THE EFFECT OF IMAGING ORGANIZER ON STUDENTS’ DESCRIPTIVE WRITING ABILITY.
THE EFFECT OF IMAGING ORGANIZER ON STUDENTS’
DESCRIPTIVE WRITING ABILITY
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
by:
JELITA SITORUS
Registration Number 2113121035
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2. 1 The Sixth Group of Prewriting Frameworks ..................................
15
Table 3. 1 Research Design .............................................................................
24
Table 3.2 Descriptive Writing Indicators ........................................................
26
Table 3.3 Treatment in Experimental Group ..................................................
27
Table 3.4 Conventional Teaching in Control Group .......................................
28
Table 3.5 The Coefficient of (r) ......................................................................
30
Table 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-Test .............................................................
33
Table 4.2 Students’ Score in Post test .............................................................
34
Table 4.3 Students’ Score in Pre-test and Post test .........................................
36
Table 4.4 Students Distribution Score Base on Sudijono’s Classification ......
36
Table 4.5 Normality of Data ............................................................................
39
Table 4.6 Test for Homogeneity Data .............................................................
40
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 The Stages of Writing ....................................................................
7
Figure 2.2The Stages of Writing .....................................................................
9
Figure 2.3 The Example of Imaging Organizer ...............................................
18
Figure 4.1 Students’ score in Pre-test ..............................................................
33
Figure 4.2 Students’ score in Post test .............................................................
35
Figure 4.3 Students’ score in Experimental Group .........................................
36
Figure 4.4 Students’ score in Control Group ...................................................
37
vii
ABSTRACT
Sitorus, Jelita. 2113121035. The Effect of Imaging Organizer on Students’
Descriptive Writing Ability. A Thesis, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan. 2016.
This study deals with the effect of Imaging Organizer on students’ descriptive
writing ability. The objective of this study was to find out if there was a
significant effect of Imaging Organizer on students’ descriptive writing ability. It
was conducted by using experimental research. The population of this study was
tenth grade of SMA N 1 Siantar Narumonda, which is consisted of 8 parallel
classes. Two classes were taken as the sample of the research. The class X 2 was a
experimental group and class X 6 was as control group. The experimental group
was taught by using Imaging Organizer strategy, otherwise control group was
taught by using conventional strategy. The instrument for collecting data was
writing test. The data was analyzed by using t-test formula. The result shows that
the value of t-observed is higher than the value of t-table. (2.29>1.994 ( α= 0.05))
with the degree of freedom (df) = 70. Based on the data analysis of the study, the
result indicates that the alternative hypothesis ( ) was accepted. It means that
Imaging Organizer affects on students’ descriptive writing ability.
Keywords: Imaging Organizer, Writing Descriptive Text
i
DECLARATION
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work,
has been expressed through my own words and has not previously been submitted
for assessment.
I understand that this thesis may be screened electronically or otherwise
for plagiarism.
Medan, November 2015
Jelita Sitorus
Reg. No. 2113121035
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..........................................................................
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................
iv
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................
vi
LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................
iv
LIST OF APPENDIXES .............................................................................
v
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ................................................................
1
A. The Background of the Study ............................................
1
B. The Problem of the Study ..................................................
4
C. The Objective of the Study ................................................
4
D The Scope of the Study .......................................................
4
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................
4
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................
5
A. Theoretical Framework ...................................................
5
1. Writing ........................................................................
5
a. The nature of Writing .............................................
5
b. The stages of Writing .............................................
7
c. Factors Affecting Writing ......................................
9
2. Kind of Genre .............................................................
11
a. Descriptive Text .....................................................
11
b. Example of Descriptive Text .................................
13
c. Descriptive Writing Assessment ............................
13
3. Imaging Organizer ......................................................
14
a. The Nature of Imaging Organizer ..........................
14
b. Advantages and Disadvantages of Imaging
Organizer ...............................................................
16
c. Teaching Descriptive Writing through Imaging
Organizer ................................................................
17
d. The Example of Imaging Organizer .......................
18
iv
e. Conventional Strategy ............................................
19
B. The Relevant of the Study................................................
20
C. Conceptual Framework ....................................................
20
D. Hypothesis .......................................................................
21
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD....................................................
