1
THE QUALITY OF THE ARGUMENT OF ANALYTICAL EXPOSITION TEXT WRITTEN BY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
A Descriptive Study of Eleventh Grade Students of MAN 3 Padang
Oleh:
Desi Nilasari *)
**) Suharni dan **) Syayid Sandi Sukandi Staff Pengajar Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kualitas penulisan argumen siswa dalam menulis teks analitikal eksposisi. Dalam penelitian ini, peneliti menganalisa kualitas penulisan argumen berdasarkan teori Kolby dan Thornburg. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif. Sumber data penelitian adalah hasil tulisan mengenai teks analitikal eksposisi yang ditulis oleh siswa kelas sebelas MAN 3 Padang. Peneliti mengumpulkan latihan siswa dari kelas IPA sebanyak 62 tulisan. Dari data yang telah dianalisa, diketahui bahwa kualitas penulisan argumen siswa MAN 3 Padang adalah adequate, limited, flawed and deficient.
Kualitas argumen ditentukan oleh kemampuan siswa dalam memaparkan premise dan conclusion. Sebab premise dan conclusion merupakan elemen dalam menulis argument yang memiliki claim, data, warrant, qualifier, backing dan rebuttal. Selain itu, pemilihan kata menjadi patokan juga dalam menentukan kualitas suatu argumen. Sehingga peneliti memperoleh dua tulisan argumen berkualitas adequate, satu tulisan argumen berkualitas limited, tiga tulisan argumen siswa berkualitas flawed, dan satu tulisan argumen siswa berkualitas deficient.
Keywords: Analytical Exposition Text, Argument, Elements of Argument, Quality of Argument.
*) Penulis
**) Pembimbing
INTRODUCTION
Writing is one of the crucial skills to be learned in English. It is caused that writing is one of tools of communication. Through writing, the writer can express the feeling that the writer wants to share to the readers on a paper. Thus, writing skill must be taught by the teacher in Junior and Senior High School.
Furthermore, in teaching Senior High School students, writing has the goals which are going to be reached. These goals are conducted by the Department of Education and Culture in School Based Curriculum. Referring to the curriculum, the goals of writing skill are the students are able to analyze the social function, text structure and language feature of the text and write the text by the genre and the topic given. The genre learned by eleventh grade students is analytical exposition text.
Moreover, analytical exposition text is text written to
persuade the reader by giving arguments and analysis. According to Wahidi (2008:2), analytical exposition is a text that elaborates the writer’s idea about the phenomenon surrounding and its social function is to persuade the reader that the idea is important matter. It means that the writer must give some ideas to support a phenomenon given. These ideas must be clear and make sure the readers to think that this phenomenon good or bad. As a result, the readers are not doubt to believe in the writer’s opinion and deal with it.
Actually, based on preliminary observation that has been done by the researcher at MAN 3 Padang on Tuesday, September 2014 until Saturday, September 2014, it was found that the students had been able to write an analytical exposition text because they had been taught by the teacher to write a text that needs arguments.
Yudhantoro (2010:8) states that analytical exposition is a text whose purpose to persuade by presenting
2 arguments that have evidences and analysis. It means that the students are hoped to be able to support the idea by giving opinion with fact and analyzing it. The argument becomes an important component in writing analytical exposition because it will support the idea given in the statement. Therefore, the quality of the argument should be more noticed by the writer.
It is caused the quality of argument will determine the readers’ belief to the writer’s position. The quality of the argument itself is decided by strenghen the reasons with data. It is supported by Govier (2012: 8), “In writing argument, the writer will try to show the reasons and explore the strength of these reasons. The writer will think critically to write the claim and carefully examine the opinions and evidence. These all are the important tools the writer uses rationally to persuade others of the beliefs.” The statement signs that the strength reasons will create strength argument. The device of making strength argument is claim and evidence. If the writer successes in stating the claim and evidence, the readers will be impressive to believe the writer’s thought.
REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE Definition of Analytical Exposition Text
The analytical exposition has been defined by many expert based on its purpose. The purpose of an analytical exposition text is to persuade the readers by presenting one side of an argument. To make the persuasion stronger, the writer gives some arguments as the fundamental reasons why something is the case. Moreover, Cassell (2000: 8) adds that analytical exposition text is one of a genre of texts that has social purpose to persuade by presenting arguments and to analyze or explain “how” and “why.” It can be consolidated that the arguments written should show the reader the way and the reason of something can be a matter. It does not simply give arguments shuffle without fact.
Furthermore, the analytical exposition can be interpreted as a case analysis of issue. It is noted by Soeprapto and Darwis (2007: 37), analytical exposition text is a text that has purpose to persuade the readers that something is the case. This statement still further explains that this kind of text is to get the readers think the writer’s opinion about a case, and invite them to be of the opinion. Then, Kurniawan and Artiningsih (2008: 80) also support that
analytical exposition is a persuasive text to persuade the reader that something is the case. In other word, analytical exposition text can be said as the event analysis of an issue text in order to make the readers stand on the writer’s position.
Argument
When the students write reasons for what they believe, they make arguments. In this way, critical thinking is linked to arguments. According to Woods, Irvine and Walton (2004: 2), an argument is a presentation of reasons or evidence in support of some claim. It can be said that in the argument the writer should give detailed and accurate descriptions of exactly what will be delivered. The descriptions are the connection among the statements.
The other definition of argument is told by Mayberry (2009: 4), an argument is a position supported by clear thinking and reasonable evidence.
In similarly, the argument is the opinion to hold the obvious idea and logical proof. The opinion is well- arranged to get more conviction to the reader.
Besides, Govier (2012: 1) mentions that an argument is a set of claim in which one or more of them are put forward so as to offer reasons for another claim, the conclusion. The claim should be a statement that will be related one and other. The claims connected will imply a decision-making.
Elements of Argument
The students can not avoid some elements that must be payed more attention. It is that the elements will be the measurement whether the argument is good or not, strong or weak. The measurement has been investigated by some experts.
In this case, some experts state the explanation of elements of argument.
The first, the element of argument is determined in some parts. Sadler (2011:148) identifies some elements of the argument, likely, claim, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. The claim is the conclusion whose merits are established.
The warrant is the reason that is used to justify the connections between the data and the conclusion. The basic assumption that provides the justification for particular warrants is called backing. The qualifier has function to spesify the condition which claim is true. Then, the rebuttal is to spesify the condition which claim is not true.
In addition, the element can be classified into smaller parts. Rainbolt and Dwyer (2012: 7) tell
3 that all arguments have two parts. The first part is the reasons, and the second part is the belief that those reasons are intended to support. The reasons are the premises and the belief being supported is the conclusion. Premises and conclusions are both statements. A statement is a sentence that makes a claim that can be either true or false. Every argument is composed of two or more statements.
The last, argument elements are divided into six that is represented by Toulmin. Okada and Buckingham (2014: 141) present Toulmin’s model to explain the elements of argument. In Toulmin’s from, there are six basic the elements of arguments, such as claim, data, warrant, rebuttal, qualifier, and backing.
The claim is the position of the issue. The data is the initial ground. The warrant is the evidence that connects the data and claim. The exception of the claim is called rebuttal. The strength of claim is called qualifier. The last is backing: a source of authority for the warrant.
Quality of Argument
The measurement of the quality argument is the main point to know how good the argument written by the students. The quality can be clasified into level or scale. To avoid the bias of the argument quality measurement, Ndon (2010: 182) forwards the quality of argument which is divided three. The argument is said weak quality when the statement is isolated. The isolated statement means the opinion without support. Then, the quality of argument is average if the argument only miss one of these parts, that are, the evidence or conclusion. The argument is strong if it has both parts.
The other explanation of the quality is also explained by Kolby and Thornburg (2010:195).
