THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING LOOPING STRATEGY TOWARD STUDENTS’ WRITING ACHIEVEMENT
A Study at Eleventh Grade of SMA N 2 Lubuk Basung
Oleh:
MULYANDRI
Dibimbing Oleh:
Dra. Yelfiza M.Pd Sevriani Sevrika M.Pd
English Department
College of Teacher Training and Education (STKIP) PGRI West Sumatra
___________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melihat pengaruh dari Looping Strategy dalam pengajaran Bahasa Inggris khususnya Writing. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode Pre-eksperimental, one group pre-test and post test design dimana peneliti hanya menggunakan satu kelas untuk menguji ke effektifan startegi looping Pada kelas tersebut. Populasi dari penelitian ini adalah siswa kelas tiga SMAN 2 Lubuk Basung tahun ajaran 2014/2015 yang berjumlah 307 orang yang terdiri dari 10 kelas yaitu 5 kelas untuk jurusan IPA dan 5 kelas untuk jurusan IPS. Untuk menentukan sampel penelitian ini, peneliti menggunakan uji liliforst untuk menentukan kelas yang berdistribusi normal. Oleh karena itu, peneliti menemukan 3 kelas yang berdistribusi normal, yaitu kelas XII IPA 3, XII IPS 3 dan XII IPS 5. Lalu peneliti memilih kelas uji coba di kelas XII IPS 5 dan XII IPS 3 sebagai kelas eksperimen.
Instrument penelitian ini adalah tes menulis berbentuk discussion text dan explanation text.Hasil analisis pada penelitian ini diklasifikasikan dalam 2 bentuk; discussion test dan explanation test.
Berdasarkan hasil analisis tes, didapat jumlah pre-test 511 dan post-test 718 eksperiment. Pengujian hipotesis ini dilakukan dengan uji t-table, setelah dilakukan pengujian diperoleh t-calculated 2,87 lebih besar dari t-table 2,04, maka hipotesis pada penelitian ini diterima, sehingga disimpulkan bahwa strategi looping dapat memberikan efek yang baik terhadap hasil Bahasa Inggris khususnya dalam writing (membaca) pada siswa kelas tiga SMAN 2 Lubuk Basung, Kab. Agam.
Kata kunci: Strategi Looping, Pencapaian menulis siswa
___________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
Teaching is a comunication among the teacher and the students in the class room where teacher will give materials for the students and also make the students understand about materials that are given by the teacher itself.
Related with the statment above, the target of learning English for Senior High School based Curriculum 2006 (SBC) is to make the students able to write text such as short functional text and monolog text. Short functional texts includes announcement,
advertisement, and warning, etc. while monolog text consists of narative, recount, exposition, procedure, news item, etc. Those are kind of texts that should be written by the students at Senior High School.
based on the researcher pre observation at SMA N 2 Lubuk Basung, the reseacher realized that the students get difficulties to develop and explore their ideas in writing, it is true that good writing has to produce good ideas to make the readers understand about the writing itself. Not only that but also researcher also found that the teacher only explained about the material in the front of the class then
1
gave some examples of the texts, after that the teacher asked the students tried to write example the texts which were given. In fact, the students need the teacher’s guiding in writing process and also how to explore their ideas to get good writing, in the same case the teacher has to make the students interested in writing class, so the students are not bored to do writing itself.
Therefore the teacher has to have an effective strategy to explore students’ ideas in writing. The strategies are important thing which will be able to help the teacher to deliver the materials that are given to the students in learning proccess. Those strategies are ; first, Six Thinking Hats strategy is a strategy that explores students’ mind to think creatively , second, Quick writes strategy is one of teaching strategy on which students work together to produce a report or complete specific task. Third, Looping Strategy is a useful strategy to help students exploring their thinking through writing. The appropriate strategies will be able to give the significant effects toward students’ writing achievement.
REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE
Looping strategy is a strategy that can be used in teaching writing, there are some definitions of Looping strategy given by experts. According to Nancy (1995:26) Looping strategy is the effective strategy that will be able to help open the writers’ thinking.