23
A. Research Method .............................................................
23
B. Research Design ..............................................................
23
C. Population and Sample ....................................................
24
D. The Instrument of Collecting Data ..................................
25
E. The Criteria of Scoring Writing Test ...............................
26
F. The Procedures of Research.............................................
27
G. The Validity and Reliability of the Test ..........................
28
H. The Technique of Analyzing Data ..................................
30
CHAPTERIV THE DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS ..............................
32
A. Data Description ..............................................................
32
B. Data Analysis ..................................................................
37
C. Testing Hypothesis ..........................................................
41
D. Research Findings ...........................................................
41
E. Discussion ........................................................................
42
CHAPTERV CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION................................
44
A. Conclusion.......................................................................
44
B. Suggestions ......................................................................
44
REFERENCES ............................................................................................
45
APPENDIXES ..............................................................................................
46
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Pre-test and Post test in Experimental and Control Groups
47
Appendix B Students’ score of Pre-test and Post test of Experimental groups
48
Appendix C Students’ score of Pre-test and Post test of Control groups ........
49
Appendix D The Calculation of Reliability of the Test ..................................
50
Appendix E Test for Distribution of Frequency in Experimental Group ........
52
Appendix F Test for Distribution of Frequency in Control Group .................
55
Appendix G Testing Normality in Experimental Group .................................
58
Appendix H Testing Normality in Control Group ..........................................
62
Appendix I Test for Homogeneity of Variance of Post test in Experimental
and Control Groups .....................................................................
65
Appendix J The Calculation of t-test ...............................................................
67
Appendix K Table of Normality from 0 to Z ..................................................
70
Appendix L Table List of testing Liliefors ......................................................
71
Appendix M Percentage Points of the t Distribution.......................................
72
Appendix N Lesson Plan .................................................................................
73
Appendix O Students’ Writing ........................................................................
97
viii
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
None has doubts about the function of using a language; that is to
communicate. English is one of International Languages besides French,
Arabic, Chinese, Spanish and Russian. It is a medium to exchange the
information, to tell ideas and to express their opinions. Nowadays, English is
important to be learnt since it is used in science, art, politics, education,
technology, etc. So, one is hoped to be able to listen, to speak, to read and to
write in English well.
Everyone believes that writing is one of the ways to deliver, tell, and
inform every single idea in our mind. Somehow, writing is the toughest part of
English, since our grammar/structure and vocabulary are needed in this skill.
In addition, lack of regular reading habits may be the cause of difficulties in
writing. Experiences, events, histories and ideas can be expressed through
written form, which is considered very difficult for many students. It is proved
that Indonesian’s writing International English Language Test System
(IELTS) score is the lowest of all skills. It shows in the score of IELTS
researchers’-test-taker performance in 2012 for listening (6.3), speaking (6.1),
reading (6.5), and writing (5.7)source:http://ielts.org/researchers/analysis-oftest-data/test-taker performance 2012.aspx.
1
2
Thus, the reality was experienced while taking teaching training/
(PPL) in SMA N 1 Kisaran, the students complained whenever they were
asked to write on a certain topic. Actually, they had not any idea and even if
they had ideas, the problem was they do not know how to arrange their ideas
or put them in to a good order. They found many difficulties in delivering
their ideas through writing. Actually, the students should be able to write a
text, but students’ writing ability is still low. Based on the syllabus for tenth
grade of senior high school, the students should able to write four genres
namely: narrative, descriptive, recount, and explanation. In this study is
limited to focus on teaching descriptive text.
Students might have some ideas on their mind, but they do not know
how to express them in writing. It may arise because of the inappropriate
learning strategy applied by teachers in teaching writing. The researcher found
that most of English teachers tend to focus merely on providing their students
with vocabulary relating to the required topic and some guiding questions in
order to help them shape their ideas into the completed paragraphs. Besides
that, the researcher found that some teachers, taught the students grammar in
so epic a way for the whole teaching time, but indeed being well-understood
students in grammar - either theoretically or practically - is not the objective of
standard competence and basic competence from teaching English. In
addition, it may arise because of students’ motivation, students’ prior
knowledge and uninterested media.
2
3
Responding to these problems and by considering the importance of
writing skills, it is compulsory to find a fit strategy as a solution to that
situation. Actually, there are some ways to facilitate students’ writing ability
namely: Brainstorming, Key Words, Web/Cluster, Sketch and Label and
Imaging Organizer, etc. Imaging Organizer is proposed to solve the problem
since it can stimulate students to express the ideas and to elaborate them
briefly.
