55 IMPROVING STUDENTS’ WRITING ABILITY BY USING PLAN AND WRITE
STRATEGY AT SECOND GRADE OF SMKN 10 MAKASSAR Wa Kalsum La Mboi1
1,2,3 Pendidikan Bahsa Inggris STKIP YPUP Makassar
Email: kanisia@gmail.com Artikel info
Artikel history:
Received; xx-xx-xxx Revised:xx-xx-xxxx Accepted;xx-xx-xxxx
The objective of this research is aimed to know whether or not of PLAN and WRITE strategy can improve students’
writing ability at SMKN 10 Makassar. This researcher used pre- experimental method with one group pre-test and post-test design. The population of this research was the second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar. The total sample was 20 students. The result of the data refers to the mean score of post-test was greater than the pre-test (75.40>63.15) and the t-test value was greater than the t-table value (15.17> 2.093 ) at the level of significant (p) 0.05 and degree freedom (df)=19. It can be proved by the result of the five components in writing, where the post-test result was higher than the pre-test. So it can be concluded that the score of the five components of writing on post-test (Content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanic) which was greater than the score of the five components of writing on pre-test.
Kata kunci:
PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’
writing ability
Coresponden author:
Email: xxxx@gmail.com artikel dengan akses terbuka dibawah lisensi CC BY -4.0
ENGLISH REVIEW JOURNAL
http://ojs.stkip-ypup.ac.id/index.php/erj Vol 1, No, 1, Juni 2020
p-ISSN: xxxx-xxxx dan e-ISSN: xxxx-xxxx DOI.xxx-xxx
ENGLISH REVIEW JOURNAL
56 INTRODUCTION
Background
In globalization era, English is very important in human life. It is used as an international language. Language can control behavior, realize the actions and change the situation. Wikipedia (2011), explained that “there are six definitions of languages they are: a) a system to represent objects, actions, ideas and circumstances. b) an apparatus which is used to convey their real concept into the minds of others. c) an unified system of meaning. d) a code that is used by a linguistic expert to distinguish between form and meaning. e) deliver a speech grammar that have been established for instance words, sentences, and others. f) a speech system that will be understood by the linguistic community.”
In Indonesia English is a foreign language which is considered important to be introduced in the field of education. Education in Indonesia takes English as one of the main subjects taught from elementary school up university and also examined in the national examination to determine students’ graduation. English requires four skills which are integrated each other and have to be mastered well by the students. They are listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. As one of those four skills, writing is one of skill that students need to be mastered. It is important in some aspects of life. It means that when the students do the writing process, they are involved in producing language output rather than receiving it. It is also supported by many experts for instance Richards and Renandya explaind that English is the most difficult skill for foreign language learners that the difficulty is not only in generating and organizing ideas but also in translating the ideas into text.
In learning process, writing is one of important skill which taught in school.
Writing is language skill that can be used to communicate and to express with other in written form. Based on many the statement, writing is very important because writing can expand our knowledge, feeling, and help us to express our idea.
Due to Capitalize III did by the researcher in July until august 2018 at second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar, and did interview of the English teacher after teaching in the class, the researcher got the information that most students’
of writing skills are relatively low. Those are ideas, and generate of paragraphs.
The researcher is interested to conduct research the problem on a title
“Improving Students’ Writing Ability by Using PLAN and WRITE Strategy at the second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar”.
Problem Statement
Due to the background above, the researcher formulated a problem statement as follow:
”Does PLAN and WRITE strategy improve the students’ writing ability at the second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar?”
57 Objective of the Research
The objective of this research is to find out whether or not use PLAN and WRITE strategy can improve students’ writing ability at second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar.
Significance of the Research
The results of the research are expected to make a contribution theoretically and partically. This research theoretically is to contribute to the development of theoritical discipline. It will be used by the further researcher as a reference.
Therefore, the research will be conducted continuously. On the other hand, practically the result of this research is expected to give information to the curiculum policy make to bring into being as a public oriented for English learning and teaching process. It also will be useful for the teachers to get a new strategy in teaching english and the students find an effective way to ability writing text. In other words, It cand be said that the significance of this research universally becaming meaningful information for grammatical teaching and learning in order to be more interesting, pleasant, and comprehension for all educated people.
Scope of the Research
The scope of the research focuses on using PLAN and WRITE strategy to improve students’ writing ability at the second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar in 2019-2020. The researcher focuses the scoring based on five components in writing they are content, organization, language use, vocabulary, and mechanic.
Meanwhile, the paragraphs are limited to an expository essay.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Previous Research Findings
Many previous researcher findings have reported to expose the writing ability of the students comprehend in writing materials and some of them are as follows:
Mardhikaningrum (2016: 90-92) in her research “Using the Brainstorming Technique to Improve the Eighth Grade Students’ Writing Ability at SMPN 1 Nanggulan Kulon Progo focused on improving students’writing ability by implementing Brainstorming technique. The effect of the study reffered that the there were some improvements related to their writing ability.
The first, the implementation of the Brainstorming technique could improve the students’ motivation and involvment to build up their confidence to generate ideas in their writing. The second, related to the grammatical aspect, the students had improvements related to the gramatical aspects.
