). Therefore there is the improvement of the students’ in content and the target can be achieved. Finally, the Topical Approach method is effective for students.
2. Improvement of the students’ Organization.
In implementation of POWER Strategy in writing descriptive paragraph. the writer found that the mean score of organization aspect in the second cycle is greater than the mean score of organization in the first cycle and diagnostic test. It would be described in the table below:
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
CYCLE I CYCLE II
56.26
82.36
37
Table 2: The students’ Improvement in Organization
No Indicators
CI CII
Improvement (%)
Score % Score % CI-CII
1 Coherence 1457 58.28 2075 83 49.78
2 Spatial Order 1374 54.96 2058 82.32 40.86
𝑋 2831 113.24 4133 165.32 90. 64
𝑋 1415 56. 62 2066 82. 66 45.32
The data in the table above shows the students’ writing ability in organization as the result of calculating of cycle I and cycle II at the students’
writing ability by POWER strategy, where the students’ score in cycle I and cycle II. The mean score in cycle I is 56. 62 and cycle II is 82. 66. The achievement of cycle II is greater than cycle I (82. 66% > 56. 62 %) and classified as good.
Based on the percentages above there is a significant improvements of the students by using POWER strategy. To see clearly the improvement of the students’ writing organization, the following chart is presented.
Graphic 2: The Students’ Improvement in Organization .
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Cycle I Cycle II
56.62
82.66
38
The chart above shows that the improvement of the students’ organization from cycle I to cycle II (45.32%),. Therefore there is the improvement of the students’ in organization and the target can be achieved. Finally, the POWER strategy is effective for students.
3. The improvement of the students’ writing ability through POWER strategy
The implementation of POWER strategy in improving the students’
writing ability covered content and organization. The improvement of the students’ writing ability could be seen clearly in the following table:
Table 3: The students’ improvement in writing ability
No Variables
Mean Score Improvement (%)
CI CII CI-CII
1 Grammar 56 .26 82. 36 46.39
2 Organization 56. 62 82. 66 46.00
𝑋 112.08 165.02 92.39
𝑋 56.44 82.41 46.19
The table above indicates that there is improvement of the students’ writing ability from the first cycle and the second cycle is different. After evaluation in the first cycle the students’ writing ability becomes (56.44%) and categorized as good and the second cycle (82.41%). which categorized as good. The improvement of students’ writing ability achieve from the first cycle to the second cycle (46.19 %). There was also significant improvement of the students’ writing ability from the first cycle to the second cycle.
39
The table above proves that used of POWER Strategy in teaching and learning process was able to improve the students’ writing ability after taking action in the first cycle and the second where the students’ achievement in the second cycle was greater than the first cycle
The table above proves that the use of POWER Strategy in teaching and learning process is able to improve the students’ writing ability after taking action in cycle I and II where the students’ achievement in cycle II is greater (cycle II>cycle I>Diagnostic-Test).
To see clearly the increase of the students’ writing ability, the following chart is presented:
Graphic 3: The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Ability
The chart above shows, that the improvement of the students’ writing ability in cycle I (56.44) and cycle II (82.41%), the giving score are classified from fairly good to good. After evaluation in cycle I and cycle II, there is a significant improvement from cycle I to Cycle II (46.19%) of the students’
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Cycle I
Cycle II
56.44
82.41
40
grammar and organization that show clearly in the chart after taking an action in two cycles through POWER strategy.
B. DISCUSSION
In this part, the discussion covering the interpretation of finding derived from the result of findings was based on the problem statement. They were : 1) How does POWER Strategy improve the students’ writing ability in descriptive paragraph viewed from Grammar? 2) How does POWER Strategy improve the students’ writing ability in descriptive paragraph viewed from Organization?
The application of POWER Strategy at VIII.B class of SMP Negeri 2 Barombong can improve the students’ writing ability.
1. Grammar
The improvement of the students’ ability to write good descriptive paragraphs through POWER Strategy had an effective effect. Where the teacher was finds in the diagnostic test of grammar that the students just got score about 43.70%. It means that it was far from the target, but after implies the POWER Strategy; the students got mean score about 56.26 in the first cycle and 82.36 in the second cycle. It means that the target has been achieved.
Following was presented the improvement of students’ grammar percentage as the result of teaching learning observation:
Table 5: The Students’ Improvement Percentage in Grammar
No. Classification Score
D-test Cycle I Cycle II
F % F % F %
1. Excellent 90 -100 0 0 0 0 0 0
41
The table above shows that the percentage of the students’ grammar in writing diagnostic-test indicates that 15 students (60. %) get fair. 10 students (40%) get poor and none of students for the excellent. very good and good classification.
After taking an action in the first cycle through POWER strategy the percentage of the students’ content is 10 students (40%) get good. 9 students (36%) fair. 6 students (24%) get poor and none of the students for other classification.