An Imaging Organizer is, like a graphic organizer, a visual
representation of knowledge that structures information by arranging aspects
of a concept or topic through making pictures. Making pictures means to make
pictures in our minds into blank sheets. Picture refers to a description that
gives you an idea in your mind of what something is like.
According to the research that has been done by Mahmood, Nikoo &
Bonyadi (2013) in Tehran proved that Graphic Organizer is useful method for
learning enhancing reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners.
Another research which were done by Griffin, Malone & Kameenui (2001) in
McGraw-Hill clarified that Graphic Organizer facilitate comprehension, recall,
and transfer information contained in an expository book. In addition, Handini
and Saragih (2013) found that Four Square Graphic Organizer gave significant
effect on students’ achievement in writing descriptive text.
An Imaging Organizer is a beneficial instructional strategy to
support students’ learning more effectively. It fits with descriptive text, since
powerful pictures guide students to write. It is valuable because it requires the
4
use of critical thinking. In addition, it can generate excitement and enthusiasm
toward learning. Therefore, this study is designed and conducted to identify
the effect of Imaging Organizer.
B. The problem of the Study
The problem of the study is formulated:
Is there any effect of Imaging Organizer on the students’ ability in writing
descriptive text?
C. The Objective of the study
The objective is to find out whether there is the effect of Imaging
Organizer on students’ ability in writing descriptive text for students in the
tenth grade of SMA N.1 Siantar Narumonda.
D. The Scope of the Study
This research was only focusing to teach descriptive text, exactly in
describing person by using Imaging Organizer.
E. The Significance of the Study
The finding of this research is expected to be useful for:
1)
Theoretically, it develops the theories for teaching writing
especially descriptive text.
2)
Practically, It is as a reference for teachers in English teaching-
learning process especially in teaching descriptive text. Then, it enlarges
the understanding of others researcher in improving in writing skill and
provide reference for further similar study specially in teaching writing.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusion
The result of calculation t-test shows that the t-observed (2.29)> the ttable (1.994). It means that the alternative hypothesis
is accepted. So, it is
concluded that Imaging Organizer strategy affects the students’ ability in writing
descriptive texts.
B. Suggestions
As the result of the study, it is suggested that:
1. The English teachers should use the strategy in their attempt to improve
students’ ability in writing descriptive text, especially for the students
who have difficulty to explore ideas, to think of what to write on the
writing substantial.
2. Since this research is limited to the investigation of the Imaging
Organizer on writing and how the Imaging Organization can be
developed is not known, it is suggested that a research should be done
on writing development.
44
45
REFERENCES
Al-Hinnawi, Arwa N. 2012. The Effect of the Graphic Organizer Strategy on
Students’ English Vocabulary Building. English Language Teaching.
IV (12) 62-69
Ary, Donald., Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2002. Introduction to
Research in Education (sixth edition). Canada: Wadsworth Group.
________________. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education (eighth
edition). Canada: Wadsworth Group.
Best, J.W., and Kahn, J. V. 2006. Research in Education (tenth edition). Boston:
Pearson Education.
Carol, J.A, E. Wilson & G. Forlini. 2001. Writing and Grammar. New Jersey:
Prentice.
Chamot, Anna Uhl. et al. 1999. The Learning Strategies Handbook. New York:
Addison Wesley Longman.
Demire, Ozcan. 2013. English Language Teaching Methodologies. Ankara:
Pegem A Yayinlari.
Dirgeyasa, I Wy. 2012. Maritime English Writing. Medan: Unimed Press.
Dirgeyasa, I W. 2014. College Academic Writing: A Genre Based Perspective.
Medan: Unimed Press.
Griffin, C.C., Malone, L. D. & Kameenui, E.J. 2001. Effects of Graphic Organizer
Instruction on Fifth-Grade Students. The Journal of Educational
Research. Vol. 89 (2) 1-10.
Handini, Frida Dian and Saragih, Amrin. 2013. Improving the Students’
Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Register.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2003. How to teach Writing. London: Pearson Education
Harmer, Jeremy. 2004. How to teach Writing. London: Pearson Education
Hyland, Ken. 2009. Teaching and Researching Writing, (second edition).