The next is related to vocabulary mastery. The students’ vocabulary mastery was much richer after they practiced using the brainstorming technique. The students could choose the appropriate words when producing a text. They also could deliver their ideas better.The students’ writing ability improved much better by using the brainstorming technique. It helps the students to generate ideas more effectively to produce a text. Brainstorming facilitates the students to activate
58 their prior knowledge before they practice their writing. By implementing the technique, the students could feel at ease in performing the writing task.
Moreover, by implementing the brainstorming technique, the activities in teaching and learning process were more varied. Since the researcher introduced this new technique to the students to learn writing, they were interested and more motivated to learn in the teaching and learning process.”
Based on previous research findings above, the reseacher is intersted to teach at second grade of SMKN 10 Makassar by using PLAN and WRITE strategy.
Akhmad (2011:57) in his entitle “ Improving the Students’ Writing Ability of Second Semester Students of STKIP- YPUP Makassar Through Mind Mapping Method. He concluded that the use of mind mapping method can improve students’ writing ability of the second semester students of STKIP-YPUP Makassar in academic year 2011.
In this strategy there is significant diffrence between result pre-test and post-test, where the mean score of pre-test is lower than the mean score of post- test and t-test value of final score in writing ability is greater than t-table.”
Owen in De La Paz (2018:108) in her tittle “ Using Self-Regulated Strategy Development to PLAN and WRITE for a State Writing Exam. She recently invited the special education “ pull out “ teacher and her students to visit one of her inclussive classes. She modeled PLAN and WRITE, using butcher paper and colored pens to show how the introductory and concluding paragraphs were similar, and corresponding colors for each main idea and its body paragraph. The visiting students then readly then readly answered questions regarding where information came from for each paragraph.”
Based on the previous findings above, the researcher concludes that the strategy give a meaningful contribution to both the students and english teachers who teach writing. So they can make this research as one of their references to improve their strategy by using PLAN and WRITE strategy to teach writing ability.
Some Pertinent Ideas The Concept of Writing
English club (2019) “writing is the process of using symbols (letters of the alphabet, punctuation and spaces) to communicate thoughts and ideas in a readable form. In our own language, writing is usually the fourth language skill that we learn. A writer may write for personal enjoyment or use, or for an audience of one person or more and the audience may be known (targeted) or unknown. Taking notes for studying of purposes is an example of writing for one's self. Blogging publicly is an example of writing for an unknown audience. A letter to a friend is an example of writing for a targeted audience. As with speaking, it is important to consider your audience when writing.”
Hornby in Akhmad (2011:8) “means to make letter or other symbols on a surface (use paper), esp wuith a pen or pencil. In other case, it means to compose, to draw, engrave etc, it is also could be to communicate with, to perfom or to practice by letters.”
59 According to Nurhadi (2017: 5-6), resulted that in general writing is an activity that gives birth the idea and package of graphic symbols in the form of writing that can be understood by others. Based on understanding illustrated are as follows:
1. In writing someone does an activity to produce a product.
2. The intended product is structured to series of graphic symbols of a language to contain meaning bound in idea.
3. The product is known as writing.
4. The writing can be used to express themselves and communicate ideas to others indirectly.
In this case, the description above illustrates that writing can present ideas and languages where ideas as principals or messages are conveyed, while language (writing) as a place that accommodate ideas. In the other hand, writing is also a thinking activity. The process of thinking in writing includes how ideas are raised and focused on certain ideas that are relevant and interrelated. The idea is an expressed in coherent and cohesive paragraphs and discourses. From writing, it can be explored into someone's thinking and what is recorded in his mind.
The Concept of PLAN and WRITE Strategy Definition of PLAN and WRITE strategy
“PLAN and WRITE is mnemonic strategy essay writing. It is designing to teach students strategies for planning, drafting, and revising, along with the knowledge and skills needed to support this processes.
PLAN and WRITE organize and direct the processes for both planning and writing an essay. Being able to write is an effective and critical skill for academic success. However, writing can even begin. The students must able to plan their writing. Planning is a critical element of writing skill. The students voted about one fourth of the writing time to plain. Skilled writers not only plan what they will write, but how they will write. They establish goals for their writing, structure, ideas and consider their audience.”
According to DeLaPaZ and Grahamin in Teacher Tool Boox SRSD Strategies (2012), school age children do not spend much time planning deliberately what they will write in advance, and even when they do, those plans are usually unsophisticated. Skilled writers activate and coordinate an impressive array of mental operations, skills, and knowledge as they make planning, draw ideas from memory, developing, concepts, organizations, skills, written draft, re- conceptualize planning, revise text, and so forth (Graham and Harris, DeLaPaz and Graham in Teacher tool boox : 2012).
The procedures of PLAN and WRITE strategy
Th procedures of PLAN and WRITE strategy are as follows:
1) Pay attention to the prompt (this is to help students to fully consider the prompt state and underline what they are being asked to write about).
2) List the main ideas
Students first brainstorm and decide on the topic (field trip destination) and then brainstorm at least three main ideas for the development of the essay (reasons for this destination).