Kolby and Thornburg states notes that the analysis an argument requires to discuss the logical soundness of it. They figure out six gradings for the quality argument below:
1. Outstanding:
a) Clearly identifies and insightfully analyzes important features of the argument. The feature of argument is premise and conclusion. The writer should be capable to differ both feature by using the transition.
Then, in writing the features the elements conducted well. The elements are the claim, data, warrant, rebuttal, qualifier and backing.
b) Develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically and connects them smoothly with clear transition. The transition can be used as premise is since, because, given that, and on the grounds that. The transition for conclusion is thus, therefore, consequently, so, it follows that and we may conclude that.
Thus, the writer should differ the use of transition and adjust the use for making the language fluent. Therefore, there must be more than two claims to be developed so that the writer can use varied transition to connect the ideas of each claim.
c) Effectively supports the main points of the critique. The main point of critique can be said as the claim. It can be supported by giving relevant and valid data, evidence or fact.
d) Demonstrates the superior control of the language including diction and syntatic variety. In other word, the words are chosen fluently and construct the sentences by appropriate grammar.
e) Demonstrates superior the facility with the convention of standard written English. It relates to the grammar, usage and mechanics of writing. The grammar is right in usage and the mechanics of writing is suitable to the writing of a paragraph.
2. Strong:
a) Clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them in a generally thoughtful way. The features of argument are premises and conclusion. In this features the claim is constructed. The identification of the feature is really influenced by transition and the claim. The strong argument has one or two claims and the claims are developed by giving data, warrant, backing and qualifier without rebuttal.
b) Develops ideas clearly, organizes them logically, and connects them with appropriate transition. The transition used does not need varied, but it should connect and be suitable to the claim, the data and warrant.
4 c) Sensibly support the main point of the
critique. It needs to have valid data to consolidate the idea in the claim.
d) Demonstrates clear control of language. It means that the word diction is appropriate and based on the context.
e) Demonstrates the facility with the convention of standard written English. The grammar, usage and the mechanism are good and well-arranged.
3. Adequate:
a) Identifies and capably analyzes important features of the argument. it can be one or two claims by supporting it by writing data, warrant and qualifier without backing and rebuttal.
b) Develops and organizes ideas satisfactorily but may not always connect them with transition.
c) Supports the main points of the critique. The relevant data or evidence should be given.
d) Demonstrate adequate control of language, but may lack syntatic variety.
e) Displays control of the convention of standard written English.
4. Limited:
a) Does not identify or analyze most of the important features of the argument, although analysis is present. It looks from the claim can be one.
b) Is limited in the logical development and organization of the ideas. The idea is developed but it is not arranged well.
c) Offers support a little of relevance and value for points of the critique. The reason given is not relevance to the claim. Nevertheless, the reason still discuss similar topic.
d) Uses language imprecisely and/or lack of sentence variety. It can be said that the diction is not noticed.
e) Has occasional major errors in grammar, the usage and mechanics.
5. Flawed:
a) Does not understand, identify or analyze the features of the argument.
b) Does not develop idea.
c) Provide little relevant reasonable support sentence structure. It indicates that there is evidence, but it is really not relevant.
d) Has serious and frequent problem in the use of language. The words, phrases and clauses are repetition
e) Containts frequent errors in grammar, the usage and mechanics.
6. Deficient:
a) Provides little understanding in analyzing te features of argument. It can be explained that the claim is not developed.
b) Has persistent errors in language and sentence structure. The words used can make confuse the readers.
c) Containts a pervasive pattern of errors in grammar, usage and mechanics.
Furthermore, the quality of an argument is listed into hierarchy based on Toulmin Argument Pattern (TAP). This argument quality is developed by Erduran, Simon, and Osbone in Khine (2012: 242) as follow:
1. Very weak: Arguments that are simple claim versus a counter-claim or a claim versus a claim.
2. Weak: Consist of a claim versus a claim with either data, warrants or backings but which does not possesses any rebuttals.