England: Pearson Education.
Hughes, Arthur. 2003. Testing for Language Teachers, (second edition).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Knapp, Peter and Megan, Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies
for Teaching and Assessing. Sydney: UNSW Press.
46
Kothari, C.R. 2004. Research Methodology Methods and Technique, (second
revised edition). New Delhi: New Age International.
Mahmood, M.H.K., Nikoo, F.R. & Boyandi, A. 2013. The Role of Schema or
Background Knowledge Activation and Graphic Organizer on
Increasing Iranian EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension. European
Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, Vol.2 (2) 1-13.
Mcknight, Khaterine S, 2013. The Elementary Teacher’s Big Book of Graphic
Organizers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Patel, M.F., and Jain, P.M. 2008. English Language Teaching : Methods, Tools
and Technique. Jaipur : Sunrise Publishers and Distributors.
Roberts, Jane M.E, 2004. 25 Prewriting Graphic Organizers and Planning Sheets.
New York: Scholastic.
Richard-Amato,Patricia A. 2003. Making It Happen, (third edition). New York:
Pearson Education.
Shoari, Elnaz and Farrokhi Farrahman. 2014. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
Strategy on Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning.
IJRLT. I (3) 71-82.
Siahaan, Sanggam. 2008. Issues in linguistics. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Siregar, Nurhafni. 2011. The Effect of Graphic Organizer and Concientiousness
on Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension. Medan:
English Applied Linguistics Study Program Postgraduate State
University of Medan.
Sudijono, Anas. 2007. Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan. Jakarta: Raya Gravindo
Persada
Tayib, Abdul-Majeed. 2015. The Effect of Using Graphic Organizer on Writing.
International Journal of English Language Teaching. III(1) 11-31
Turnbull, Joanna. et al. 2010. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Great
Clarendon Street: Oxford University Press.
Zaini, S.H., Mokhtar, S.Z. & Nawawi, M. 2010. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
on Students’ Learning in School. Malaysian Journal of Educational
Technology. Vol. 10 (1) 1-7.
http://ielts.org/researchers/analysis-of-test-data/test-taker-performance-2012.aspx
accessed on January 27th 2015
https://instruct.uwo.ca/geog/500/t_test.htm accessed on September 2nd 2015.
DESCRIPTIVE WRITING ABILITY
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
by:
JELITA SITORUS
Registration Number 2113121035
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2. 1 The Sixth Group of Prewriting Frameworks ..................................
15
Table 3. 1 Research Design .............................................................................
24
Table 3.2 Descriptive Writing Indicators ........................................................
26
Table 3.3 Treatment in Experimental Group ..................................................
27
Table 3.4 Conventional Teaching in Control Group .......................................
28
Table 3.5 The Coefficient of (r) ......................................................................
30
Table 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-Test .............................................................
33
Table 4.2 Students’ Score in Post test .............................................................
34
Table 4.3 Students’ Score in Pre-test and Post test .........................................
36
Table 4.4 Students Distribution Score Base on Sudijono’s Classification ......
36
Table 4.5 Normality of Data ............................................................................
39
Table 4.6 Test for Homogeneity Data .............................................................
40
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 The Stages of Writing ....................................................................
7
Figure 2.2The Stages of Writing .....................................................................
9
Figure 2.3 The Example of Imaging Organizer ...............................................
18
Figure 4.1 Students’ score in Pre-test ..............................................................
33
Figure 4.2 Students’ score in Post test .............................................................
35
Figure 4.3 Students’ score in Experimental Group .........................................
36
Figure 4.4 Students’ score in Control Group ...................................................
37
vii
ABSTRACT
Sitorus, Jelita. 2113121035. The Effect of Imaging Organizer on Students’
Descriptive Writing Ability. A Thesis, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan. 2016.
This study deals with the effect of Imaging Organizer on students’ descriptive
writing ability. The objective of this study was to find out if there was a
significant effect of Imaging Organizer on students’ descriptive writing ability. It
was conducted by using experimental research. The population of this study was
tenth grade of SMA N 1 Siantar Narumonda, which is consisted of 8 parallel
classes. Two classes were taken as the sample of the research. The class X 2 was a
experimental group and class X 6 was as control group. The experimental group
was taught by using Imaging Organizer strategy, otherwise control group was
taught by using conventional strategy. The instrument for collecting data was
writing test. The data was analyzed by using t-test formula. The result shows that
the value of t-observed is higher than the value of t-table. (2.29>1.994 ( α= 0.05))
with the degree of freedom (df) = 70. Based on the data analysis of the study, the
result indicates that the alternative hypothesis ( ) was accepted. It means that
Imaging Organizer affects on students’ descriptive writing ability.