3) Add supporting ideas
60 Students note three details or elaborations to support each main idea.
4) Number the major Points (ideas)
Remainds students to sequence the main ideas and details in a meaningful way (i.e the most compelling reason for this destination becomes the first or last body paragraph it the essay).
5) Work from your plan to develop your thesis statement
Remainds students to incorporate ideas from their plan into a thesis statement. Either a “basic” or an “advanced” approach for introductory paragraphs can be used here. In the former approach, the first paragraph begins with the topic sentences and provides an overview of the three body paragraphs. Students using the advanced approach start with a series of questions, statements, concluding the intductory paragraph with their topic sentences.
6) Remember your goals
Serves an additional reminder to the students to continue planning as they compose. These goals reflect qualities of good writing incorporate specific criteria from the state’s holistic scoring rubric. Goals include maintaining control of the topic, providing clear, organization, attempt to include mature vocabulary, and use of sentences that vary by form and function. Copies of these goals are provided to teach student and select personal goals to strive for.
7) Include transition words for each paragraph 8) Try to use different kinds of sentences 9) Exciting, and interesting words
METHOD OF THE RESEARCH Method of Research and Design
The method applied in this research is pre-experimental method with one group pre-test and post-test design. It is aimed to find out the students’
improvement in writing expository essay by using PLAN and WRITE strategy at seecond grade of SMKN 10 Makassar.
The statistic representation of design as follows:
Pre-test Treatment Post-test 01 X 02 Where :
O1 : The result of students’ (pre-test) X : Treatment by text
O2 : The result of the students’ (post-test)
(Creswell, 2013:241) Variable of the research
This research consists of two variables that are dependent and independent variables. Dependent variable is improving the students’ writing ability and independent variable is the using PLAN and WRITE Strategy.
Population and Sampel
61 1. Population
The population of the research is the second grade of SMKN 10 Maksassar in academic year 2019/2020 which consists of three classes they are XI TeLI 1a, XI TELI 1b, XI TELI 2a, XI TELI 2b, XI DPIB a, XI DPIB b, XI TIPTL a, TIPTL a, TIPTL b,XI TIPTL c, XI TKB a, XI TKBB b, XI TKJ, XI TKR 1a, XI TKR 1b, XI TKR 2a, XI TKR 2b, XI TPTL, XI TPM a, XI TPM b, XI TSM a, and XI TSM b, the total population are 214 students.
2. Sample
The researcher used purposive sampling technique. It means, the researcher only chose one class as a sample of this research by taking class XI DPIB a.The total number of sample consists of 20 students of SMKN 10 Makassar.
Instrument of the Research
The instrument of this research was writing test that was used in pre-test and post-test. Pre-test was to find out the students’ prior knowledge on writing before giving treatment, while the post-test administrated to know the students’ writing ability after gave the treatment by using PLAN and WRITE Strategy.
Procedures of Collecting Data 1. Pre-test
The Researcher gave the students pre-test before giving the treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy. It was aimed to know the previous students ability before giving treatment. Before giving treatment, the researcher administrated the pre-test. The pre-test was intended to see the students’ writing ability before giving treatment.
2. Treatment
After giving pre-test, the researcher gave treatment for the students as long as four meetings. The activities of each meeting run 90 minutes and the materials were given to the students during treatment was about expository essay. The procedure of treatment was the same as for each treatment. Here were the procedures of treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy.
a. Part one : The model of the acitivity (25 minutes)
The researcher explained to the students that they focused in PLAN and WRITE strategy from described something, some place, some experience, or some situation through sensory information in their lives and researcher asked the students have decided some information about.
b. Part two : Write ( 50 minutes)
The students did exercise individual after the researcher explained how to create their pragraph by using PLAN and WRITE strategy.
c. Part three : closing (10 minutes)
The researcher collected the students’ approval sheets 3. Post-test
62 After giving treatment as long as four meetings, the researcher gave post-test to the students to find out the used of PLAN and WRITE Strategy. The post-test was the same as pre-test.
Technique of Data Analysis
In analyzing the students’ score, the researcher applied some procedures as follows:
1. The data collected through written test in pre-test and post-test to analyze quantitatively. The way of getting the score was determined based on the criteria they are:
a) Content b) Vocabulary c) Orgasnization d) Language use e) Mechanics a. Content
To evaluate the score of the content, the researcher used the following scale.
Table 3.1 Content Component
Score Classification Criterion
27 – 30 Very Good If the central purpose, the unity, the coherence. And continuity of paragraph are all correct.
23 – 26 Good If the paragraph contained few errors of the central purposes, unity,
coherence, and contiunity.
20 – 22 Average If the paragraph contained some errors of the central purposes, unity, coherence, and continuity
9 – 11 Poor If the paragraph or composition dominated by using errors of the central purposes,unity,coherence, and continuity.
13 – 16 Very Poor If the central purpose, unity, coherence, and continuity are all incorrect.
b. Vocabulary
To evaluate the scope of the vocabulary, the researcher used the following scale.
63 Table 3.2
Vocabulary Component
Score Classification Criterion
18 – 20 Very good If the paragraph containing wide range of vocabulary, using effective words.
15 – 17 Good If the paragraph contain occasion errors of the vocabulary but the meaning not obscured.