3. OK: Consist of a series of claims or counter- claims with either data, warrants or backings with the occasional weak rebuttals.
4. Good: Arguments with a claim with a clearly identifiable rebuttal. Such an argument may have several claims and counter-claims.
5. Very Good: An extended argument with more than one rebuttal.
In this condition, the researcher chooses the measurement that is stated by Kolby and Thornburg.
By using this delineation, the researcher can assess the students’ argument writing objectively. The argument can be clearly determined what quality it is.
Not only it will be valued by the pattern of sentences, but also it should be considered the convention the standard written English.
Consequently, the students’ argument writing will be established classification.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research was a type of descriptive qualitative reseach. According to Gay and Airasian (2000:275) A descriptive research determines and describes the way thing are. Descriptive research was chosen because the researcher wanted to
5 describe and analyze the quality of the argument of analytical exposition text written by eleventh grade students of MAN 3 Padang
There are three field-studies in MAN 3 Padang. The researcher took documents purposively and randomly by considering the representative of each field-studies. Thus, the document collected was from only two science classes because the students from the class whose better ability in writing text.
Then, the researcher chose the writings which fullfiled the criteria of a text.
FINDINGS
After analyzing the data, the researcher had gotten the result of this research. The researcher found how quality of argument of analytical exposition written by eleventh grade students at MAN 3 Padang. The quality found was adequate, limited, flawed, and deficient. First, the quality written was deficient. It was caused most of students could not know how to elaborate the idea in argument so that the idea could support the thesis. The students were always stuck some unarrranged sentences. In other word, the students were difficult to state evidence, data or facts to consolidate the claim. This uncapability also influenced the use of transition. If the student wrote disordered sentences, transition absolutely did not exist in the argument. Besides, the students often used the words in dictionary directly without thinking by the context. Therefore, the content sometimes were confuse.
In addition, there were students whose flawed quality of the argument. this quality was different from the way to give evidence. The argument had more than one sentence. However, the evidence given was not relevant. Then, the students did not use transition to connect the claim and evidence. Furthermore, the quality found was limited.
For this quality, the students had been able to developed idea and given evidence. Yet, the explanation was not deep enough to ensure the readers. The students had started using transition but it was not various. The content itself could be understood enough by the readers. The next quality found was adequate. The adequate argument in the text written could be considered by the claim construction for supporting the idea in thesis. Then, the idea in developing the evidence. The students were capable to explain evidence related and use the
transition. Although the student did not use transition, it could be said adequate because the student developed the idea well.
DISCUSSION
Based on the finding that has been explained, there were four quality of argument written by eleventh grade students of MAN 3 Padang, that were, adequate, limited, flawed and deficient.
These quality of written argument are stated by Kolby and Thornburg (2010:195). Dealing with Kolby and Thornburg’s explanation about argument written, the argument could be said adequate quality when the eleventh grade students at Man 3 Padang was able to construct a claim and elaborate it by giving relevant evidences, facts or data. Besides, the students made the warrant to connect the data and the claim. In this occasion, the claim developed had qualifier to differ the premise and the conclusion of argument. The differences was signed by the use of transition.
Furthermore, referring to Kolby and Thornburg’s statement, the quality of argument found in students’ analytical exposition text of MAN 3 Padang was limited. Kolby and Thornburg stated that the quality is said as limited because the student had written the claim, but the idea was limited in developing. It could be seen from the student’s way in connecting every idea without using transition.
Although the idea was united in the explanation, the use of transition helped the readers to determine the evidence, fact or data in the argument. Besides, the student did not choose the word used in constructing the claim. Then, the quality found in constructing the argument was flawed. Dealing with Kolby and Thornburg’s explanation, the flawed quality can be noticed from the claim developed. There were some claims in argument, the students could not elaborate the claims by giving relevant data or evidence though. It was looked from the claims were in similar topic but the supporting evidence was not related to the idea in the claim. In addition, the students used transition. Yet, it was not approriate. The diction and grammar were also not determined by the students well.