In cycle II.The percentage of the students’ grammar is 7 students (28. %) get very good. 14 students (56. %) get good, 4 students (56%) get fair and none poor of the students for other classification. The result above also proves that the use of POWER strategy is able to improve the students’ content where the result of the second cycle is higher than the first cycle and diagnostic-test (Cycle II>Cycle I>Diagnostic-Test).
2. Organization
After implementation of POWER strategy in the class. The teacher finds that the mean score of diagnostic test in organization is 44.41. In the first cycle.
2. Very good 80 -85 0 0 0 0 7 28.00
3. Good 60 -70 0 0 10 40.00 14 56.00
4. fair 45 -55 15 60.00 9 36 4 16.00
5. Poor 30-40 10 40.00 6 24.00 0 0
Total 25 100 25 100 25 100
42
the students just get 56.34. In the second cycle, the students get 79. It means that the target score can be achieved in the second cycle.
Following is presented the improvement of students’ organization percentage as the result of teaching learning observation:
In the second cycle the percentage of the students’ organization is 18 students (56.25%) get very good. 16 students (47.05%) and none of the students for other classification. The result above also proves that the use of POWER Strategy is able to improve the students’ content where the result of the second cycle is higher than the first cycle and diagnostic-test (Cycle II>Cycle I>Diagnostic-Test).
3. The Implementation of POWER Strategy
The researcher observes the students’ activeness to asses the implementation of POWER Strategy in teaching and learning process to improve the students’ writing ability of SMP Negeri 2 Barombong in class VIII.E which was conducted in 2 cycles during 8 meetings was taken by the observer through observation sheet.
The researcher observes every meeting in two cycles where every cycle of four meetings. In the first cycle the students’ responses low but in the second cycle the students’ responses are classified into good.
Based on the result of the research the researcher found that the students’
participation in each meeting of the two cycles improves normally. The first meeting up to the fourth meeting in the first cycle, the students’ activeness is 48, 52% to 88, 23% with the average of students’ activeness is 69, 47%. The
43
researcher considers that the students’ activeness in the first cycle still fairly good.
The researcher results of observation in the first the second cycles were:
a. Most of students were still less active in carrying out the task.
b. Most group of student seems to be unaccustomed yet with the material.
c. The students got confuse in generating ideas.
d. Get difficulty to determine the generic structure of descriptive text The teacher then thought about the teaching material to be modified in order to derive a significant improvement of the students’ activeness in teaching and learning process in the next cycle. Trough some revision, the teacher results of the students’ observation. In second cycle were:
a) The students have been active in learning, and even some of them very active in carrying out the task.
b) Each group of students has been sharing their ideas.
c) Some of the students prefer asked to the teacher when they get difficulties concerning the material.
d) The students were able to accomplish their task.
Trough the second cycle, the researcher indicated a significant improvement.
From the first meeting of the second cycle, the students’ activeness has been increased that was 55, 14% to 94, 85% with the average to the students’
activeness in the second cycle was 66, 87%. This result indicates if the students activeness has meet the teacher expectation to gain significant improvement 68, 30% from the first cycle and the second cycle. It was obviously improves because the teaching material has been provided more attractively with difference kinds of
44
topic in each meeting. So the students more interested to writing descriptive paragraph.
The students’ writing ability can be improved through POWER Strategy, because in this method they can find out the new ideas. And, if they got diffuclty of expressing ideas, POWER strategy can reduce this problem. So, it was fun and interesting. They can be motivated in learning the English writing ability.
50
50 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter presents the conclusion and suggestion the conclusion is drawn based on the findings and discussion. And suggestion is given based on the conclusion.
A . Conclusion
1. The students’ writing ability in writing grammar of diagnostic test is 44.88, in cycle I is 56.26, and cycle II is 82.36. The students’ progress from the diagnostic test to the cycle I is 25.35%, the cycle I to the cycle II is 46. 64%.
2. The students’ writing ability in writing organization of diagnostic test is 45.
06 the cycle I is 56. 62, and cycle II is 82.36 The students’ progress from the diagnostic test to the cycle I is 25%, the cycle I to the cycle II is 45.32%.
3. The implementation of POWER strategy can increase the students’ writing ability. This is led to the conclusion that implementing POWER strategy is needed in English language teaching and learning in increasing their skills to organize their ideas. Four by Four Technique gives them more chance and times to collect their ideas related to the topic and organize them into a paragraph. The implementation of POWER strategy also gives the students’ freedom to organize their ideas, so they can decide the contents that they want to write and they write the contents under the guidance of the teacher.
51
B. Suggestion
Based on the findings, the writer states suggestions as follows:
1. It is suggested to the English teachers that they apply POWER strategy as one of the alternative ways in writing skill.
2. The students are expected to increase their intensity in learning writing through POWER strategy.
3. It is suggested to the English teachers that they apply POWER strategy in giving guidance to the students in learning and teaching writing process.
4. Teacher should use Four by Four Technique in teaching English. The writer hopes that the next writers use Four by Four Technique in improving the other language skills, such as: reading, speaking, writing, and listening.