12 – 14 Average If the paragraph contain frequent errors but the meaning confused.
9 – 11 Poor If the paragraph dominated by errors of vocabulary.
5 – 8 Very Poor If the vocabulary of the paragraph are all incorrect.
c. Organization
To evaluate the score the organization, the researcher used the following scale.
Table 3.3
Organization Component Score Classification Criterion
18 – 20 Very Good If the words, sentences line up easly from a clear pattern.
15 – 17 Good If the paragraph contain few errors of words .
12 – 14 Average If the paragraph contain some errors of words and sentences.
9 – 11 Poor If the paragraph dominated by errors of words and sentences.
5 – 8 Very Poor If the words in sentences and paragraph are all incorrect.
64 d. Language use
To evaluate the score of language used, the researcher used the following scale.
Table 3.4
Language Use Component Score Classification Criterion
23 – 25 Very good If the grammar the paragraph are all correct.
20 – 22 Good If the paragraph contain few errors of grammar.
16 – 19 Average If the paragraph contain some errors of grammar.
9 – 15 Poor If the paragraph dominated by errors of grammar.
5 – 8 Very poor If the grammar of the paragraph are all incorrect.
e. Mechanic
To evaluate the score of the mechanic , the tresearcher used the following scale.
Table 3.5 Mechanic Component Score Classification Criterion
5 Very good If there are no problems of spelling, punctuation,and capitalization.
4 Good If there are few errors of spelling, capitalization, paragraphing but not observed.
3 Average If there some errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing.
2 Poor Poor many errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization,
65 paragraphing.
1 Very Poor Illegible writing.
Jacobs in Akhmad (2011:37-39) 2. To analize the data, the researcher used scale 1-100, scorring rate components of composition . The lower score is 1 and highest score is 100. The score was found by calculating the five at composition component by using the formula as follows:
X1 + X2 + X3 + X4 + X5 = X
= The sum of all components of score
X = The total score
Jacobs in Akhmad (2011:40) 3. Classifying the students’ score from pre-test and post-test the data that was of obtained then classified by reffering to the scorring system based on the guided profided by ESL composition profile which propose by Jacobs as follows:
Level A : Score 100- 88 is classified as very good writing ability Level B : Score 85 – 75 is classified as good writing ability Level C : Score 76 – 64 is classified as average writing ablity Level D : Score 63 – 45 is classified as poor writing ability Level E : Score 44 – 34 is classified as very Poor writing ability
Jacobs in Akhmad (2011:40) 4. Calculating the mean score of the students by using SPSS 20 version.
5. Computing the squency and precentage of the students’ score by using SPSS 20 version.
6. Finding the mean standard deviation by using SPSS 20 version.
7. Finding the significance different between the score of the pre-test and pos- test by calculating the value of t-test by using SPS S 20 version.
Findings
1. The Calculation
of the Mean score and Standar Deviation students’ pre-test and post- test.
In this section the researcher described the students scores of writing expository essay based on five components of writing. They would be shown on the tables below:
66
a. Content
component
Table 4.1
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Content Component in Pre-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
PRETEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 27-30 Very good
2 23-26 Good 3 15,0%
3 20-22 Average 13 65,0%
4 17-19 Poor 1 5,0%
5 13-16 Very poor 3 15,0%
Total 20 100%
The table 4.1 showed that there are 3 students or 15,0% is classified as very poor category, 1 student or 5.0% is classified as poor categry , 13 students or 65,0% is classified as average category, 3 students or 15.0% is classified as good category and none of them 0% is classified as very good category. So, the dominant category pre-test in content component is average with 13 students or 65.0% percentages.
Table 4.1
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Content Component in Post-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY POST TEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 27-30 Very good 3 15,0 %
2 23-26 Good 11 55,0%
3 20-22 Average 3 15,0%
4 17-19 Poor 3 15,0%
5 13-16 Very poor
Total 20 100%
The table showed that there are 3 tudents or 15,0% is classified as poor category, 3 students or 15,0% is classified as average category, 11 students or
67 55,0% is classified as good category, 3 students or 15,0%, is classified as very good category and none of them 0% is classified as very poor category. Next, the dominant score in post-test component is good category with 11 students or 55.0% precentages. So, the contrast between pre-test and post-test showed that the post-test is higher than pre-test or there is significance diffrence bitween pre-test and post-test.
b. Vocabulary component
Table 4.2
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Vocabulary Component in Pre-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
PRETEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 18-20 Very good
2 15-17 Good 1 5,0%
3 12-14 Average 12 60,0%
4 9-11 Poor 7 35,0%
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
To build upon the table above, showed that the result of students’ writing ability in vocabulary component in pre-test. There are 7 students or 35,0% is classified as poor category, 12 students or 60,0% is classified as average category, 1 student or 5,0% is classified as good category, none students of them or 0% is classified as very poor and none of them 0% is classified as very good category. The dominant score in vocabulary component of pre-test is average category with 12 students or 60.0% precentages. So, the proprotion between pre- test and post-test showed that the post-test is higher than pre-test or there is significance diffrence between pre-test and post-test.