Keywords: Imaging Organizer, Writing Descriptive Text
i
DECLARATION
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work,
has been expressed through my own words and has not previously been submitted
for assessment.
I understand that this thesis may be screened electronically or otherwise
for plagiarism.
Medan, November 2015
Jelita Sitorus
Reg. No. 2113121035
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..........................................................................
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................
iv
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................
vi
LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................
iv
LIST OF APPENDIXES .............................................................................
v
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ................................................................
1
A. The Background of the Study ............................................
1
B. The Problem of the Study ..................................................
4
C. The Objective of the Study ................................................
4
D The Scope of the Study .......................................................
4
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................
4
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................
5
A. Theoretical Framework ...................................................
5
1. Writing ........................................................................
5
a. The nature of Writing .............................................
5
b. The stages of Writing .............................................
7
c. Factors Affecting Writing ......................................
9
2. Kind of Genre .............................................................
11
a. Descriptive Text .....................................................
11
b. Example of Descriptive Text .................................
13
c. Descriptive Writing Assessment ............................
13
3. Imaging Organizer ......................................................
14
a. The Nature of Imaging Organizer ..........................
14
b. Advantages and Disadvantages of Imaging
Organizer ...............................................................
16
c. Teaching Descriptive Writing through Imaging
Organizer ................................................................
17
d. The Example of Imaging Organizer .......................
18
iv
e. Conventional Strategy ............................................
19
B. The Relevant of the Study................................................
20
C. Conceptual Framework ....................................................
20
D. Hypothesis .......................................................................
21
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD....................................................
23
A. Research Method .............................................................
23
B. Research Design ..............................................................
23
C. Population and Sample ....................................................
24
D. The Instrument of Collecting Data ..................................
25
E. The Criteria of Scoring Writing Test ...............................
26
F. The Procedures of Research.............................................
27
G. The Validity and Reliability of the Test ..........................
28
H. The Technique of Analyzing Data ..................................
30
CHAPTERIV THE DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS ..............................
32
A. Data Description ..............................................................
32
B. Data Analysis ..................................................................
37
C. Testing Hypothesis ..........................................................
41
D. Research Findings ...........................................................
41
E. Discussion ........................................................................
42
CHAPTERV CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION................................
44
A. Conclusion.......................................................................
44
B. Suggestions ......................................................................
44
REFERENCES ............................................................................................
45
APPENDIXES ..............................................................................................
46
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Pre-test and Post test in Experimental and Control Groups
47
Appendix B Students’ score of Pre-test and Post test of Experimental groups
48
Appendix C Students’ score of Pre-test and Post test of Control groups ........
49
Appendix D The Calculation of Reliability of the Test ..................................
50
Appendix E Test for Distribution of Frequency in Experimental Group ........
52
Appendix F Test for Distribution of Frequency in Control Group .................
55
Appendix G Testing Normality in Experimental Group .................................
58
Appendix H Testing Normality in Control Group ..........................................
62
Appendix I Test for Homogeneity of Variance of Post test in Experimental
and Control Groups .....................................................................
65
Appendix J The Calculation of t-test ...............................................................
67
Appendix K Table of Normality from 0 to Z ..................................................
70
Appendix L Table List of testing Liliefors ......................................................
71
Appendix M Percentage Points of the t Distribution.......................................
72
Appendix N Lesson Plan .................................................................................
73
Appendix O Students’ Writing ........................................................................
97
viii
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
None has doubts about the function of using a language; that is to
communicate. English is one of International Languages besides French,
Arabic, Chinese, Spanish and Russian. It is a medium to exchange the
information, to tell ideas and to express their opinions. Nowadays, English is
important to be learnt since it is used in science, art, politics, education,
technology, etc. So, one is hoped to be able to listen, to speak, to read and to
write in English well.
Everyone believes that writing is one of the ways to deliver, tell, and
inform every single idea in our mind. Somehow, writing is the toughest part of
English, since our grammar/structure and vocabulary are needed in this skill.