In addition, Leki (1998:28) defines that lopping strategy is a strategy that can help the writer focus their thought on a subject, find the core or center of their thought, and pinpoint a main idea on which to elaborate. It can be concluded that by using looping strategy, the writers focuse with one subject and try to explore their ideas to make their writing be specific.
Moreover, Smalzer (2005) states that Looping is a way of freewriting in which the writers identifies and writes about new main ideas that arise as writer write. It means that, the writers have to identify before they will try to make the next paragraph, and make sure that there are conection between one paragraph to next paragraph. In addition, Elbow in Gallgher (2006:38) states that Looping strategy is a useful strategy to help students exploring their thinking through writing and
this strategy also enable a student to move from unfocused to focused writing. It can be concluded this strategy will be able to help students in writing from unspecific to specific paragraph.
In the same case, Nazario, Borchers and Lewis ( 2010:164) say that Looping strategy is a useful effective pre writing tool that helps you uncover ideas you never knew you had and permits you to explore and generate new ideas. It means that looping strategy can help the writers to explore their ideas and produce the new ideas that they have. In the other word, the looping strategy is also able to help apearing students opinions well.
There are some opinions about procedure of Looping strategy based on the experts. According to Atlee (1995:26) he tells that teacher can use free writing loops to explore a topic by writing about it continuosly for two or three minutes. Next, the writers write all their ideas as they come into their head. Then, the writers do not pause. If the writers run sout of ideas, they continue to write the last word until their ideas flow again.
After two or three minutes, they stop and read their free writing. After that, the writers have to circle one word or phrase that stands out or means the most to them. Then, the teacher asks the writers continue to write using this selected idea as the focus of another free writing activity. Finally, the writers repeat the process until they have completed a total of four free witing loops.
Leki (1998:28-29) says that to use looping strategy, the first, the writers begin by writing down the subject they want to consider for five minutes and does not worry about grammar or punctuation. At the end of five minutes, the writers read what they wrote and loop the word or phrase that will be explored in the next paragraph by looping the word or phrase itself . The second, the writers begin a second loop by focusing on their summary sentence. The third, the writers try to keep this sentence in their mind as their write continuosly for another five minutes. When they finish the second five minutes of writing, the writers have to read what they have just writen. The forth, the teacher asks the writers look for the main idea or core toward which all the other ideas are turned. Finally, the teacher has the writers to summarize that core idea in one sentence, and write that sentence down, this is the end of their second loop and the
2
writers also follow the same procedure to get the third loop.
According to Gallagher (2006:38), there are seven steps for looping, the first step is teacher starts by having students write their initial thinking on a giving topic. For example, in an English class students might be asked what their think of a particular character’s behavior. Second the teacher asks students to write non stop for ten minutes. The key is to begin with the first thing that comes to mind and non stop writing. If the students get stuck, they have to rewrite the last sentence. Students must be thought that their writing might take them in unforeseen direction. This is good thing. Third, after ten minuts the teacher has students reread what they have writen thus far.
Fourth, the teacher has students high light or circle “hot spot”. Skipping a line or two, the teacher has the students rewrite this hot spot into a complete. Fifth, the writer s begin with the new sentences and write again for ten minutes. Sixth, at the end of ten minutes, the teacher tells students to find a new hot spot and again write a summary sentence. And the seventh step, he or she has to keep looping until a focus ar thesis emerges. Sometimes it will accur in a single loop; sometime it takes a few loops.
Likewise, Nazario, Borchers and Lewis (2010:168) state that looping strategy is a strategy that has some steps, the first step is picking a topic and write it at the top of paper.
It means that the students have to have a topic that will be writen on the paper, so they will be able to use it as a topic for their writing topic.
The second step, the teacher lets the students write for five minutes, stop and review that have been writen. Then the students select and circle the centre of grafity sentence. It refers to students have to write everything that they have in their mind or free writing, after they write it, they should cirle or loop the word or phrase that will be explored in the next paragraph. The third step, the students copy the word or phrase that has been circled or selected from loop one and free write on this key point for five minutes. After five minutes they stops and review what they have writen.