Table 4.2
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Vocabulary Component in Post-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
POST TEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
68
1 18-20 Very good 1 5,0 %
2 15-17 Good 11 55,0%
3 12-14 Average 5 25,0%
4 9-11 Poor 3 15,0%
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
To find the table above, showed that the result of students’ writing ability in vocabulary component in post-test. It can be prove that there are 3 students or 15,0% classified as poor score, 5 students or 25.0% is classified as average category, 11 students or 55.0% is classified as good category, 1 student or 5.0%, is classified as very good category and none of them or 0% is classified as very poor category. The dominant score in vocabulary component of post-test is good category with 11 students or 55.0% precentages. So, the compare between pre-test and post-test refers to post-test is higher than pre-test or there is significance diffrence between pre-test and post-test.
c. Organization
Table 4.3
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Organization Component in Pre-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY PRETEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 18-20 Very good
2 15-17 Good 2 10,0%
3 12-14 Average 12 60,0%
4 9-11 Poor 6 30,0%
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
Based on the data showed in the table above, there are 6 students or 30.0% is classified as poor score, 12 students or 60.0% is classified as average score, 2 students or 10.0% is classified as good score. Meanwhile, none of them is classified as very poor score and none of them is classified as very good score.
69 The dominant score in organization component of pre-test is average category with 12 students or 60.0% precentages. So, the imagery between pre-test and post- test showed that the post-test is higher than pre-test or there is significance diffrence between pre-test and post-test.
Table 4.3
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Organization Component in Post-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY POST TEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 18-20 Very good 2 10,0 %
2 15-17 Good 10 50,0%
3 12-14 Average 5 25,0%
4 9-11 Poor 3 15,0%
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
In the contrast of the result in the post-test after giving treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy are able to give signifficance difference of the result students writing ability in organization. There are 3 students or 15.0% classified as poor score, 5 students or 25.0% classified as average score, 10 students or 50.0%) classified as good score, 2 students or 10.0% classified as very good score, and none (0%) as a very poor classification.The dominant score in organization component of post-test is good category with 10 students or 50.0%
precentages. So, the compare between pre-test and post-test refers to post-test is higher than pre-test.
d. Language Use component
Table 4.4
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Language Use Component in Pre-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
PRETEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 23-25 Very good
2 20-22 Good 3 15,0%
3 16-19 Average 11 55,0%
4 9-15 Poor 6 30,0%
70
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
Based on the data above, there are 6 students or 30.0% is classified as poor score, 11 students or 55.0% is classified as average category, 3 students or 15.0% is classified as good category. Moreover, none 0% student is classified as very poor and very good. The dcategory. The dominant score in language use component of pre-test is good category with 3 students or 15.0% precentages. So, the compare between pre-test and post-test refers to post-test is higher than pre- test.
Table 4.4
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Language Use Component in Post-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
POST TEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 23-25 Very good 3 15,0%
2 20-22 Good 8 40,0%
3 16-19 Average 6 30,0%
4 9-15 Poor 3 15,0%
5 5-8 Very poor
Total 20 100%
In the contrast of the result in the post-test after giving treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy can give signifficance difference of the result students writing ability in language use . There are 3 students or 15.0% classified as poor score, 6 students or 30.0% classified as average score, 8 students or 40.0% classified as good score, 3 students or 15.0% classified as very good score, and none of them classified as a very poor score. In addition, the dominant score in language use component of post-test is very good category with the 3 students or 15% precentages. As the comparison between the result in the pre-test and pos-test can conclude tha the students post-test is higher than pre-test and all of students had improved students’ writing ability.
e. Mechanic component
Table 4.5
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Mechanic Component in Pre-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
PRETEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
71
1 5 Very good
2 4 Good
3 3 Average 5 25,0%
4 2 Poor 12 60,0%
5 1 Very poor 3 15,0%
Total 20 100%
According the data showed that the 3 students or 15.0% classified as very poor score, 12 students or 60.0% classified as poor score, 5 students or 25.0% classified as average score. However, none students classified as good score, and none of them classified as very good score.
Table 4.5
The Rate Percentage and Frequency of Students’ Score Mechanic Component in Post-Test
NO SCORE CATEGORY
POST-TEST
FREQUENSI PERCENTAGE
1 5 Very good
2 4 Good 13 65,0%
3 3 Average 4 20,0%
4 2 Poor 3 15,0%
5 1 Very poor
Total 20 100%
In the contrast of the result in the post-test after giving treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy can give signifficance difference of the result students’ writing ability in language use. It can be prooved that there are 3 students or 15.0% classified as poor score, 4 students 20.0 % classified as average score, 13 students or 65.0% classified as good score. Meanwhile none student classified as very good score, and none of them classified as a very poor score. As the comparison above, the result in the pre-test and pos-test , all of students had improved in writing ability.
f. Classifying the students’ score from pre-test and post-test.
The data on the table 4.10 and 4.11, showed that the frequency and rate percentage of students final score in five components of writing both pre-test and post-test.