In addition, lack of regular reading habits may be the cause of difficulties in
writing. Experiences, events, histories and ideas can be expressed through
written form, which is considered very difficult for many students. It is proved
that Indonesian’s writing International English Language Test System
(IELTS) score is the lowest of all skills. It shows in the score of IELTS
researchers’-test-taker performance in 2012 for listening (6.3), speaking (6.1),
reading (6.5), and writing (5.7)source:http://ielts.org/researchers/analysis-oftest-data/test-taker performance 2012.aspx.
1
2
Thus, the reality was experienced while taking teaching training/
(PPL) in SMA N 1 Kisaran, the students complained whenever they were
asked to write on a certain topic. Actually, they had not any idea and even if
they had ideas, the problem was they do not know how to arrange their ideas
or put them in to a good order. They found many difficulties in delivering
their ideas through writing. Actually, the students should be able to write a
text, but students’ writing ability is still low. Based on the syllabus for tenth
grade of senior high school, the students should able to write four genres
namely: narrative, descriptive, recount, and explanation. In this study is
limited to focus on teaching descriptive text.
Students might have some ideas on their mind, but they do not know
how to express them in writing. It may arise because of the inappropriate
learning strategy applied by teachers in teaching writing. The researcher found
that most of English teachers tend to focus merely on providing their students
with vocabulary relating to the required topic and some guiding questions in
order to help them shape their ideas into the completed paragraphs. Besides
that, the researcher found that some teachers, taught the students grammar in
so epic a way for the whole teaching time, but indeed being well-understood
students in grammar - either theoretically or practically - is not the objective of
standard competence and basic competence from teaching English. In
addition, it may arise because of students’ motivation, students’ prior
knowledge and uninterested media.
2
3
Responding to these problems and by considering the importance of
writing skills, it is compulsory to find a fit strategy as a solution to that
situation. Actually, there are some ways to facilitate students’ writing ability
namely: Brainstorming, Key Words, Web/Cluster, Sketch and Label and
Imaging Organizer, etc. Imaging Organizer is proposed to solve the problem
since it can stimulate students to express the ideas and to elaborate them
briefly.
An Imaging Organizer is, like a graphic organizer, a visual
representation of knowledge that structures information by arranging aspects
of a concept or topic through making pictures. Making pictures means to make
pictures in our minds into blank sheets. Picture refers to a description that
gives you an idea in your mind of what something is like.
According to the research that has been done by Mahmood, Nikoo &
Bonyadi (2013) in Tehran proved that Graphic Organizer is useful method for
learning enhancing reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners.
Another research which were done by Griffin, Malone & Kameenui (2001) in
McGraw-Hill clarified that Graphic Organizer facilitate comprehension, recall,
and transfer information contained in an expository book. In addition, Handini
and Saragih (2013) found that Four Square Graphic Organizer gave significant
effect on students’ achievement in writing descriptive text.
An Imaging Organizer is a beneficial instructional strategy to
support students’ learning more effectively. It fits with descriptive text, since
powerful pictures guide students to write. It is valuable because it requires the
4
use of critical thinking. In addition, it can generate excitement and enthusiasm
toward learning. Therefore, this study is designed and conducted to identify
the effect of Imaging Organizer.
B. The problem of the Study
The problem of the study is formulated:
Is there any effect of Imaging Organizer on the students’ ability in writing
descriptive text?
C. The Objective of the study
The objective is to find out whether there is the effect of Imaging
Organizer on students’ ability in writing descriptive text for students in the
tenth grade of SMA N.1 Siantar Narumonda.
D. The Scope of the Study
This research was only focusing to teach descriptive text, exactly in
describing person by using Imaging Organizer.
E. The Significance of the Study
The finding of this research is expected to be useful for:
1)
Theoretically, it develops the theories for teaching writing
especially descriptive text.
2)
Practically, It is as a reference for teachers in English teaching-
learning process especially in teaching descriptive text. Then, it enlarges
the understanding of others researcher in improving in writing skill and
provide reference for further similar study specially in teaching writing.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusion
The result of calculation t-test shows that the t-observed (2.29)> the ttable (1.994). It means that the alternative hypothesis
is accepted. So, it is
concluded that Imaging Organizer strategy affects the students’ ability in writing
descriptive texts.