The other quality of argument written by eleventh grade students of MAN 3 Padang was deficient. Kolby and Thornburg described that the argument has deficient quality if the claim written by
6 the students is very simple. In the argument written was found that most of the students wrote it too simple. Even, most of students wrote argument by stating one claim only. This indicated that there was no evidence to prove the idea given and no transition used to connect the idea. Besides, the grammar and diction were errors in using. Consequently, the readers were confuse about the idea and the purpose of the students in writing the argument of the text.
CONCLUSION
For this research, the researcher collected the data from students’ writing about analytical exposition text on Wednesday until Saturday, February - , 2015. Then, the researcher returned to the school on March 2015 in order to take a new data fro science classess only. Dealing with the data, the researcher classified the data into four quality of argument which are suggested by Kolby and Thornburg (2010:195). The quality is adequate, limited, flawed and deficient. The quality is considered based on the premises and conclusion of argument written by the students.
Moreover, the quality found was deficient for one student, flawed for three students, limited for one student and adequate for two students. The quality was looked from the claim, idea development, evidence given, word diction, and transition used.
The rubric existed has a little difference for each quality classification. Therefore, the differences of each quality should be deeply understood by the reseacher.
SUGGESTION
After doing this study about analysis of the argument quality of analytical exposition text that is written by eleventh grade students of MAN 3 Lubuk Minturun, the researcher states insightfully suggestions for teaching and learning analytical exposition. Firstly, the researcher suggests to English teacher who teaches in Senior High School in order to explain more about constructing part of the text especially the argument. It is that the argument constructed logically by the students will determine the quality of the text itself.
Secondly, the researcher also recommends the students to comprehend deeply about how to write a good analytical exposition because in constructing the text, the students will learn the way
of writing argument. The argument is the part that will support the idea in thesis. Then, it is crucial thing to know the quality because there is little difference among quality. It may be difficult but it can be achieved by practicing more.
REFERENCES
Cassell. 2000. Researching Language in Schools and Communities. London: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
Erduran, Sibel and Rosa Villamanan. Cool Argument: Engineering Students’ Written Argument about Thermodynamics in the Context of the Peltier Effect in Refrigeration. Retrieved on November
2014. From
http://depa.fquim.unam.mx/sie/actividades/A rgumento_fro[1].pdf.
Gay, L.R & Peter Airasian. 2000. Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and Aplications. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Govier, Trudy. 2012. A Practical Study of Argument.
ed. New York: Course Mate.
Kolby, Jeff and Scott Thornburg. 2010. Graduate Record Examination (GRE): Prep Course.
Los Angeles: Nova Press.
Kurniawan, Lanny and Siti Nuryuni Artiningsih.
2008. English Today 2: SMA Grade XI, Science and Social Program. Jakarta:
Quadra.
Mayberry, Katherine. 2009. Everyday Argument: A Guide to Writing and Reading Effectice Argument. ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Ndon, Udeme T. 2010. Hybrid-Context Instructional Model, The Internet and the Classroom: The Way Teachers Experience It. New York:
Information Age Publishing Inc.
Okada, Alexandra and Simon J. Buckingham. 2014.
Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Technique. ed. New York:
Springer.
Rainbolt, George W. And Sandra L. Dwyer. 2012.
Critical Thinking: The Art of Argument.
Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Sadler, Troy D. 2011. Socio-Scientific Issue in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning, and Research. New York: Springer.
7 Soeprapto and Mariana Darwis. 2007. Linked to the
World 2: English for Senior High School Grade XI. Jakarta: Yudhistira.
Wahidi, Ahmad. 2008. Genre of Text. Jakarta:
Wordpress.
Woods, John, Andrew Irvine and Douglas Walton.
2004. Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies. Canada: Pearson and Prentice Hall.
Yudhantoro, Elang. 2010. Rangkuman Bahasa Inggris SMA. Jakarta: Gagas Media.