72 Table 5.1
The Rate Percentage And Frequency of The Students’ Score Writing Ability on Five Components of Writing In Pre-Test
No Classification Score Level Frequency Percentage
1 Very good 100-88 A 0 0%
2 Good 87-75 B 2 10%
3 Average 74-64 C 9 45%
4 Poor 63-45 D 8 40%
5 Very poor 44-34 E 1 5%
Based on the table 4.1 showed that the frequency and rate percentage of students’ score in five components in writing ability. There is 1 student or 5%
classified as very poor score, 8 students or 40% classified as poor score, 9 students or 45% classified as average category, 2 students or 10% as good category, and none of them classified as very good score.
Table 5.2
The rate percentage and frequency of the students’ score writing ability on five components of writing in post-test
No Classification Score Level Frequency Percentage
1 Very good 100-88 A 2 10%
2 Good 87-75 B 9 45%
3 Average 74-64 C 5 25%
4 Poor 63-45 D 4 20%
5 Very poor 44-34 E 0 0%
Based on the table 4.2 showed that the frequency and rate percentage of students’ score in five components in writing. There are 4 students or 20% as poor score, 5 students or 25% classified as average score, 9 students or 45% classified as good score, 2 students or 10% classified as very good score.
The Mean Score and Standard Deviation a. Content component
The following table showed the mean score and standard deviation of students’ score in component of content.
73 Table 6.1
The Mean Score And Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Content Compoent
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Postest 22,8500 20 2,94288 ,65805
Pretest 20,3500 20 2,60111 ,58163
According to the table above, the mean score of students writing ability in pre-test is 20.3500 classified as average score and the post-test is 22.8500. It can be proved that this strategy by using PLAN and WRITE strategy is improve by two ranges, even though it falls into the average category. So, the mean score of students’ writing ability of content component in post-test is higher than pre-test.
b. Vocabulary
The following table shows the mean score and standard deviation of students’ score in component of vocabulary.
Table 6.2
The Mean Score And Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Vocabulary Compoenent
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Postest 14,9000 20 2,53190 ,56615
Pretest 12,2000 20 2,19089 ,48990
Based on the table above,the mean score of students writing ability in pre-test is 12.2000 classified as average score. Meanwhile, in the post-test is 14.900 classified as good score. In this case, the mean score of students’ writing ability of vocabulary component in post-test is higher than pre-test.
c. Organization component
The following table showed the mean score and standard deviation of students’ score in component of organization.
Table 6.3
The Mean Score And Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Organization Component
74 Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean Pai
r 1
Postest 15,0500 20 2,62528 ,58703
Pretest 12,5000 20 2,13985 ,47848
Based on the table above, the mean score of students writing ability in pre-test is 12.5000 classified as average score. Meanwhile, in the post-test is 15.0500 classified as good score. It can conclude that the mean score of students’
writing ability of organization component in post-test is higher than pre-test.
d. Language Use
The following table shows the mean score and standard deviation of students’
score in component of language use.
Table 6.4
The Mean Score And Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Language Use Component
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Postest 19,1000 20 3,52286 ,78773
Pretest 16,0000 20 3,46410 ,77460
According to the table above, the mean score of the students writing ability in pre-test is 16.000 classified average score and the post-test is 19.1000 classified as average into good classification. It can be proved that this strategy by using PLAN and WRITE strategy is improved by two ranges, even though it falls into the averag score. So, the mean score of students’ writing ability of content component in post-test is higher than pre-test.
e. Mechanic
The following table showed the mean score and standard deviation of students’ score in component of Mechanic.
Table 6.5
The Mean Score and Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Mechanic Component
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std.
Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair
11
Postest 3,5000 20 ,76089 ,17014
Pretest 2,1000 20 ,64072 ,14327
Based on the table above, the mean score of students writing ability in pre- test is 2.1000 classified as poor score while the post-test is 3.500 classified as average scorr. It can conclude that the mean score of students’ writing ability of mechanic component in post-test is higher than pre-test.
75 3. The Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Students’ Score on Five
Components between pre-test and post-test Table 7.2
The Mean Score And Standar Deviation of The Students’ Score In Five Components
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair
1
POSTEST 75,4000 20 11,57311 2,58783
PRETEST 63,1500 20 9,59866 2,14632
The mean score of students’ writing ability of five components in pre-test is 63.150 classified as poor score, and in the post-test is 75.4000 which is categorized into good score. As a result above, it indicates that the mean score of students’ writing ability in all components of writing in post-test is higher than pre-test. The students’ score extend 12.25 points. It can be prove that there is significance betweet pre-test and post-test of students’ writing ability in all components.
4. Test significance
To begin whether the pre-test and post-test are significantly difference, the researcher analized the t-test by using SPSS 20 version. On the other hand, if the result of t-test value 15.17 is greater than t-table value 2.093, the null hypothesis will be rejected and if t-test value is lower than the t-table value, the null hypothesis will be accepted. The two variables pre-test and post-test are significance levels (0,05) with the degree of freedom (df) = n-1 where (n) is the number of total population.
Table 7.3
The Students Achievemt In Writing
Variable t – test value t – table
X2 – X1 15,17 2,093
Based on the data showed that the t-test value was 15.17 and t-table 2.093. It can be concluded that the t-table is smaller than t-test value of students’
writing ability achievement. It can be inferred that there is significance diffrence between the result of the students’ scores in pre-test and post-test.