Select and circle a different centre of gravity word or sentence. It means that students must do the same step with the second step, but they have to choose or circle a new centre of gravity sentence. Then, in the forth step, the students do the same step with the third step
where they have to copy centre of gravity sentence from loop 2, and write on this key point for five minutes. After five minutes, the teacher lets the students sto and reviews what they have writen on the paper. At the end step, the teacher asks students to copy the centre of gravity sentence from loop three and write on this key point for five minutes, stop and review what they have writen. And then the teacher asks them to circle a final centre of gravity sentence.
Based on the steps which are given by the experts above, the researcher chooses Gallangher’s step, because his steps can be applaid for the students and those steps also give more detail information and easy to be used for the students to explore their ideas to get good writing, not only they can get good writing, but also those steps make the teacher can be easy to applicate this strategy while teaching writing. The researcher also agrees with those steps, because the time that is used enough in writing proccess.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research was expected to know the effectiveness of Looping strategy on improving students’ writing achievement.
Therefore, the researcher chose the experimental design. Gay and Airasian (2000:367) state that experimental research is type of research that can test hypothesis to know the cause and effect relationship. In this research, the researcher chose The One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design which was part of the Pre-Experimental Design.
Population is the total number of the students in the research. According to gay and Airasian (2000: 122) “population is the group of interest to the researcher, the group to which she or he would like result of the study to be generalized” . From that statment it is known that the population has large scale.
Beside that, Sudjana (2002:6) states that population is all of members that the researcher will focus on their characteristhic.
In this case, the researcher chose the eleventh grade at SMA N 2 Lubuk basung who were registered in academic year 2013/2014. The population of this research with the total students were 307 students. There were five classes of social class and five classes for
3
science class. Then, researcher chose XII IPS 3 as sample of this research.
In this case, theresearcher had taken the writing test that was used to know the knowledge and performance of the students after get the treatment in their writing.Therefore, in this research, the researcher used essay writing test in pretest and posttest to measure whether the treatment effective for teaching writing or not. Here, the teacher provided some topics, they are 5 topics for explenation text (how do floods occur?, photosynthesis, rain happens, butterfly life cycle and frog life cycle), and 5 topics for discussion text (fast food, nasional examination, shopping online, what are the pros and cons of school uniform and social media).Then,the studentswere asked to choose one of them and developed it into an essay.
Dealing with the statement, the researcher got the data from the sample that had been chosen by the researcher at SMA N 2 Lubuk Basung. In this case, there weretwo kinds of data that were obtainedbyresearcher, they werethe pretest and posttest data. The pretest data got before the researcher gave the treatment to the sample by giving the writing test that was tried out to the other class. The researcher asked the English teacher to give the pretest to the students. Then, the researcher gave writing test with the same topic in the posttest to the students at the end of the meeting in order to get the data of post-test.
The data of this research had been taken from the students’ score; they are the pretest and posttest score where In this test, there were several indicators that became the focus of measurement and it was related to the scoring rubric of the writing itself such as content, organization, language use and mechanic. Thus, in this research the researcher used the scoring rubric that suggested by Kern (2005), because it has complete aspec in in giving students’ writing score. After the researcher got both of scores, the researcher analyzed the data. Firstly, the researcher calculated the differences of the score by comparing the posttest and pretest score. Here, the posttest score subtracted to the pretest score for every student’s score.
FINDINGS
Based on the hypothesis of researcher above, the researcher found some findings, the first finding was the researcher found that the value of reability in try out class was 0,75. It
means that there was high reability, because based on the criterion of reability that was taken from Ridwan (2012:218) mentions that 0,60-0,79 is high reliability. The second finding was the score of pre test. in that finding, the researcher found the sum of pre test score was 511. After that the researcher found the third finding where the researcher found the sum of the post test score was 718.