B. Suggestions
As the result of the study, it is suggested that:
1. The English teachers should use the strategy in their attempt to improve
students’ ability in writing descriptive text, especially for the students
who have difficulty to explore ideas, to think of what to write on the
writing substantial.
2. Since this research is limited to the investigation of the Imaging
Organizer on writing and how the Imaging Organization can be
developed is not known, it is suggested that a research should be done
on writing development.
44
45
REFERENCES
Al-Hinnawi, Arwa N. 2012. The Effect of the Graphic Organizer Strategy on
Students’ English Vocabulary Building. English Language Teaching.
IV (12) 62-69
Ary, Donald., Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2002. Introduction to
Research in Education (sixth edition). Canada: Wadsworth Group.
________________. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education (eighth
edition). Canada: Wadsworth Group.
Best, J.W., and Kahn, J. V. 2006. Research in Education (tenth edition). Boston:
Pearson Education.
Carol, J.A, E. Wilson & G. Forlini. 2001. Writing and Grammar. New Jersey:
Prentice.
Chamot, Anna Uhl. et al. 1999. The Learning Strategies Handbook. New York:
Addison Wesley Longman.
Demire, Ozcan. 2013. English Language Teaching Methodologies. Ankara:
Pegem A Yayinlari.
Dirgeyasa, I Wy. 2012. Maritime English Writing. Medan: Unimed Press.
Dirgeyasa, I W. 2014. College Academic Writing: A Genre Based Perspective.
Medan: Unimed Press.
Griffin, C.C., Malone, L. D. & Kameenui, E.J. 2001. Effects of Graphic Organizer
Instruction on Fifth-Grade Students. The Journal of Educational
Research. Vol. 89 (2) 1-10.
Handini, Frida Dian and Saragih, Amrin. 2013. Improving the Students’
Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Register.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2003. How to teach Writing. London: Pearson Education
Harmer, Jeremy. 2004. How to teach Writing. London: Pearson Education
Hyland, Ken. 2009. Teaching and Researching Writing, (second edition).
England: Pearson Education.
Hughes, Arthur. 2003. Testing for Language Teachers, (second edition).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Knapp, Peter and Megan, Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies
for Teaching and Assessing. Sydney: UNSW Press.
46
Kothari, C.R. 2004. Research Methodology Methods and Technique, (second
revised edition). New Delhi: New Age International.
Mahmood, M.H.K., Nikoo, F.R. & Boyandi, A. 2013. The Role of Schema or
Background Knowledge Activation and Graphic Organizer on
Increasing Iranian EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension. European
Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, Vol.2 (2) 1-13.
Mcknight, Khaterine S, 2013. The Elementary Teacher’s Big Book of Graphic
Organizers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Patel, M.F., and Jain, P.M. 2008. English Language Teaching : Methods, Tools
and Technique. Jaipur : Sunrise Publishers and Distributors.
Roberts, Jane M.E, 2004. 25 Prewriting Graphic Organizers and Planning Sheets.
New York: Scholastic.
Richard-Amato,Patricia A. 2003. Making It Happen, (third edition). New York:
Pearson Education.
Shoari, Elnaz and Farrokhi Farrahman. 2014. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
Strategy on Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning.
IJRLT. I (3) 71-82.
Siahaan, Sanggam. 2008. Issues in linguistics. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Siregar, Nurhafni. 2011. The Effect of Graphic Organizer and Concientiousness
on Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension. Medan:
English Applied Linguistics Study Program Postgraduate State
University of Medan.
Sudijono, Anas. 2007. Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan. Jakarta: Raya Gravindo
Persada
Tayib, Abdul-Majeed. 2015. The Effect of Using Graphic Organizer on Writing.
International Journal of English Language Teaching. III(1) 11-31
Turnbull, Joanna. et al. 2010. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Great
Clarendon Street: Oxford University Press.
Zaini, S.H., Mokhtar, S.Z. & Nawawi, M. 2010. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
on Students’ Learning in School. Malaysian Journal of Educational
Technology. Vol. 10 (1) 1-7.
http://ielts.org/researchers/analysis-of-test-data/test-taker-performance-2012.aspx
accessed on January 27th 2015
https://instruct.uwo.ca/geog/500/t_test.htm accessed on September 2nd 2015.