5. Hypothesis
To find out degree of freedom (df), the researcher used the following formulas below:
Df = N-1 where (N=19)
76 Df= 20-1
Df= 19
The level of significance (p) = 0.05 and degree of freedom (df) = 19 thus value of t-table is 2.093. Compared with the t-test value, it can explained that the t-test value 15.17 was higher than the value of t-table 2.093. In other word, it can be said that 15.17> 2.093. its meant that the null hypothesis (HO) of this research is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accapted because there is a significant difference between pre-test and post-test by using PLAN and WRITE strategy in teaching writing ability.
Based on the data analayze above, it can be concluded that the used of PLAN and WRITE strategy could improve students’ writing ability.
6. Analysis Data By Using SPSS 20 Version a. Mean score of pre-test and post-test
The researcher used SPSS 20 version to get the mean score of pre-test 63.1500 and the mean score of post-test 75.4000
b. Descriptive statistics
The researcher used SPSS 20 version to get the median score of pre-test is 64.00 and the post-test is 74.50. Besides, the mode numbers which mostly appear in pre-test is 62.00 while post-test is 74.00 Then, the minimum score in the pre-test is 44.00 while post-test is 53.00, the maximum score in pre-test and post-test have changed from 75.00 to 91.00
c. T-test value
The researcher used SPSS 20 version to get the t-test value is 15.17 and t- table is 2.93.
Discussion
This section, the researcher discusses about the finding of data analysis in respect to the scope of the research. To deal the interpertation to students’ ability in writing after they are given treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy.
The ability of students writing in expository essay was categorized on poor with the mean score of pre-test were 63.1500 as poor category without using PLAN and WRITE strategy. Meanwhile, after giving treatment by using PLAN and WRITE strategy and the mean score of students’ writing ability is 75.4000 and classified as good score. The result of the students’ writing in expository essay observed based on the five components in writing and the collecting data in pre-test, treatment, and post-test were analysed quantitave by using Jacob in Akhriadi see the page twenty seventh until thirthy.
In content component, the total score of students were 407, then it was devided by the total sample to get mean score of pre-test and the students mean score 20.35 and classified as average. The vice-versa of the total score of students in post-test. In post-test, the students got 457 and devided with the sample to get the mean score was 22.85 as average to good classification. In pre-test of content component, researcher can conculde that the students’ prior knowlrdge on writing in content component was average. Meanwhile, the researcher after giving treatment as long as four meetings by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’ knowledge in content component have progress from average to good.
So this strategy is successful to apply at senior high school especillay SMKN 10 Makassar.
77 In vocabulary component, the total score of students were 244, then it was devided by the total sample to get mean score of pre-test and the students mean score 12.2 and classified as average. The vice-versa of the total score of students in post-test. In post-test, the students got 296 and devided with the sample to get the mean score was 14.9 as average to good classification. In pre- test of vocabulary component, researcher can conculde that the students’ prior knowledge on writing in vocabulary component was average. Meanwhile, the researcher after giving treatment as long as four meetings by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’ knowledge in vocabulary component have progress from average to good. So this strategy is successful to apply at senior high school especillay SMKN 10 Makassar.
In organization component, the total score of students were 250, then it was devided by the total sample to get mean score of pre-test and the students mean score is 12.5 and classified a average classification. The vice-versa of the total score of students in post-test. In post-test, the students got 301 and devided with the sample to get the mean score was 15.05 as good classification. In pre- test of organization component, researcher can conculde that the students’ prior knowledge on writing in vocabulary component was average . Meanwhile, the researcher after giving treatment as long as four meetings by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’ knowledge in organization component have progress from average into good classification. So this strategy is successful to apply at senior high school especillay SMKN 10 Makassar.
In language use component, the total score of students were 320, then it was devided by the total sample to get mean score of pre-test and the students mean score 16.00 and classified as poor classification.The vice-versa of the total score of students in post-test. In post-test, the students got 382 and devided with the sample to get the mean score was 19. 1 as average to good classification. In pre-test of language use component, the researcher can conculde that the students’
prior knowlrdge on writing in language use component was average to good. On the other hand, the researcher after giving treatment as long as four meetings by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’ knowledge in language use component have progress from average to good. So this strategy is successful to apply at senior high school especillay SMKN 10 Makassar.
In mechanic component, the total score of students were 42, then it was devided by the total sample to get mean score of pre-test and the students mean score 2.1 and classified as poor classification. The vice-versa of the total score of students in post-test. The post-test, the students got 70 and devided with the sample to get the mean score was 3.5 as average classification. The pre-test of mechanic component, researcher can conculde that the students’ prior knowlrdge on writing in mechanic component was poor into average. In addition, the researcher after gave treatment as long as four meetings by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students’ knowledge in organization component have progress from poor into good. So this strategy is successful to apply at senior high school especillay SMKN 10 Makassar.
78
\ The Charts 7.4
The Chart Pre-Test And Post of The Students Pre-Test And Post-Test of Students Writing Ability In Five Components.
In order to know that the is significance difference of students pre-test and post-test, the researcher observed the students’ writing on five components namely: content, organization, vocabulary, language use, mechanics. All of components were improved. Based on all five components above the content is more improve in students’ writing ability because there is effect by using PLAN and WRITE strategy namely the students enrich their paragraph by using transition words, and answer question in their paragraph until the first paragraph and second paragraph are related.