After the researcher found both the sum of pre test and post test score, the researcher calculated defference of both that scores then the researcher got the difference of those score, they were 4,3. In this case, after the researcher got the differences of both pre test and post test score, the researcher calculated the ttest where the researcher found ttest was 2,87. It means that t-table was bigger than t- table at the degree of freedom 29 and at the level of significance 0,05. Therefore, it could be concluded that the looping strategy is effective toward students’ writing achievement.
CONCLUSION
In a research, the researcher found the data that were gotten by the researcher from students’ writing test where the researcher used some design, in this research, the researcher usedOne-Group Pretest-Posttest Design that still part of pre-experimental research design. The researcher used the XII grade students of SMAN 2 Lubuk Basung, kab Agam that consist of 10 classes as the population and chose one class as the sample.
In this case, the researcher used class XII IPS 3 as the sample of the research.
In this research, the researcher used pre-test and post-test score from the class treatment. The researcher found out the means of difference between pre-test and post-test and the mean of difference was 6,9. Beside that, the t-calculated was 4,3, it was bigger that t-table (2.04) at the degree of freedom 29 and at the level of significant 0.05. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Looping strategy is effective toward students’ writing achievement.
REFFERENCES
4
Alston and Boules. (2003). Research for Social Workers: An Introduction to Methods.Singapore: South Wind Productions
Atlee. (2005). Advancing writing skill, Guide to Autentic Writing. San Fransisko: Dandy Lion Publication
Brandvik et al. (2011). The English Teacher’s Survival Guides, Ready to Use Teaching technique and Materials for Grades 7-12 .Canada:
Pearson Education
Blake (2002). Literacy for QTLS : Achiving the minimum core. New york: R.I.C. Publication
Clayton. (2003). Great Genre Writing Lessons. Canada: Sholastic Inc
Connelly, Mark. (2010). Get Writing and Pharagraph. 2nd Edition. San Fransisko: UNSW Press
Ferris. (2005). Teaching ESL Composition, Purpose, Process, and Practice. New York:Cambridge University Press
Gallanher, Kelly. (2006). Teaching Adollecent Writers.United States:
Stend House Publishers.
Gangal. (2011). A Practice Course For Developing Writing Skills In English.
Mudrak, New Delhi: Asoke publisher Gay, L.R and Airasian, Peter. (2000).
Educational Research Competencies For Analysis and Application.
6th Ed, New Jersey: Prentice Hal, Inc.
_______________________ (2002).
Educational Research Competencies For Analysis and Application.
7th Ed, New Jersey: Prentice Hal, Inc.
Hyland, Ken. (1998). Academic writing.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, Mauren. (2009). Another 60 writing topic: San Fransisko. R.I.C.
Publication
Kern, Diane E. (2006). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: Mc Graw Hill
Leki, Ilona. (1998). Academic Writing, Exploring Process and Strategies.
United States: Cambridge University Press.
Mather, Nancy, Barbara J Wendling, and Rhia Roberts. (2000). Writing Assesment and Instruction For Students With Learning Disabilities Grade K-12. New York: Jossey Bass.
Nazario. (2013). Bridges to Better. 2nd ed.
New York: Longman
Nunan, David. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching: New York:
Hill Companies Inc.
Purwadi and Marta. (2005). English For a Better Life. Bandung: Pakar Raya.
Richard, Jack C and Renandya, Willy A.
(2002). Methodology In Language Teaching. New York: Combridge University Press.
Riduwan. (2012). Teknik dan etode Penelitian Untuk Pemula Dan Karyawan, Alfa Beta, Bandung.
Spack, Ruth. (1995). Guidines, A Cross Cultural Reading/ Writing Text.
CambridgE Academic Writing.
Canada: Dandy Lion Publication.
Stubbs, Sue. (2000). Targeting Text.
Sidney: Mc Pherson’s Printing
Sudarwati, Th.M and Grace, Audia.
(2007). Look a head an English Course. Jakarta: Erlangga
Sudjana. (2002). Methode Statistika Bandung: PT. Tarsito Bandung.
Suprato and Darwis. (2007). Pasti Bisa!
Teaching Genre- Based Writing.
Yogyakarta: Andi Offset