Reffering to the statement above, the researcher found that the similar research conducted by another researcher. Meanwhile, DeLaPaz and Graham in teacher Tool Box SRSD Strategies (2012) stated that the PLAN and WRITE strategy is designed to teach students strategies for planning, drafting, and refising text. The learning and teaching in PLAN and WRITE strategy are able to circumulate the development of students’ writing compotence. It this steps, by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the researcher asked students to Plan, draft and revising in their work sheet. The students list the main idea an after known the topic and list the main idea, supporting idea and generate it. The students used transition words and used the basic vocabulay. Moreover, by using PLAN and WRITE strategy, the students students were able to find out their idea, opinioons into sentences or paragraph easly in their writing. Based on the discussion, the students had shown that their ability were improved after gave them treatment as long as four meetings and significant. It can be seen from the score of pre-test and post-test. This strategy is useful for everyoone especially for the second grade students SMKN 10 Makassar.
The discussion of data collectad through writing test was explained above showed that the students’ ability in expository essay was improved. It was supported by the students’ mean score in pre-test was 63.1500 which is classified as poor category and the mean score of students’ post-test was 75.4000 which
56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78
Pre-test Post-test
79 classified as good classification. In order to know all of the total score pre-test and post-test, the researcher calculated all of components and determine the mean sore by using Jacob in Akhriadi component see the page twenty until thirty .
To the t-test statistic analysis, the researcher found that the value of t-test (15.17) was greater than the value of the table (2.093) on the level of significance p =0.05 at the degree of freedom (df) = 19. This means that the there was a significant diffrence between the results of pre-test and post-test. In other words, teaching writing by using PLAN and WRITE strategy is able to improve students’
writing ability.
The situations when the researcher did research at SMKN 10 Makassar 1. Pre-test
In ordet to begin pre-test, one of the english teacher at SMKN 10 Makassar introduce my self and explained that the researcher would teach in the class room namely XI DPID class. After that the researcher gave work sheet to do material pre-test after took attendece list, introduce their self each other and explained a little bit about the expository essay becase they were confused how to begin. The researcher got them to create the paragraph the minimal 70 words as long as 50 minutes.
2. Treatment
The researcher implementation of the strategy in learning process using phone to get the information which have been brainstorming in theis exercise.
In this research, the researcher applied PLAN and WRITE strategy in teaching learning process. It have done as long as four meetings with diffrent topics.
3. Post-test
In order to know the ability of students to write, the reseacher gave post- test to them . On the other hand, the researcher investigate the achievement of students in writing ability and found significance difference between pre-test and post-test. Amost, all of the students were able to generate their paragraph.
80 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter prsents the information about the conclusion of the research and suggestion. The explanation of each point will be presented as follows.
Conclusions
The aim of this research is to improve students’ writing ability by using PLAN and Strategy. This research was conducted at the second grade students of SMKN 10 Makassar. Based on the data and discussion gathered in the previous chapters, it can be concluded that the improving of the PLAN and WRITE trategy could help the students in generating ideas, organizing text and improving their vocabulary mastery. First, PLAN and WRITE strategy could improve students’
motivation. It was able to engage the students’ attention and interests during the teaching and learning process of writing. Moreover, PLAn and WRITE strategy could provide the students with information and ideas in their minds. Second, the improvement could be seen in the teaching and learning process. The students became more confident to write and active in the classroom activities. Third, since the students have motivated and the writing class ran well, the students’ writing ability were improved.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher conclude that the PLAN and WRITE Strategy is successful to improve the students’ writing ability of the second grade students of SMKN 10 Makassar. This Strategy could help the students presented information through writen. PLAN and WRITE Strategy helps the students to improve their ability in organizing the text because it helped them to remember the category of expository essay. The PLAN and WRITE Strategy made the students to focus on the lesson. Therefore, it meants the null hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted Makassar.
Suggestion
Based on the result of this pre-experimental research, the researcher recomended for the other researchers to continue this strategy. In order the students are able to motivate theirself, active, generate paragraph, express the ideas, supporting ideas and more confidence learn in the class especially the students writing ability.
81
REFFERENCE
Akhmad, Akhriadi. 2011. Improving the Students’ Writing Ability of Second Semester Students of STKIP-YPUP Makassar Through Mind Mapping Method. A Thesis of STKIP-YPUP Makassar.
Creswell, Jhon. W. 2013.Research Design, Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan Mixed.
Edisi Ketiga. Pustaka Pelajar.
De La PaZ, Susan 2018. Using Self -Regulated Strategy Development to Plan and Write for a State Writing Exam. A thesis of University of Maryland.
English Club. 2019. What Is Writing. https://www.englishclub.com/writing/what.htm.
Retrived on 19 May 2019.
Mardikaningrum, Ayu Risky. 2016. Using the Brainstorming Technique to `Improve the Eighth Grade Students’ Writing Ability at SMP N 1 NANGGULAN KULON PROGO. A Thesis of Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
Nurhadi. 2017. Handbook of Writing: Panduan untuk Menulis. PT Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.
